Skip Navigation


Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on January 31, 2006
Rheumatology 2006 45(7):880-884; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel018
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
45/7/880    most recent
kel018v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pittler, M. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pittler, M. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Spa therapy and balneotherapy for treating low back pain: meta-analysis of randomized trials

M. H. Pittler, M. Z. Karagülle1, M. Karagülle1 and E. Ernst

Complementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth, Exeter, UK and 1 Department of Medical Ecology and Hydro-Climatology, Istanbul Medical Faculty, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey.

Correspondence to: M. H. Pittler, Complementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter EX2 4NT, UK. E-mail: M.H.Pittler{at}exeter.ac.uk


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Objectives. Low back pain is a major public health concern and complementary treatments are frequently used for this condition. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the evidence for or against the effectiveness of spa therapy and balneotherapy for treating low back pain.

Methods. Systematic searches were conducted on Medline, Embase, Amed Cochrane Central, the UK National Research Register and ClincalTrials.gov (all until July 2005). Hand searches were performed and experts contacted. Methodological quality was assessed using a standard scale.

Results. Five randomized clinical trials met all inclusion criteria. Quantitative data synthesis was performed. The data for spa therapy, assessed on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS), suggest significant beneficial effects compared with waiting list control groups (weighted mean difference 26.6 mm, 95% confidence interval 20.4–32.8, n=442) for patients with chronic low back pain. For balneotherapy the data, assessed on a 100 mm VAS, also suggest beneficial effects compared with control groups (weighted mean difference 18.8 mm, 95% confidence interval 10.3–27.3, n=138).

Conclusions. Even though the data are scarce, there is encouraging evidence suggesting that spa therapy and balneotherapy may be effective for treating patients with low back pain. These data are not compelling but warrant rigorous large-scale trials.

KEY WORDS: Complementary medicine, Alternative medicine, Spa therapy, Balneology, Systematic review, Meta-analysis


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Low back pain is a major public health concern in many countries and there is a lack of agreement as to when it becomes chronic [1–5]. Chronic low back pain has been described as back pain that lasts longer than 7–12 weeks [5]. In the UK, estimates indicate that low back pain is the largest single cause of absence from work and is responsible for 12.5% of all sick days [5]. Among patients receiving care in the USA, the proportion receiving physician care increased from 64% in 1987 to 74% in 1997, whereas those obtaining care from physical therapists increased from 5% to 9% during the same period [6]. Complementary therapies are popular and frequently used by patients with low back pain [7]. Two such treatment options are balneotherapy and spa therapy. They are used particularly in European countries and the costs are, at least in part, reimbursed by health insurance systems (e.g. Germany) [8]. In contrast to hydrotherapy, which generally employs normal tap water, balneotherapy is defined as the use of baths containing thermal mineral waters from natural springs at a temperature of at least 20°C and with a mineral content of at least 1 g/l. Spa therapy additionally employs physiotherapeutic interventions at a spa resort [9, 10]. In countries such as the UK and the USA these treatments are also used but are viewed as complementary. Elsewhere, they have traditionally been considered as part of the conventional medical system (e.g. Germany). Balneotherapy and spa therapy are associated with considerable costs and it is therefore reasonable to ask whether they are supported by good evidence. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the evidence for or against the effectiveness of balneotherapy and spa therapy for treating low back pain.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Database search
The following databases were searched: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Amed, the National Research Register, UK (http://www.update-software.com/projects/nrr/), and ClincalTrials.gov, USA (http://clinicaltrials.gov/). We used the search terms ‘balneotherapy’, ‘balneology’, ‘spa therapy’ and ‘kur’ (German term for spa treatment). Each database was searched from its inception until July 2005. To identify additional published or unpublished studies, we conducted hand searches of conference proceedings (FACT – Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies 1996–2005), relevant medical journals (Alternative and Complementary Therapies 1995–2005, Forschende Komplementärmedizin Klassische Naturheilkunde 1994–2005 and Physikalische Medizin, Rehabilitationsmedizin und Kurortmedizin 1993–2005) and our own collection of papers. Hand searches also included the bibliographies of all retrieved articles and contact with experts. There were no restrictions regarding the language of publication.

