Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
van Tulder 2003 Canada | Review of papers examining the use of muscle relaxants in patients with simple low back pain. Only RCTs and CCTs were included in the article. | Systematic review | Benzodiazepines in chronic low back pain | 2 high quality trials. strong evidence for short term benefit. Pain intensity RR 0.82 in favour of benzos after 5-7 days, and 0.71 at 10 to 14 days. | This is a well conducted review article. There is also a Cochrane review by the same authors on the same subject. The outcomes in individual trials are often disparate making grouping of results difficult. |
Nonbenzodiazepines in chronic low back pain | 3 trials, Two high quality trials showed benefit to muscle relaxants for short term (7-21 days) pain relief | ||||
Bernstein et al 2004 USA | 1633 patients with low back pain. Recruited from community practitioners. Observed to determine if the use of muscle relaxants was associated with a more rapid recovery. No interventions were made by the authors on the care of the patients. | Observational cohort. | Baseline data on patient mix | 24% had sciatica. average pain was 5.4 on a 10 point scale. Average Roland baseline score was 11.2. Mean time to functional recovery (if recovered) was 16.2 days. | Only looked at time to return to normal function. benefit in treatment may be in relief of symptoms only which would be missed on this study. Purely observational study which is prone to a great deal of bias. Groups clearly different at baseline with users of muscle relaxants apparently having a greater degree of illness (though this is adjusted for in the Cox analysis). Mostly acute pain. |
Use of muscle relaxants | 49% of patients used muscle relaxants | ||||
Statistically significant differences in patient characteristics between users and non users | Users were on average 2.3 years younger (p=0.012); female 50% vs 45%; on workers compensation 34% vs 28%; or if they had a higher pain score, roland disability score or if they took longer to recover. They were less likely to be used if the patient had seen a chiropracter as initial provide 18% vs 55%; | ||||
Time to achieve functional recovery on Cox proportional hazards model. | No difference in recovery rates between those using muscle relaxants and those not. |