***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: OBJECTIVES To compare outcomes in perception of pain and disability for a group of patients suffering with chronic low-back pain ( CLBP ) when managed in a hospital by either a regional pain clinic or a chiropractor .  DESIGN The study was a pragmatic , r and omized , controlled trial . SETTING The trial was performed at a National Health Service ( NHS ) hospital outpatient clinic ( pain clinic ) in the United Kingdom . SUBJECTS AND INTERVENTIONS Patients with CLBP ( i.e. , symptom duration of > 12 weeks ) referred to a regional pain clinic ( outpatient hospital clinic ) were assessed and r and omized to either chiropractic or pain-clinic management for a period of 8 weeks . The study was pragmatic , allowing for normal treatment protocol s to be used . Treatment was administered in an NHS hospital setting . OUTCOME MEASURES The Rol and -Morris Disability Question naire ( RMDQ ) and Numerical Rating Scale were used to assess changes in perceived disability and pain . Mean values at weeks 0 , 2 , 4 , 6 , and 8 were calculated . The mean differences between week 0 and week 8 were compared across the two treatment groups using Student 's t-tests . Ninety-five percent ( 95 % ) confidence intervals ( CIs ) for the differences between groups were calculated . RESULTS R and omization placed 12 patients in the pain clinic and 18 in the chiropractic group , of which 11 and 16 , respectively , completed the trial . At 8 weeks , the mean improvement in RMDQ was 5.5 points greater for the chiropractic group ( decrease in disability by 5.9 ) than for the pain-clinic group ( 0.36 ) ( 95 % CI 2.0 points to 9.0 points ; p = 0.004 ) . Reduction in mean pain intensity at week 8 was 1.8 points greater for the chiropractic group than for the pain-clinic group ( p = 0.023 ) . CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that chiropractic management administered in an NHS setting may be effective for reducing levels of disability and perceived pain during the period of treatment for a sub population of patients with CLBP Study Design . A r and omized trial . Objective . To evaluate the effectiveness of a semi-intensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation for patients with chronic low back pain in an outpatient setting . Summary and Background Data . Systematic review s have shown that there is strong evidence that intensive multidisciplinary treatment ( > 100 hours ) , which includes functional restoration , improves function among chronic patients with low back pain , and moderate evidence that it reduces pain but contradictory evidence regarding improvement of working ability . However , there is paucity of data whether semi-intensive outpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation in groups is more effective than individual physiotherapy . Material s and Methods . A total of 120 women employed as healthcare and social care professionals with nonspecific chronic low back pain were recruited from two occupational healthcare centers . The patients were r and omized into two intervention programs . Multidisciplinary rehabilitation ( n = 59 ) was conducted in groups and comprised of physical training , workplace interventions , back school , relaxation training , and cognitive-behavioral stress management methods for 70 hours . The individual physiotherapy ( n = 61 ) included physical exercise and passive treatment methods administered for 10 hours . Main outcome measures were : back pain and sciatic pain intensity , disability , sick leaves , healthcare consumption , symptoms of depression , and beliefs of working ability after 2 years . Results . There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups in main outcome measures just after rehabilitation , at 6- , at 12- , or 24-month follow-up . In both intervention arms , however , the before- and -after comparison showed favorable effects , and the effects were still maintained at 2 years follow-up . Conclusions . The results of this study indicate that semilight outpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for female chronic low back pain patients does not offer incremental benefits when compared with rehabilitation carried out by a physiotherapist having a cognitive-behavioral way of administering the treatment Abstract Objective To estimate the effect of adding exercise classes , spinal manipulation delivered in NHS or private premises , or manipulation followed by exercise to “ best care ” in general practice for patients consulting with back pain . Fig 1 Progress of the UK BEAM trial Design Pragmatic r and omised trial with factorial design . Setting 181 general practice s in Medical Research Council General Practice Research Framework ; 63 community setting s around 14 centres across the United Kingdom . Participants 1334 patients consulting their general practice s about low back pain . Main outcome measures Scores on the Rol and Morris disability question naire at three and 12 months , adjusted for centre and baseline scores . Results All groups improved over time . Exercise  improved mean disability question naire scores at three months by 1.4 ( 95 % confidence interval 0.6 to 2.1 ) more than “ best care . ” For manipulation the additional improvement