Evaluation of Therapeutic Management in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients
NCT ID: NCT05209854
Last Updated: 2023-05-15
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
613 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2023-03-02
2026-02-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Pain not only affects the body, but also destroys the person who endures it. A comparative study by Attal et al. carried out on a sample of 1,591 chronic pain sufferers and 1,237 non pain sufferers shows a major impact of pain on the individual's quality of life (SF12), sleep (MOS sleep) and anxiety and depression (HADS).
The 2009 report of the French National Authority for Health (HAS) shows that chronic pain generates a significant societal cost. Low back pain is the leading cause of activity limitation in people aged 45 to 65, and the third leading cause of chronic disability. It is the leading cause of disability in people under 45 years of age, and the leading cause of work stoppage and occupational disease.
The reference tool for assessing pain is currently the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). However, several factors considerably limit the relevance of an exclusive use of this tool:
* For the patient: the intensity of pain is objectively influenced by many parameters such as the time of day, stress, position, duration of evolution, mechanical or "neuropathic" character, paroxysms, etc. These are all elements that objectively disrupt the evaluation performed by the VAS. When the subjective and emotional dimension is included in these elements, the cloudiness of "true" perception of such a sensation increases even more.
* Difficulties of evaluation for the carer: carers are therefore confronted with a lack of relevance of objective pain evaluation tools, and researchers have to deal with data that are often not very reproducible. A fortiori, the second problem arising from this concerns the difficulty of comparing the effectiveness of different therapeutic strategies. The VAS cannot, for example, take into account the pain dominance in the case of multi-site pain, nor the surface area of the pain zone or even less its typology or topology. This information is however essential to determine the choice of the most appropriate therapeutic strategy.
* The difficulties of evaluation for the health care system: in fact, beyond the therapeutic wandering imposed on certain patients on a "micro" scale, it must be considered that this randomness of evaluation has an impact on the entire health care system. When a decision has to be made to reimburse a particular expensive drug or implantable medical device for pain relief, this reflection has to be extended to the "macro" level. This review thus reveals a threefold need for innovation in pain assessment: for the patient, for the caregiver and for the healthcare system.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Contribution of the Podiatrist-Posturologist in the Evaluation of the Link Between the Stabilometric Parameters and the Pain Felt in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
NCT05540548
Effectiveness of a Pain Neuroscience Education Programme on Physical Activity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
NCT05840302
Feasibility and Effect of a Multidisciplinary Telematics Approach for Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain: a Randomized, Open-label, Controlled, Pilot Clinical Trial. Study Protocol
NCT05093543
Effectiveness of a Condensed Functional Restoration Program for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: a Study of 193 Patients
NCT03803501
Efficacy of a Short Multidisciplinary Education and Rehabilitation Program for Patients With Subacute and Chronic Low Back Pain (LBP)
NCT05261828
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
It allows to take into account the objective parameters of pain intensity and surface in a given individual, in a reliable, reproducible and quantitative way.
The Neuro-Mapping Tool: its purpose is to evaluate very precisely the extent of the patient's painful surface at a given moment.
. This prospective study aims to optimize the care pathway and to introduce rationalization and objectivity in the evaluation of therapies proposed to patients.
This study will help us to test the following hypotheses:
* Sociodemographic, psychological, and physiological factors are associated with patient response to the standard care pathway offered to patients with low back pain.
* The different assessment tools are correlated with their evolution.
* The effect of different therapies varies according to patient characteristics.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Have had low back pain for more than 3 months.
* Have back pain greater than or equal to 2 on the Visual Analog Scale.
* Free patient, without guardianship or tutelage, nor subordination
* No objection from the patient after clear and fair information about the study
Exclusion Criteria
* Persons benefiting from reinforced protection, i.e. minors, persons deprived of their liberty by a judicial or administrative decision, persons staying in a health or social institution, adults under legal protection, pregnant or breast-feeding women and finally patients in emergency situations
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Poitiers University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Manuel ROULAUD, MSc
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Poitiers University Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Poitiers University Hospital
Poitiers, Vienne, France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
PREDIPAIN
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.