Skip to main content
. 2013 Aug 19;2013(8):CD003010. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003010.pub5

Summary of findings 4. Traction compared with any other treatment for people with low‐back pain with and without sciatica.

Traction compared with any other treatment for people with low‐back pain with and without sciatica
Patient or population: people with low‐back pain with and without sciatica
Settings: diverse
Intervention: traction
Comparison: other treatment
Outcomes Effects No of participants
 (studies) Quality of the evidence
 (GRADE)
Pain intensity
VAS (0‐100 mm).
Follow‐up 12‐16 weeks.
3 trials, of which 1 compared traction with 2 other types of treatment, showed no difference greater than 5 points on the VAS scale between the 2 groups (MD ‐2.90 (95% CI ‐8.53 to 2.93) to 4.50 (95% CI ‐0.45 to 9.45). 304
(3)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
 moderate
 
Imprecision (< 400 participants)
Functional status
Oswestry Disability Index or Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire.
Follow‐up 12‐16 weeks.
3 trials, of which 1 compared traction to 2 other types of treatment and used 2 types of questionnaires to assess functional status, showed no difference between the 2 groups (SMD ‐0.08 (95% CI ‐0.39 to 0.23) to 0.51 (95% CI ‐0.12 to 1.14)). 350
(3)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
 moderate
 
Imprecision (< 400 participants)
Global improvement
Follow‐up 12‐16 weeks.
1 trial showed no difference in global improvement (RD 0.05, 95% CI ‐0.1 to 0.2). 42
(1)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
 low
 
Study design (high risk of bias)
Imprecision (< 300 participants)
Return to work
Follow‐up 12‐16 weeks.
Not measured.    
Adverse effects 1 trial reported temporary deterioration of low‐back pain in 17% of the traction group and 15% of the exercise group.    
MD: mean difference; RD: risk difference; SMD: standardized mean difference.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
 High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
 Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
 Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
 Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.