Selection
All trials that reported that the sequence of allocation was randomized [randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] testing balneotherapy or spa therapy for treating patients with low back pain were included. Trials reported in duplicate were excluded. Titles and abstracts of identified articles were assessed independently by at least two authors and hard copies of all potentially relevant articles were obtained for further evaluation (M.H.P., M.Z.K., M.K., E.E.).

Validity assessment
Methodological quality was evaluated using the system developed by Jadad [11]. The quality was assessed independently by two authors (M.H.P., E.E.).

Data abstraction
Data abstraction was performed systematically and independently (M.H.P., M.Z.K., M.K.) according to design, quality, sample size, intervention, water characteristics, results, adverse events and concomitant treatment (Table 1). Disagreements in the evaluation of studies were largely due to reading errors and were resolved through discussion. Quantitative data synthesis was performed. The mean change of pain measured on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) compared with baseline was defined as the primary end-point, and was used to assess the difference between the intervention groups and the control groups (M.H.P.). Means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using standard meta-analysis software (RevMan 4.2.8; Update Software, Oxford, UK). Summary estimates of the treatment effect were calculated using a random effects model. The {chi}2 test for heterogeneity was performed to determine whether the distribution of the results was compatible with the assumption that intertrial differences were attributable to chance variation alone.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Randomized controlled trials of spa therapy and balneotherapy for low back pain

 

   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
The literature searches identified 60 potentially relevant articles (Fig. 1). Abstracts were assessed and 10 papers were retrieved for further evaluation [12–21]. No unpublished studies were identified. Five publications were excluded because they were not reported as randomized [12, 13], did not test balneotherapy or spa therapy [14], did not report a clinical trial [15] or were a duplicate publication [16]. Five trials [17–21] met all inclusion criteria (Table 1). All trials provided data that were suitable for statistical pooling. The methodological quality was on average adequate, given that patient blinding was not possible [11]. In most trials the mineral content of the water was relatively low.


Figure 1
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1. Flowchart of trial selection process.

 
Three RCTs tested the effectiveness of spa therapy (Fig. 2). These trials included 454 patients suffering from chronic low back pain. In all studies, pain was assessed using a 100 mm VAS. The meta-analysis suggested significant differences in favour of spa therapy compared with waiting list control groups (weighted mean difference, 26.6, 95% CI 20.4–32.8, n = 442). There was no visual or statistical evidence of heterogeneity (P = 0.17, {chi}2 test). Results for the Schober index, assessing lumbar flexibility, suggested no significant intergroup differences (weighted mean difference 3.6 mm, 95% CI –2.7–9.8, n = 442). In all three trials there was no mention of adverse events.


Figure 2
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2. Meta-analysis of RCTs WMD, weighted mean difference.

 
Two RCTs tested the effectiveness of balneotherapy using a 100 mm VAS (Fig. 3). The meta-analysis suggested significant intergroup differences in favour of balneotherapy compared with control groups (weighted mean difference 18.8 mm, 95% CI 10.3–27.3, n = 138). There was no visual or statistical evidence of heterogeneity (P = 0.24, {chi}2 test). There was no mention of adverse events in one trial, and another [20] reported the occurrence of no adverse events in the treatment group.


Figure 3
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3. Meta-analysis of RCTs WMD, weighted mean difference.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The data from this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest significant differential effects in favour of spa therapy and balneotherapy for reducing low back pain and corroborate other reviews on the topic [15]. However, the volume of the evidence is small and includes a total of only five RCTs assessing 674 patients. The variation in the treatment regimen (Table 1), which was expected, did not cause enough heterogeneity to lead us to abandon statistical data pooling. None of the reviewed trials reported any adverse events and it seems that, where adequate facilities are available, spa therapy and balneotherapy are beneficial options when administered under close supervision.

The paucity of evidence from RCTs is in stark contrast to the popularity of these treatments among patient populations and to the expenditure by health insurers on such interventions. The findings of our meta-analyses support data from previous systematic reviews, which identified the need for further studies some 7 yr ago [e.g. 22, 23]. Methodological difficulties in assessing complex interventions relating, for instance, to the design of adequate control groups, blinding and the expense involved may be some of the reasons for the small number of studies carried out so far. Nonetheless, this meta-analysis has shown that good-quality trials are possible and it is hoped that our findings will encourage further systematic research. Future studies should be randomized and careful attention should be paid to the concealment of treatment allocation, as was done in all studies on spa therapy. Adequate sample sizes should be assessed, ideally administering similar regimens under similar conditions. In contrast to other opinions [24], we believe that balneotherapy and spa therapy are good examples of complex interventions for which it is possible and relevant to distinguish specific from non-specific effects.

Trials are also required to investigate the more fundamental question of whether spa treatments administered at a spa resort are more beneficial than the same treatments administered elsewhere. These differences are at the heart of spa therapy and are associated with considerable costs. At present, there is no convincing evidence that spa therapy administered at a spa resort is more effective than the same treatment regimen administered elsewhere, which could reduce costs [22]. Thus, a situation exists whereby some encouraging evidence suggests that spa therapy is effective for low back pain, while it is unclear whether these treatments have to be administered at a spa resort, as an integral part of spa therapy, or whether they can be administered elsewhere with the same therapeutic effects and at less cost.

In some countries, such as Germany, the spa sector has suffered through political decisions to cut back on reimbursement for such treatments (Kur) through the national health insurance system. The move was motivated by financial considerations but the paucity of compelling data on specific effectiveness and cost-effectiveness has also played a crucial role. Considering the potential role of balneotherapy and spa therapy, as shown in this meta-analysis, it is disappointing that more clinical trials have not been initiated. As always, the burden of demonstrating the worth of a medical intervention lies on the shoulders of those who claim that it works.

Limitations of our systematic review, and indeed systematic reviews in general, pertain to the potential incompleteness of the evidence reviewed. We aimed to identify all RCTs on the topic. The distorting effects on systematic reviews and meta-analyses arising from publication bias and location bias are well documented [25–28]. For this study, we searched databases with a focus on the American and European literature and those that specialize in complementary medicine, and we included hand searches. There were no restrictions in terms of publication language, and the appraisal of the clinical evidence was performed independently by two reviewers. We are therefore confident that our search strategy has located all relevant data on the subject. However, one can never be absolutely certain and a degree of uncertainty remains.

In conclusion, even though the data are scarce, there is some encouraging evidence suggesting that spa therapy and balneotherapy may be effective for treating patients with low back pain. These data are not compelling but warrant rigorous large-scale trials.
Figure 4

