↓ Skip to main content

A comparative study of three conservative treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: lumbar spinal stenosis with acupuncture and physical therapy study (LAP study)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
26 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
Title
A comparative study of three conservative treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: lumbar spinal stenosis with acupuncture and physical therapy study (LAP study)
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12906-018-2087-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroyuki Oka, Ko Matsudaira, Yuichi Takano, Daichi Kasuya, Masaki Niiya, Juichi Tonosu, Masayoshi Fukushima, Yasushi Oshima, Tomoko Fujii, Sakae Tanaka, Hirohiko Inanami

Abstract

Although the efficiency of conservative management for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has been examined, different conservative management approaches have not been compared. We have performed the first comparative trial of three types of conservative management (medication with acetaminophen, exercise, and acupuncture) in Japanese patients with LSS. Patients with L5 root radiculopathy associated with LSS who visited our hospital for surgical treatment were enrolled between December 2011 and January 2014. In this open-label study, patients were assigned to three treatment groups (medication, exercise, acupuncture) according to the visit time. The primary outcomes were Zurich claudication questionnaire (ZCQ) scores before and after 4 weeks of treatment. Least square mean analysis was used to assess the following dependent variables in the treatment groups: changes in symptom severity and physical function scores of the ZCQ and the ZCQ score of patient's satisfaction after treatment. Thirty-eight, 40, and 41 patients were allocated to the medication, exercise, and acupuncture groups, respectively. No patient underwent surgical treatment during the study period. The symptom severity scores of the ZCQ improved significantly after treatment in the medication (p = 0.048), exercise (p = 0.003), and acupuncture (p = 0.04) groups. The physical function score improved significantly in the acupuncture group (p = 0.045) but not in the medication (p = 0.20) and exercise (p = 0.29) groups. The mean reduction in the ZCQ score for physical function was significantly greater for acupuncture than for exercise. The mean ZCQ score for treatment satisfaction was significantly greater for acupuncture than for medication. Acupuncture was significantly more effective than physical exercise according to the physical function score of the ZCQ and than medication according to the satisfaction score. The present study provides new important information that will aid decision making in LSS treatment. This study was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry ( UMIN000006957 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 150 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Student > Master 15 10%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 62 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 17%
Sports and Recreations 7 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 67 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,333,216
of 25,038,941 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#211
of 3,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,319
of 453,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#11
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,038,941 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 453,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.