Quality and quantity of clinical trials on low back pain published by Indian physiotherapists

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Clinical trials are regarded as the gold standard evidence for establishing the effectiveness and efficacy of different therapeutic strategies. LBP is a globally prevalent health symptom that is commonly encountered clinically by the physiotherapist. Physiotherapeutic strategies are essential in managing individuals with low back pain (LBP). High-quality clinical trials are required to establish the efficacy/effectiveness of physiotherapeutic management strategies. A clinical trial’s generalizability depends on various factors such as geographical location, population, and healthcare facilities. Evaluating the publication trends and quality of clinical trials conducted by Indian physiotherapists will help determine the effectiveness of physiotherapeutic strategies in managing LBP with respect to the Indian context. Therefore, the study aimed to assess the publication trends and quality of clinical trials conducted by Indian physiotherapists. Methods The authors used MEDLINE and the PEDro database to screen for eligible trials. The research encompassed clinical trials addressing low back pain that were authored by Indian physiotherapists and were published between January 2005 and December 2021. The included studies were analyzed for quality using the PEDro Scale. The authors also evaluated sample size calculation, trial registration status, and adherence to the CONSORT checklist. Results A total of 866 studies were screened, of which 37 studies were included for final analysis. Most of the studies were published in the southern states of India (Maharashtra and Karnataka), and most were published in 2019. Methodological quality evaluation by PEDro yielded a mean score of 5.17 (range, 2–9). The major missing elements from PEDro items were blinding and intention to treat analysis. Sample size calculation was not found in 83.7% of the studies. Trial registrations were reported in only 10.8% of the studies, and the trials did not report adherence to standard guidelines such as CONSORT. Conclusion Included studies showed poor to fair methodological quality according to the PEDro Scale. There has been an increase in the number of RCTs published by Indian physiotherapists. However, there is significant room for improvement in the conduct and reporting of trials.