The authors have declared that there are no conflicts of interest.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Walker BF, Muller R, Grant WD. Low back pain in Australian adults: prevalence and associated disability. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2004;27:238–44.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  2. da Silva MC, Fassa AG, Valle NC. Chronic low back pain in a Southern Brazilian adult population: prevalence and associated factors. Cad Saude Publica 2004;20:377–85.[Medline]
  3. Stranjalis G, Tsamandouraki K, Sakas DE, Alamanos Y. Low back pain in a representative sample of Greek population: analysis according to personal and socioeconomic characteristics. Spine 2004;29:1355–60.[Medline]
  4. Palmer KT, Walsh K, Bendall H, Cooper C, Coggon D. Back pain in Britain: comparison of two prevalence surveys at an interval of 10 years. BMJ 2000;320:1577–8.[Free Full Text]
  5. Andersson GB. Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet 1999;354:581–5.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Feuerstein M, Marcus SC, Huang GD. National trends in nonoperative care for nonspecific back pain. Spine J 2004;4:56–63.[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Barnes PM, Powell-Griner E, McFann K, Nahin RL. Complementary and alternative medicine use among adults: United States, 2002. Adv Data 2004;343:1–19.[Medline]
  8. Karagülle MZ, Gutenbrunner C, Karagülle O. Balneologie, Medizinische Klimatologie bei rheumatischen Erkrankungen. Törpin: ISMH Verlag, 2003.
  9. Bender T, Karagülle Z, Balint GP, Gutenbrunner C, Balint PV, Sukenik S. Hydrotherapy, balneotherapy, and spa treatment in pain management. Rheumatol Int 2005;25:220–4.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Pätzold C, Engst R. Pschyrembel Wörterbuch Naturheilkunde. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2000.
  11. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1–12.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Krajnc I, Siftar M, Turk Z, Barovic J, Nikolic T. The effect of balneotherapy on the low back pain disease at the Moravci spa and the Department of Physiotherapy and Rheumatology – Maribor Teaching Hospital. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl 1992;94:55.
  13. Peter A, Cornut JP, Zenklusen JL, Pfister JA. The patient with chronic low back pain in a thermal spa. Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax 1993;82:1004–7.[Medline]
  14. Rozier M, Francon J, Gras-Joly JPJ. Clinical study of Voltaren in 58 patients in a thermal bath environment. Rhumatologie 1978;30:133–5.
  15. Queneau P, Francon A, Graber-Duvernay B. Methodological reflections on 20 randomized clinical hydrotherapy trials in rheumatology. Therapie 2001;56:675–84.[Medline]
  16. Constant F, Guillemin F, Herbeth B, Collin JF, Boulange M. Measurement methods of drug consumption as a secondary judgment criterion for clinical trials in chronic rheumatic diseases. Am J Epidemiol 1997;145:826–33.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Guillemin F, Constant F, Collin JF, Boulange M. Short and long-term effect of spa therapy in chronic low back pain. Br J Rheumatol 1994;33:148–51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Constant F, Collin JF, Guillemin F, Boulange M. Effectiveness of spa therapy in chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Rheumatol 1995;22:1315–20.[Medline]
  19. Constant F, Guillemin F, Collin JF, Boulange M. Use of spa therapy to improve the quality of life of chronic low back pain patients. Med Care 1998;36:1309–14.[Medline]
  20. Konrad K, Tatrai T, Hunka A, Vereckei E, Korondi I. Controlled trial of balneotherapy in treatment of low back pain. Ann Rheum Dis 1992;51:820–2.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Yurtkuran M, Kahmraman Z, Sivrioglu K, Afsin Y, Dogan M. Balneotherapy in low back pain. Eur J Phys Med Rehabil 1997;7:120–3.
  22. Ernst E, Pittler MH. How efficacious is spa treatment? A systematic review of randomized trials. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1998;123:273–7.[Medline]
  23. Karagülle MZ, Karagülle M. Balneotherapy and spa therapy of rheumatic diseases in Turkey: a systematic review. Forsch Komplementärmed Klass Naturheilkd 2004;1:33–41.[Medline]
  24. Paterson C, Dieppe P. Characteristic and incidental (placebo) effects in complex interventions such as acupuncture. BMJ 2005;330:1202–5.[Free Full Text]
  25. Dickersin K. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 1990;263:1385–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Egger M, Davey Smith G. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ 1998;316:61–6.[Free Full Text]
  27. Ernst E, Pittler MH. Alternative therapy bias. Nature 1997;385:480.[Medline]
  28. Pittler MH, Abbot NC, Harkness EF, Ernst E. Location bias in controlled clinical trials of complementary/alternative therapies. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:485–9.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Submitted 31 August 2005; revised version accepted 16 December 2005.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clin RehabilHome page
B. Waller, J. Lambeck, and D. Daly
Therapeutic aquatic exercise in the treatment of low back pain: a systematic review
Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2009; 23(1): 3 - 14.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
Minerva
BMJ, July 22, 2006; 333(7560): 208 - 208.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
45/7/880    most recent
kel018v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pittler, M. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pittler, M. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ernst, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?