To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Tuina Manual Therapy for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
May 2023

Tuina Manual Therapy for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis

Vol: 303| Issue: 5| Number:17| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Efficacy and safety of Tuina for chronic nonspecific low back pain: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.

Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Mar 3;102(9): e33018.

Contributing Authors:
J Yang X Zhou Q Ma JT Woods AB Mohabbat A Do JS Brault MA Jensen KM Shin L Shen C Zhao KCP Cheong K He Y Guo Z Chen S Tang Y Tang CIC Tan J Chen BA Bauer

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

15 RCTs with 1390 chronic non-specific low back pain patients were included in this meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness and safety of Tuina therapy. Pooled outcomes of interest included pain, physical function, and quality of life. Adverse events were also assessed. Meta-analyses demonstrated a significant benefit of Tuina therapy on pain (p<0.001) and function (p=0.005). Pooled quality of l...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue