BMJ  2004;329:1403 (11 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7479.1403

Letter

Physiotherapy compared with advice for low back pain

Summary of responses

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—The many responses to the randomised controlled trial of physiotherapy compared with advice for low back pain by Frost et al and the accompanying editorial by McAuley raised several issues.^{1 2} The general complaint was that trials are not always of good quality and therefore do not provide evidence for what works and what does not. Others added that the findings of the paper by Frost et al were not consistent with the conclusions so reports in the media had picked up the wrong message. And comparing treatment with something other than no treatment, one session with several sessions, and not considering the heterogeneity of the study sample, struck several as a pointless exercise.

The points raised in the debate between doctors, physiotherapists, and chiropractors and osteopaths were predictable, with people explaining their job profiles and discussing one profession's superiority or suitability over another. Some argued that the expense . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Randomised controlled trial of physiotherapy compared with advice for low back pain

Helen Frost, Sarah E Lamb, Helen A Doll, Patricia Taffe Carver, and Sarah Stewart-Brown
BMJ 2004 329: 708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]