↓ Skip to main content

The Journal of Rheumatology

Efficacy of tramadol in treatment of chronic low back pain.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Rheumatology, March 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
177 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of tramadol in treatment of chronic low back pain.
Published in
Journal of Rheumatology, March 2000
Pubmed ID
Authors

T J Schnitzer, W L Gray, R Z Paster, M Kamin

Abstract

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tramadol in the treatment of chronic low back pain. A 3 phase trial: (1) a washout/screening phase; (2) a 3 week, open label, run-in phase; and (3) a 4 week, randomized, placebo controlled, double blind treatment phase. Three hundred eighty outpatients between 21 and 79 years with chronic low back pain with no or a distant history of back surgery enrolled in the open label phase and were treated with tramadol up to 400 mg/day. At the end of the open label phase, patients who tolerated tramadol and perceived benefit from it were randomized to continue treatment with tramadol or to convert to placebo in the double blind phase. Reasons for discontinuing from the open label phase included adverse events, 78 patients (20.5%); drug ineffective, 23 patients (6.1%); and other reasons, 25 patients (6.6%). Two hundred fifty-four patients entered the double blind phase, during which the daily dose was maintained within the range 200-400 mg tramadol or equivalent amount of placebo. The primary outcome measure in the double blind phase was the time to discontinuation due to inadequate pain relief. The distribution of time to therapeutic failure was significantly (p < or = 0.0001) different in the tramadol group compared to placebo. Kaplan-Meier estimate of the cumulative discontinuation rate due to therapeutic failure was 20.7% in the tramadol group and 51.3% in the placebo group. There were significantly lower (p < or = 0.0001) mean pain visual analog scores (10 cm scale) among tramadol patients (3.5 cm) compared to placebo patients (5.1 cm) at the final visit of the double blind phase. Tramadol patients scored significantly better on the McGill Pain Questionnaire (p = 0.0007) and the Roland Disability Questionnaire (p = 0.0001). Five of 127 tramadol treated patients and 6/127 placebo treated patients discontinued treatment during the double blind phase due to an adverse event. Commonly reported adverse events with tramadol included nausea, dizziness, somnolence, and headache. Among patients who tolerated it well, tramadol was effective for the treatment of chronic low back pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 64 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Master 9 14%
Other 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 17 26%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 48%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,962,193
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rheumatology
#1,578
of 3,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,187
of 41,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rheumatology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 41,738 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.