Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of commonly used non-surgical treatments in acute care of adults with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).
Methods
A systematic approach was used to search eight electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining analgesic medications, passive physical therapies, bed rest or orthoses. Data on pain, activity/participation and adverse events were extracted. Methodological quality and quality of evidence were assessed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale (score range 0–10) and the GRADE criteria, respectively.
Results
Five RCTs (total n = 350) were identified including one placebo-controlled and four controlled trials examining analgesics (2 studies) and orthoses (3). PEDro scores ranged from 4 to 7. The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. In two trials, spinal orthoses provided significantly higher medium-term pain relief [pooled standardized mean differences (SMD): −1.47, 95 % confidence interval (CI) −1.82, −1.13; I2 = 0 %] and disability reduction (pooled SMD: −1.73, 95 % CI −2.09, −1.37; I2 = 0 %) than no intervention. Immediate- and short-term pain effects of diclofenac (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) and tramadol (a strong opioid) were demonstrated when compared to a Chinese medicine, whereas non-significant effects were found for oxycodone and tapentadol (strong opioids) in a placebo-controlled trial. Low/insufficient statistical power, co-interventions and potential conflict of interest might have influenced the results.
Conclusions
At present, there is insufficient evidence to inform conservative care for acute pain related to VCF. Large, multinational, placebo/sham-controlled trials to address this gap in evidence are needed.
The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of commonly used non-surgical treatments in acute care of adults with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).
Methods
A systematic approach was used to search eight electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining analgesic medications, passive physical therapies, bed rest or orthoses. Data on pain, activity/participation and adverse events were extracted. Methodological quality and quality of evidence were assessed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale (score range 0–10) and the GRADE criteria, respectively.
Results
Five RCTs (total n = 350) were identified including one placebo-controlled and four controlled trials examining analgesics (2 studies) and orthoses (3). PEDro scores ranged from 4 to 7. The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. In two trials, spinal orthoses provided significantly higher medium-term pain relief [pooled standardized mean differences (SMD): −1.47, 95 % confidence interval (CI) −1.82, −1.13; I2 = 0 %] and disability reduction (pooled SMD: −1.73, 95 % CI −2.09, −1.37; I2 = 0 %) than no intervention. Immediate- and short-term pain effects of diclofenac (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) and tramadol (a strong opioid) were demonstrated when compared to a Chinese medicine, whereas non-significant effects were found for oxycodone and tapentadol (strong opioids) in a placebo-controlled trial. Low/insufficient statistical power, co-interventions and potential conflict of interest might have influenced the results.
Conclusions
At present, there is insufficient evidence to inform conservative care for acute pain related to VCF. Large, multinational, placebo/sham-controlled trials to address this gap in evidence are needed.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 702-714 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | European Spine Journal |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2015 |
Keywords
- systematic review
- ertebral compression fracture
- conservative treatment
- analgesics
- orthoses