Effect of traditional Chinese exercise combined with massage on pain and disability in patients with lumbar disc herniation: A multi-center, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Herniation of the nucleus pulposus caused by disc degeneration and other reasons can cause low back pain and disability. In China, traditional Chinese exercises (TCEs) and traditional Chinese massage (TCM) are widely used to improve symptoms of pain and disability in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The safety and efficacy of combination therapy have not been studied. Objectives To assess the effect of traditional Chinese exercise combined with massage vs. traditional Chinese massage alone on pain, disability, lumbar mobility and gait performance in patients with LDH. Methods Multi-center, randomized clinical trial conducted at 4 hospitals in China and enrolling 272 patients with LDH. Participants were randomly assigned to TCEs plus TCM group or TCM alone group. The combined therapy group received 18 Tai Chi training sessions (30-min sessions 3 times a week) and regular TCM treatments over 6 weeks. The control group received TCM therapy alone and was instructed to maintain their usual daily physical activity. Outcome variables measured included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Short Form of McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), lumbar spine range of motion (ROM) and gait performance. Results Among the 272 randomized participants, 259 completed the study. The mean VAS score was 51.77 mm at baseline in the TCEs plus TCM group, and 50.93 mm for the TCM alone group. The reduction in the VAS score at week 6 was greater in the TC group than in the TCM group with a mean difference of 4.05 (95% CI, 2.15–5.95; P < 0.001), and the ODI score with between-group differences of 3.57 points (95% CI, 2.84–4.30 points; P < 0.001). Similar significantly different results were observed in SF-MPQ, walking speed, cadence, and lumbar ROM. No serious adverse events were reported throughout the study period. Conclusion Compared with TCM alone, TCEs combined with TCM treatment performed better in reducing pain and improving disability. The combination therapy could be considered a valuable treatment option for LDH patients, with potential therapeutic utility for middle-aged and elderly patients with LDH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".