SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2021
Efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for adults with non-specific low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
47 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of odanacatib, abaloparatide, denosumab, teriparatide, and bisphosphonates for male osteoporosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of abaloparatide, denosumab, teriparatide, oral bisphosphonates, and intravenous bisphosphonates in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- Skeletal muscle relaxant for the treatment of fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Oral non-benzodiazepine muscle-relaxants for people with acute and chronic primary low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of denosumab, risedronate, alendronate and teriparatide to treat male osteoporosis: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of abaloparatide, denosumab, teriparatide, oral bisphosphonates, and intravenous bisphosphonates in the treatment of male osteoporosis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Pooled it
- Long-Term Use of Muscle Relaxant Medications for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Research hotspots and frontiers in non-specific low back pain: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of guideline-recommended medications prescribed for treatment of low back pain.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Pooled it
- Optimal modes of mind-body exercise for treating chronic non-specific low back pain: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Surgical strategies for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- A randomized controlled trial evaluating the short-term efficacy of a single-administration intramuscular injection with the fixed combination of thiocolchicoside-diclofenac versus diclofenac monotherapy in patients with acute moderate-to-severe low back pain.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Trial
- Changes in Pregabalin Dispensing to Australians with Workers' Compensation Claims for Low Back Pain Following the Listing of Pregabalin on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Article
- GDF15 induces excessive activation of osteoclasts within the vertebral endplates leading to early endplate degeneration.JCI insight · 2026Article
- Saudi Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Low Back Pain and Sciatica in Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of discogenic low back pain: a phenotype-driven precision framework for surgical and interventional decision-making.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Changes in pharmacological management of low back pain: Real-world evidence from a 4-year comparison (2021-2025).Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2026Article
- Routine medical care for adults with musculoskeletal disorders in the Indigenous community of Pimicikamak, northern Manitoba before and after implementing the Global Spine Care Initiative model: a retrospective chart review with a 10-month post-implementation window: A collaborative research project between World Spine Care Canada (WSCC), Pimicikamack Okimawin, and Cross Lake Nursing Station.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025Article
- Effects of Hydrocodone Rescheduling on Pain Management Practices Among Older Breast Cancer Patients.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for low back pain.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and WHO ICTRP from inception to 23 February 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials of muscle relaxants compared with placebo, usual care, waiting list, or no treatment in adults (≥18 years) reporting non-specific low back pain. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations, respectively. Random effects meta-analytical models through restricted maximum likelihood estimation were used to estimate pooled effects and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Outcomes included pain intensity (measured on a 0-100 point scale), disability (0-100 point scale), acceptability (discontinuation of the drug for any reason during treatment), and safety (adverse events, serious adverse events, and number of participants who withdrew from the trial because of an adverse event).
results49 trials were included in the review, of which 31, sampling 6505 participants, were quantitatively analysed. For acute low back pain, very low certainty evidence showed that at two weeks or less non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics were associated with a reduction in pain intensity compared with control (mean difference -7.7, 95% confidence interval-12.1 to-3.3) but not a reduction in disability (-3.3, -7.3 to 0.7). Low and very low certainty evidence showed that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might increase the risk of an adverse event (relative risk 1.6, 1.2 to 2.0) and might have little to no effect on acceptability (0.8, 0.6 to 1.1) compared with control for acute low back pain, respectively. The number of trials investigating other muscle relaxants and different durations of low back pain were small and the certainty of evidence was reduced because most trials were at high risk of bias.
conclusionsConsiderable uncertainty exists about the clinical efficacy and safety of muscle relaxants. Very low and low certainty evidence shows that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might provide small but not clinically important reductions in pain intensity at or before two weeks and might increase the risk of an adverse event in acute low back pain, respectively. Large, high quality, placebo controlled trials are urgently needed to resolve uncertainty. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019126820 and Open Science Framework https://osf.io/mu2f5/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.