View clinical trials related to Back Pain.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to compare two different ways to treat chronic low back pain. The two types of treatment that the investigators will compare are called Usual Care and ABC Care. Usual Care tends to focus on the spine. ABC Care focuses on the entire body and the mind. With Usual Care, participants will work with their own doctor to come up with a treatment plan. With ABC Care, participants will work with the investigators' ABC providers and their team. The investigators believe ABC Care will help reduce pain, lower costs, and increase participants' ability to do the things they enjoy doing better than Usual Care. In ABC Care the investigators hope to avoid treatments like surgeries where participants get metal rods put in their back. This research is being done at three Veterans Hospitals: the Veterans Administration of Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS) in Pittsburgh, PA; the North Texas VA Medical Center in Dallas, TX; and the Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center in Richmond, VA. This research study is being paid for by the Rehabilitation Research and Development section of the Veterans Health Administration. The investigators will be enrolling about 450 participants at 3 sites or around 150 at each site.
1. Primary outcome measure: measuring the effect of spa treatment in patients suffering from lower limb osteoarthritis or any other lower limb rheumatological condition. Percentage of patients with minimum 19,9 mm decrease in pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or WOMAC score (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index) improvement of at least 9 points (minimal clinically important difference), 6 months after enrollment. Secondary outcome measures: 2. Measuring the effect of spa treatment in patients with concomitant chronic lower back pain. Percentage of patients presenting clinical benefits according to the EIFEL score, with a decrease of at least 5 points, 6 months after enrollment. 3. Quantitative evaluation of pain. Mean pain VAS comparison between enrollment and 6 months after spa treatment. 4. Quantitative evaluation of WOMAC score. Mean WOMAC score comparison between enrollment and 6 months after spa treatment. 5. Quantitative evaluation of EIFEL score. Mean EIFEL score comparison between enrollment and 6 months after spa treatment. 6. Impact of spa treatment on the patient's metabolism. Height and weight (BMI calculation), blood pressure and heart rate measured at enrollment and throughout the follow-up. 7. 8. Quality of life. 36-Item Short Form (SF 36) and EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ5D) questionnaires at enrollment, 3 months and 6 months. 9. Doctor and patient opinion. Semi-quantitative scale collected at enrollment, 3 months and 6 months. 10. Medicine consumption Daily medicine consumption evaluated upon the 72 hours preceding the medical visit at enrollment, 3 months and 6 months. 11. Auto-evaluation of pain VAS pain evaluation by the patient every 6 weeks for a more precise time frame of the treatment's effect.
The primary aim of this study is to investigate cerebral mechanisms of burst stimulation in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) patients treated with Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for chronic back and leg pain. This study is a single center, prospective, blinded, randomized crossover trial with two 14 days treatment periods and two treatment arms (burst before sham stimulation or sham before burst stimulation).
Prospective, double blinded, randomized, clinical study investigating the effects of high frequency SCS over exiting nerve roots at T9 for the treatment of chronic back or back and leg pain.
To gather data on the long-term safety of ReActiv8 and identify any residual risks by reporting all Serious Adverse Device Effects as well as performance and health care utilization through two years post-implant.
Physical activity plays an important role in the management of chronic low back pain (LBP). Engaging in an active lifestyle is associated with a better prognosis. Nevertheless, there is evidence to suggest that patients with chronic LBP are less likely to meet recommended physical activity levels. Furthermore, while exercise therapy has been endorsed by recent clinical practice guidelines, evidence from systematic reviews suggests that its effect on pain and disability are at best moderate and not sustained over time. A limitation of current exercises programs for chronic LBP is that these programs are not designed to change patient's behaviour toward an active lifestyle. Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate the short and long-term efficacy of a multimodal intervention consisting of supervised exercises, health coaching and use of an activity monitor (i.e. Fitbit Flex) compared to supervised exercises plus sham coaching and a sham activity monitor on physical activity levels, pain intensity and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP.
Lumbar pain is one of the most common injuries being the cause of morbidity in the individual generating occupational disability with strong personal, social and economic impact. As one of the methods of treatment, Pilates is a method that has good results for the management of this dysfunction. However, it is not known exactly which approach Pilates can bring better results for this population. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the effects of two types of Pilates method interventions on non-specific chronic low back pain. A blinded randomized clinical trial, will be held. 28 patients divided randomly into two groups will be assessed, the Mobilization Pilates (MP) and the Stabilization Pilates (SP). Both groups will be formed by individuals of both sexes and aged 21 to 41 years with chronic low back pain. Both groups will receive 10 sessions of Pilates Methods twice a week, with each session taking an average of 50 minutes, therefore the MP will focus on a lumbo-pelvic mobilization exercises approach and the SP will focus on lumbo-pelvic stabilization exercises approach. At the beginning and end of the 5 weeks the individuals are evaluated to verify the presence of pain and disability with VAS of pain and Oswestry Questionnaire, and also with the Functional Movement Screen. Data will be analyzed statistically.
The aim of this study is to investigate if six-weeks of exercise intervention, 3 times per week on the Functional Re-adaptive Exercise Device (FRED) reduces non-specific mechanical low back pain in adults ages 18-60.
The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of tDCS in combination with TUS for the treatment of pain and functional limitations in subjects with NSCLBP. The investigators hypothesize that there will be a decrease in pain levels with active stimulation, when compared to sham stimulation.
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) afflicts up to 50 million U.S. adults and is a primary cause of disability and reduced quality of life. The prescription of opioids for chronic low back pain (CLBP) has increased substantially within the past decade in the U.S. As noted by the CDC in their recent Guideline (released in March 2016): "Opioids are commonly prescribed for pain. An estimated 20% of patients presenting to physician offices with noncancer pain symptoms or pain-related diagnoses (including acute and chronic pain) receive an opioid prescription. Interestingly, patients scoring very high on measures of psychological distress tend to be systematically excluded from RCTs, even though this subgroup of patients is highly prevalent within the chronic pain population. This study will provide key information on individual differences in the outcomes of opioid treatment, and its findings should facilitate more effective tailoring of analgesic regimens to individual patient characteristic.