7 research outputs found

    A systematic review on the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine for chronic non-specific low-back pain

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effects of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), acupuncture and herbal medicine for chronic non-specific LBP. A comprehensive search was conducted by an experienced librarian from the Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) in multiple databases up to December 22, 2008. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with chronic non-specific LBP, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant, patient-centred outcome measure were included. Two authors working independently from one another assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the CBRG and extracted the data. The data were pooled when clinically homogeneous and statistically possible or were otherwise qualitatively described. GRADE was used to determine the quality of the evidence. In total, 35 RCTs (8 SMT, 20 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine), which examined 8,298 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Approximately half of these (2 SMT, 8 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine) were thought to have a low risk of bias. In general, the pooled effects for the studied interventions demonstrated short-term relief or improvement only. The lack of studies with a low-risk of bias, especially in regard to SMT precludes any strong conclusions; however, the principal findings, which are based upon low- to very-low-quality evidence, suggest that SMT does not provide a more clinically beneficial effect compared with sham, passive modalities or any other intervention for treatment of chronic low-back pain. There is evidence, however, that acupuncture provides a short-term clinically relevant effect when compared with a waiting list control or when acupuncture is added to another intervention. Although there are some good results for individual herbal medicines in short-term individual trials, the lack of homogeneity across studies did not allow for a pooled estimate of the effect. In general, these results are in agreement with other recent systematic reviews on SMT, but in contrast with others. These results are also in agreement with recent reviews on acupuncture and herbal medicine. Randomized trials with a low risk of bias and adequate sample sizes are direly needed

    Induction of Plasmodium falciparum-Specific CD4+ T Cells and Memory B Cells in Gabonese Children Vaccinated with RTS,S/AS01E and RTS,S/AS02D

    Get PDF
    The recombinant circumsporozoite protein (CS) based vaccine, RTS,S, confers protection against Plasmodium falciparum infection in controlled challenge trials and in field studies. The RTS,S recombinant antigen has been formulated with two adjuvant systems, AS01 and AS02, which have both been shown to induce strong specific antibody responses and CD4 T cell responses in adults. As infants and young children are particularly susceptible to malaria infection and constitute the main target population for a malaria vaccine, we have evaluated the induction of adaptive immune responses in young children living in malaria endemic regions following vaccination with RTS,S/AS01(E) and RTS,S/AS02(D). Our data show that a CS-specific memory B cell response is induced one month after the second and third vaccine dose and that CS-specific antibodies and memory B cells persist up to 12 months after the last vaccine injection. Both formulations also induced low but significant amounts of CS-specific IL-2(+) CD4(+) T cells one month after the second and third vaccine dose, upon short-term in vitro stimulation of whole blood cells with peptides covering the entire CS derived sequence in RTS,S. These results provide evidence that both RTS,S/AS01(E) and RTS,S/AS02(D) induced adaptive immune responses including antibodies, circulating memory B cells and CD4(+) T cells directed against P. falciparum CS protein.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00307021

    The clinical course of low back pain: a meta-analysis comparing outcomes in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that the course of low back pain (LBP) symptoms in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) follows a pattern of large improvement regardless of the type of treatment. A similar pattern was independently observed in observational studies. However, there is an assumption that the clinical course of symptoms is particularly influenced in RCTs by mere participation in the trials. To test this assumption, the aim of our study was to compare the course of LBP in RCTs and observational studies. METHODS: Source of studies CENTRAL database for RCTs and MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and hand search of systematic reviews for cohort studies. Studies include individuals aged 18 or over, and concern non-specific LBP. Trials had to concern primary care treatments. Data were extracted on pain intensity. Meta-regression analysis was used to compare the pooled within-group change in pain in RCTs with that in cohort studies calculated as the standardised mean change (SMC). RESULTS: 70 RCTs and 19 cohort studies were included, out of 1134 and 653 identified respectively. LBP symptoms followed a similar course in RCTs and cohort studies: a rapid improvement in the first 6 weeks followed by a smaller further improvement until 52 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in pooled SMC between RCTs and cohort studies at any time point:- 6 weeks: RCTs: SMC 1.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.2 (0.7to 1.7); 13 weeks: RCTs 1.2 (1.1 to 1.3) and cohorts 1.0 (0.8 to 1.3); 27 weeks: RCTs 1.1 (1.0 to 1.2) and cohorts 1.2 (0.8 to 1.7); 52 weeks: RCTs 0.9 (0.8 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.1 (0.8 to 1.6). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course of LBP symptoms followed a pattern that was similar in RCTs and cohort observational studies. In addition to a shared 'natural history', enrolment of LBP patients in clinical studies is likely to provoke responses that reflect the nonspecific effects of seeking and receiving care, independent of the study design
    corecore