was 1.6 ( 0.8 to 2.3 ) at three months and 1.0 ( 0.2 to 1.8 ) at 12 months . For manipulation followed by exercise the additional improvement was 1.9 ( 1.2 to 2.6 ) at three months and 1.3 ( 0.5 to 2.1 ) at 12 months . No significant differences in outcome occurred between manipulation in NHS premises and in private premises . No serious adverse events occurred . Conclusions Relative to “ best care ” in general practice , manipulation followed by exercise achieved a moderate benefit at three months and a small benefit at 12 months ; spinal manipulation achieved a small to moderate benefit at three months and a small benefit at 12 months ; and exercise achieved a small benefit at three months but not 12 months OBJECTIVE For long-term treatment effects , patients with subacute back pain need to adhere to treatment recommendations beyond the prescribed exercise treatment . Adherence rates are as low as 30 % , so we developed a cognitive-behavioural training programme to enhance patients ' self-efficacy , maximise severity perceptions and reduce barrier perceptions . METHOD A 2 x 4 ( group x time ) repeated measurement design was applied . Forty-seven patients with non-specific , subacute back pain were r and omly assigned to a training group ( exercise treatment plus cognitive-behavioural training programme ) or a control group ( exercise treatment only ) . RESULTS Repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant main and interaction effects ; the training group reported enhanced self-efficacy and severity perceptions , reduced barrier perceptions , and self-reported that they exercised more often than the control group over time . However , no group differences regarding pain intensity emerged . CONCLUSION Our findings demonstrate that a short and inexpensive cognitive-behavioural training programme is an effective tool to enable back pain patients to follow treatment recommendations on a regular basis . PRACTICE IMPLICATION S The short and simple intervention can easily be conducted by personnel , other than psychologists , i.e. , physiotherapists Objectives The aim of this r and omized controlled study was to investigate whether additional psychologic interventions in the context of multidisciplinary inpatient pain treatment increases treatment efficacy compared with normal orthopedic rehabilitation . In addition , we aim ed to demonstrate the additional benefit of a subsequent maintenance program in further stabilizing treatment successes . Methods We r and omly assigned 363 chronic back pain patients to 1 of 3 treatment conditions : traditional orthopedic rehabilitation , multidisciplinary ( behavioral-medical ) rehabilitation alone , and multidisciplinary rehabilitation with subsequent booster sessions .  Pain disability , depression , self-efficacy , health status , life satisfaction , and coping strategies were assessed at admission , discharge , and 12 months follow-up . The completion rate was 94 % . Results All 3 treatment conditions were effective in improving core outcome measures in chronic back pain patients in the short term . The results were almost maintained at follow-up ( small-to-medium within-group effect sizes ) . Significant advantages in favor of behavioral-medical interventions were found on almost all pain coping strategies and depression compared with traditional orthopedic rehabilitation . We found only slight advantages for the behavioral-medical treatment with subsequent booster sessions compared with the condition without a further maintenance program . Discussion The results concerning the efficacy of the multidisciplinary treatment are in accordance with former meta-analyses . Surprisingly , the findings suggest that the presented traditional orthopedic treatment was inherently very effective . The implication s of these findings are discussed with respect to the benefit of additional psychologic interventions and the benefit of aftercare approaches for chronic pain patients This study examined the supplemental value of a cognitive coping skills training when added to an operant-behavioral treatment for chronic low-back pain patients . The complete treatment package ( OPCO ) was compared with an operant program + group discussion ( OPDI ) and a waiting-list control ( WLC ) . After the WL period , the WLC patients received a less protocol ized operant program usually provided in Dutch rehabilitation centers ( OPUS ) . Regression analyses showed that , compared with WLC , both OPCO and OPDI led to less negative affect , higher activity tolerance , less pain behavior , and higher pain coping and pain control . At posttreatment , OPCO led to better pain coping and pain control than OPDI . Calculation of improvement rates revealed that OPCO and OPDI had significantly more improved patients than OPUS on all the dependent variables . The discussion includes findings regarding treatment credibility , compliance , and contamination bias Study Design . Single blind r and omized study . Objectives . To compare the effectiveness of  lumbar instrumented fusion with cognitive intervention and exercises in patients with chronic low back pain and disc degeneration . Summary of Background Data . To the authors ’ best knowledge , only one r and omized study has evaluated the