NCT00135239

Brief Summary

The most common work-related injury in British Columbia every year is a lower back injury. The many different treatment options that are available to workers with a back injury have often led to confusion and frustration. New back pain research has shown which combinations of treatments are most helpful, but has also shown that many injured workers in British Columbia do not have these treatments made readily available to them. This research study is designed to accurately determine whether or not providing patients suffering from acute back injuries with a combination of all of these recommended treatments, will improve their function, quality of life and return to work.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
88

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jan 2006

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

August 23, 2005

Completed
2 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

August 25, 2005

Completed
4 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

January 1, 2006

Completed
2.4 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 1, 2008

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2008

Completed
Last Updated

June 17, 2008

Status Verified

June 1, 2008

Enrollment Period

2.4 years

First QC Date

August 23, 2005

Last Update Submit

June 16, 2008

Conditions

Keywords

backLower Mechanical Back PainRehabilitation

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • To determine if study-based care (SC) is more effective than usual care (UC) in the treatment of patients with acute mechanical lower back pain after 16 weeks

    16 weeks

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • To determine if SC is more effective than UC in improving the functional status of patients with acute mechanical lower back pain at 8 weeks and 24 weeks.

    24 weeks

Interventions

Study carePROCEDURE

All study patients will be assessed initially by a physician in the CNOSP outpatient clinic to confirm that they meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the study. Patients receiving the EBC intervention will then receive re-assurance, advice to avoid passive treatments, acetominophen (except where contraindicated) for a period of 2-4 weeks, a four week course of lumbar spine spinal manipulative therapy administered by a CNOSP Chiropractor and advice to return to work in some capacity within eight weeks following the start of treatment. Patients randomized to the UC treatment arm will undergo the treatment(s) recommended by their family physicians.

Usual carePROCEDURE

Patients randomized to the UC treatment arm will undergo the treatment(s) recommended by their family physicians.

Eligibility Criteria

Age19 Years - 65 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Residents of British Columbia with mechanical lower back pain
  • Acute lower back pain with symptoms lasting 2-4 weeks
  • Satisfy the Quebec Task Force Classification of Spinal Disorders Categories 1 and 2

You may not qualify if:

  • Other significant spinal pathology
  • Pregnancy
  • Patients with Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) claims
  • Persistent pain in other areas of the spine

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Medical Rapid Access Spine Clinic

Vancouver, British Columbia, V5Z 3J5, Canada

Location

Related Publications (1)

  • 1. Bigos, S.J.B., O.R.; Braen, G.R.; et al., Clinical practice guideline number 4: Acute low back problems in adults. 1994, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Service, US Department of Health and Human Services: Rockville, MD. p. 65-0642. 2. Spitzer, W.O., et al., Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine, 1987. 12 (suppl)(7): p. S1-59. 3. Practitioners, R.C.o.G., Clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain. Accessed April 6, 2001. 4. Kendall, N.A., Linton, S.J., Main, C.J., Guide to assessing psychosocial yellow flags in acute low back pain: risk factors for long-term disability and work loss. 1997, Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation of New Zealand and the National Health Committee.: Wellington (NZ). 5. Abenhaim, L., et al., The role of activity in the therapeutic management of back pain. Report of the International Paris Task Force on Back Pain. Spine, 2000. 25(4 Suppl): p. 1S-33S. 6. Bogduk, N., Draft evidence based clinical guidelines for the management of acute low back pain. 2000, National Health and Medical Research Council: Australia. 7. (CBO), C.B.v.d.I.T., Consensus Lumbosacrale Radicular Syndrome. June 1995: Utrecht. 8. Ruckenschmerzen, H.-. Empfehlungen zur Therapie von Ruckenschmerzen, Artzneimittelkommission der deutschen Arzteschaft (Treatment guidelines - backache. Drug Committee of German Medical Society). Z Artztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 1997(91): p. 457-460. 9. Hansen, T.M., Bendix, T., Bunger, C.D., et al., Laenderesmerter Klaringsrapport fra dansk selskap for intern medecin. Ugeskr Laeger, 1996. 158(14 (Suppl)): p. 1-18. 10. Keel, P., Perinin, C.H., Schutz-Petitjean, D., et al., Chronicisation des douleurs du dos: Problematique issues. Rapport final du Programme National de Recherche No. 26B. Bale Editions EULAR. 1996. 11. Manniche, C., ed. Low back pain: Frequency, management and prevention from HTA perspective. 1999, Danish Institute for Health Technology Assessment. 12. Borkan, J., Reis, S., Werner, S. et al., Guidelines for treating low back pain in primary care. 1996, The Israeli Low Back Pain Guideline Group. p. 130: 145-51. 13. Koes, B.W., et al., Clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care: an international comparison. Spine, 2001. 26(22): p. 2504-13; discussion 2513-4. 14. Hayward, R.S., et al., Canadian physicians' attitudes about and preferences regarding clinical practice guidelines. Cmaj, 1997. 156(12): p. 1715-23. 15. Hayward, R.S., Clinical practice guidelines on trial. Cmaj, 1997. 156(12): p. 1725-7. 16. Basinski, A.S., Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines. Cmaj, 1995. 153(11): p. 1575-81. 17. Steven, I.D. and R.D. Fraser, Clinical practice guidelines. Particular reference to the management of pain in the lumbosacral spine. Spine, 1996. 21(13): p. 1593-6. 18. Burton, A.K. and G. Waddell, Clinical guidelines in the management of low back pain. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol, 1998. 12(1): p. 17-35. 19. Hart, L.G., R.A. Deyo, and D.C. Cherkin, Physician office visits for low back pain. Frequency, clinical evaluation, and treatment patterns from a U.S. national survey. Spine, 1995. 20(1): p. 11-9. 20. Cherkin, D.C., et al., Physician views about treating low back pain. The results of a national survey. Spine, 1995. 20(1): p. 1-9; discussion 9-10. 21. Bishop, P.B. and P.C. Wing, Compliance with clinical practice guidelines in family physicians managing worker's compensation board patients with acute lower back pain. Spine J, 2003. 3(6): p. 442-50. 22. Gonzalez-Urzelai V, P.-E.L., Lopez-de-Munain J, Routine primary care management of acute lower back pain: adherence to guidelines. Eur Spine J, 2003. 12: p. 589-594. 23. Bishop, P., Badii, M., Wing, P., Implementation of clinical practice guidelines in workers compensation board patients with acute mechanical back pain: a prospective randomized trial. Proceedings of the North American Spine Society 17th Annual Meeting. Spine Journal, 2002. 2: p. 62-63S. 24. Bishop, P.W., PC, The Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Family Physicians Managing Workers' Compensation Board Patients with Acute Lower Back Pain Using Patient Specific Direct Physician to Physician Communication: A Prospective Randomized Trial. Spine, 2003. Submitted. 25. McGuirk, B., et al., Safety, efficacy, and cost effectiveness of evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute low back pain in primary care. Spine, 2001. 26(23): p. 2615-22.

    BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Low Back Pain

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Back PainPainNeurologic ManifestationsSigns and SymptomsPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Officials

  • Dr. Paul Bishop, MD

    University of British Columbia

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

August 23, 2005

First Posted

August 25, 2005

Study Start

January 1, 2006

Primary Completion

June 1, 2008

Study Completion

June 1, 2008

Last Updated

June 17, 2008

Record last verified: 2008-06

Locations