celecoxib has been researched along with Low Back Ache in 18 studies
| Excerpt | Relevance | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| "To investigate whether respectively radial extracoporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) or a combination of rESWT, celecoxib and eperisone (rESWT + C + E) are superior in reducing pain in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (cnsLBP) compared to C + E alone (a standard treatment of this condition in China)." | 9.41 | Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial. ( Feng, Z; Guo, X; Li, L; Li, Y; Peng, Z; Schmitz, C; Yan, Z; Yang, Y; Zhang, Y, 2021) |
| "Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a global health problem, and gabapentin and pregabalin are often used in the treatment of patients without associated radiculopathy or neuropathy." | 9.41 | Pregabalin and gabapentin for chronic low back pain without radiculopathy: a systematic review. ( Oliveira, CAC; Poetscher, AW; Tatit, RT, 2023) |
| "In this randomized controlled trial, we compared the effect of celecoxib and acetaminophen on pain and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain." | 9.22 | Clinical Efficacy of Celecoxib Compared to Acetaminophen in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. ( Bedaiwi, MK; Haroon, N; Inman, RD; O'shea, FD; Omar, A; Salonen, D; Sari, I; Wallis, D, 2016) |
| "Chronic low back pain is a common clinical problem in both the human and canine population." | 6.87 | Intradiscal application of a PCLA-PEG-PCLA hydrogel loaded with celecoxib for the treatment of back pain in canines: What's in it for humans? ( Beukers, M; Bos, C; Creemers, LB; de Leeuw, M; Grinwis, GCM; Meij, BP; Plomp, SGM; Tellegen, AR; Tryfonidou, MA; van Dijk, M; Willems, N, 2018) |
| "Tramadol-acetaminophen was effective at reducing chronic LBP and conferred a prophylactic motivational effect in patients with chronic LBP." | 5.43 | Effect of Tramadol/Acetaminophen on Motivation in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. ( Nishida, K; Ozaki, T; Takei, Y; Tanaka, M; Tetsunaga, T, 2016) |
| "To investigate whether respectively radial extracoporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) or a combination of rESWT, celecoxib and eperisone (rESWT + C + E) are superior in reducing pain in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (cnsLBP) compared to C + E alone (a standard treatment of this condition in China)." | 5.41 | Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial. ( Feng, Z; Guo, X; Li, L; Li, Y; Peng, Z; Schmitz, C; Yan, Z; Yang, Y; Zhang, Y, 2021) |
| "Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a global health problem, and gabapentin and pregabalin are often used in the treatment of patients without associated radiculopathy or neuropathy." | 5.41 | Pregabalin and gabapentin for chronic low back pain without radiculopathy: a systematic review. ( Oliveira, CAC; Poetscher, AW; Tatit, RT, 2023) |
| "In this randomized controlled trial, we compared the effect of celecoxib and acetaminophen on pain and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain." | 5.22 | Clinical Efficacy of Celecoxib Compared to Acetaminophen in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. ( Bedaiwi, MK; Haroon, N; Inman, RD; O'shea, FD; Omar, A; Salonen, D; Sari, I; Wallis, D, 2016) |
| "Chronic low back pain is a common clinical problem in both the human and canine population." | 2.87 | Intradiscal application of a PCLA-PEG-PCLA hydrogel loaded with celecoxib for the treatment of back pain in canines: What's in it for humans? ( Beukers, M; Bos, C; Creemers, LB; de Leeuw, M; Grinwis, GCM; Meij, BP; Plomp, SGM; Tellegen, AR; Tryfonidou, MA; van Dijk, M; Willems, N, 2018) |
| " For older adult patients at higher risk for NSAID-related adverse effects, such as those who have gastrointestinal or cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or who are taking low-dose aspirin, opioids are recommended instead." | 2.49 | Opioids for chronic pain: new evidence, new strategies, safe prescribing. ( de Leon-Casasola, OA, 2013) |
| "Tramadol-acetaminophen was effective at reducing chronic LBP and conferred a prophylactic motivational effect in patients with chronic LBP." | 1.43 | Effect of Tramadol/Acetaminophen on Motivation in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. ( Nishida, K; Ozaki, T; Takei, Y; Tanaka, M; Tetsunaga, T, 2016) |