effectiveness of lumbar fusion . The Swedish Lumbar Spine Study reported that lumbar fusion was better than continuing physiotherapy and care by the family physician . Patients and Methods . Sixty-four patients aged 25–60 years with low back pain lasting longer than 1 year and evidence of disc degeneration at L4–L5 and /or L5–S1 at radiographic examination were r and omized to either lumbar fusion with posterior transpedicular screws and postoperative physiotherapy , or cognitive intervention and exercises . The cognitive intervention consisted of a lecture to give the patient an underst and ing that ordinary physical activity would not harm the disc and a recommendation to use the back and bend it . This was reinforced by three daily physical exercise sessions for 3 weeks . The main outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index . Results . At the 1-year follow-up visit , 97 % of the patients , including 6 patients who had either not attended treatment or changed groups , were examined . The Oswestry Disability Index was significantly reduced from 41 to 26 after surgery , compared with 42 to 30 after cognitive intervention and exercises . The mean difference between groups was 2.3 ( −6.7 to 11.4 ) ( P = 0.33 ) . Improvements inback pain , use of analgesics , emotional distress , life satisfaction , and return to work were not different . Fear-avoidance beliefs and fingertip-floor distance were reduced more after nonoperative treatment , and lower limb pain was reduced more after surgery . The success rateaccording to an independent observer was 70 % after surgery and 76 % after cognitive intervention and exercises .  The early complication rate in the surgical group was 18 % . Conclusion . The main outcome measure showed equal improvement in patients with chronic low back pain and disc degeneration r and omized to cognitive intervention and exercises , or lumbar fusion OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of the addition of back school to exercise and physical treatment modalities in relieving pain and improving the functional status of patients with chronic low back pain . DESIGN A r and omized controlled trial . PATIENTS A total of 146 patients with chronic low back pain were enrolled in the study . METHODS Subjects were divided into 2 groups : the back school group received exercise , physical treatment modalities and a back school programme ; and the control group received exercise and physical treatment modalities .  Treatment efficacy was evaluated at the end of treatment and 3 months post-treatment , in terms of pain , measured with the Visual Analogue Scale , and functional status , measured with the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Question naire . RESULTS In both groups , Visual Analogue Scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Question naire were significantly reduced after therapy ( p < 0.01 ) , but the difference between the scores at the end of treatment and 3 months post-treatment was not significant . There was a significant improvement in Visual Analogue Scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Question naire in the back school group compared with the control group at the end of therapy and 3 months post-treatment ( p < 0.05 ) . CONCLUSION The addition of back school was more effective than exercise and physical treatment modalities alone in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain Background Effective strategies for the primary prevention of low back pain ( LBP ) remain elusive with few large-scale clinical trials investigating exercise and education approaches . The purpose of this trial was to determine whether core stabilization alone or in combination with psychosocial education prevented incidence of low back pain in comparison to traditional lumbar exercise . Methods The Prevention of Low Back Pain in the Military study was a cluster r and omized clinical study with four intervention arms and a two-year follow-up . Participants were recruited from a military training setting from 2007 to 2008 . Soldiers in 20 consecutive companies were considered for eligibility ( n = 7,616 ) . Of those , 1,741 were ineligible and 1,550 were eligible but refused participation . For the 4,325 Soldiers enrolled with no previous history of LBP average age was 22.0 years ( SD = 4.2 ) and there were 3,082 males ( 71.3 
    Output:
    
There was insufficient evidence to assess whether MBR interventions were associated with more adverse events than usual care or physical interventions .Sensitivity analyses did not suggest that the pooled estimates were unduly influenced by the results from low quality studies .
Subgroup analyses were inconclusive regarding the influence of baseline symptom severity and intervention intensity .
Patients with chronic LBP receiving MBR  are likely to experience less pain and disability than those receiving usual care or a physical treatment .
MBR also has a positive influence on work status compared to physical treatment .
Effects are of a modest magnitude and should be balanced against the time and re source requirements of MBR programs .
More intensive interventions were not responsible for effects that were substantially different to those of less intensive interventions .