| "Celecoxib is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) which acts via specific inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 (synthesis of prostaglandins mediating pathological inflammation) but which preserves the homeostatic action of cyclooxygenase-1." | 1.32 | [Hypersensitivity to celecoxib]. ( Chiffoleau, A; Fradet, G; Huguenin, H; Robin-Le Nechet, A, 2003) |
| Timeframe | Studies, this research(%) | All Research% |
|---|---|---|
| pre-1990 | 0 (0.00) | 18.7374 |
| 1990's | 0 (0.00) | 18.2507 |
| 2000's | 4 (22.22) | 29.6817 |
| 2010's | 11 (61.11) | 24.3611 |
| 2020's | 3 (16.67) | 2.80 |
| Authors | Studies |
|---|---|
| Guo, X | 1 |
| Li, L | 1 |
| Yan, Z | 1 |
| Li, Y | 1 |
| Peng, Z | 1 |
| Yang, Y | 1 |
| Zhang, Y | 1 |
| Schmitz, C | 1 |
| Feng, Z | 1 |
| Antonen, EG | 1 |
| Kruchek, MM | 1 |
| Nikitina, MV | 1 |
| Tatit, RT | 1 |
| Poetscher, AW | 1 |
| Oliveira, CAC | 1 |
| Tellegen, AR | 1 |
| Willems, N | 1 |
| Beukers, M | 1 |
| Grinwis, GCM | 1 |
| Plomp, SGM | 1 |
| Bos, C | 1 |
| van Dijk, M | 1 |
| de Leeuw, M | 1 |
| Creemers, LB | 1 |
| Tryfonidou, MA | 1 |
| Meij, BP | 1 |
| de Leon-Casasola, OA | 1 |
| Kim, JS | 1 |
| Ahmadinia, K | 1 |
| Li, X | 1 |
| Hamilton, JL | 1 |
| Andrews, S | 1 |
| Haralampus, CA | 1 |
| Xiao, G | 1 |
| Sohn, HM | 1 |
| You, JW | 1 |
| Seo, YS | 1 |
| Stein, GS | 1 |
| Van Wijnen, AJ | 1 |
| Kim, SG | 1 |
| Im, HJ | 1 |
| Bedaiwi, MK | 1 |
| Sari, I | 1 |
| Wallis, D | 1 |
| O'shea, FD | 1 |
| Salonen, D | 1 |
| Haroon, N | 1 |
| Omar, A | 1 |
| Inman, RD | 1 |
| Pi, ZB | 1 |
| Lin, H | 1 |
| He, GD | 1 |
| Cai, Z | 1 |
| Xu, XZ | 1 |
| Danilov, AB | 1 |
| Grigorenko, NV | 1 |
| Tetsunaga, T | 2 |
| Tanaka, M | 1 |
| Nishida, K | 1 |
| Takei, Y | 2 |
| Ozaki, T | 1 |
| Romanò, CL | 1 |
| Romanò, D | 1 |
| Bonora, C | 1 |
| Mineo, G | 1 |
| Bombardier, C | 2 |
| Evans, CJ | 1 |
| Katz, N | 2 |
| Mardekian, J | 1 |
| Zlateva, G | 1 |
| Simon, LS | 2 |
| Ponce, V | 1 |
| Muñoz-Bellido, F | 1 |
| Moreno, E | 1 |
| Laffond, E | 1 |
| González, A | 1 |
| Dávila, I | 1 |
| Wielage, R | 1 |
| Bansal, M | 1 |
| Wilson, K | 1 |
| Klein, R | 1 |
| Happich, M | 1 |
| Hasegawa, M | 1 |
| Horiki, N | 1 |
| Tanaka, K | 1 |
| Wakabayashi, H | 1 |
| Tano, S | 1 |
| Katsurahara, M | 1 |
| Uchida, A | 1 |
| Sudo, A | 1 |
| Giles, LG | 1 |
| Muller, R | 1 |
| Fradet, G | 1 |
| Robin-Le Nechet, A | 1 |
| Huguenin, H | 1 |
| Chiffoleau, A | 1 |
| Evans, C | 1 |
| West, C | 1 |
| Robbins, J | 1 |
| Copley-Merriman, C | 1 |
| Markman, J | 1 |
| Coombs, JH | 1 |
| Trial | Phase | Enrollment | Study Type | Start Date | Status | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Single Centre Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Radial Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Patients With Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain[NCT03337607] | 150 participants (Anticipated) | Interventional | 2017-11-13 | Recruiting | |||
| Comparative Effects of Shockwave Therapy and Maitland's Lumbar Mobilization on Pain, Disability and Range of Motion in Patients With Mechanical Low Back Pain[NCT05404997] | 26 participants (Anticipated) | Interventional | 2022-03-01 | Recruiting | |||
| Trigger Point Dry Needling vs Trigger Point Dry Needling With Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation for the Treatment of Sub-acute and Chronic Low Back Pain in a Military Population: A Randomized Crossover Design[NCT03539588] | 30 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2017-04-12 | Completed | |||
| Changes in Pressure Pain Thresholds and Basal Electromyographic Activities Following Spinal Mechanical Manipulation in Asymptomatic Subjects[NCT01469533] | 30 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2011-07-31 | Completed | |||
| Lumbar Stenosis Outcomes Research II: Opana IR Versus Placebo and Active Control (Darvocet) for the Treatment of Walking Impairment in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Double-Blind Randomized, Cross-Over Trial[NCT00652093] | Phase 4 | 24 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2008-03-31 | Terminated (stopped due to Removal of Darvocet from US market) | ||
| Lumbar Stenosis Outcomes Research (LUSTOR)- A Randomized, Double-blind, Cross-over Trial of Pregabalin vs. Diphenhydramine in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Neuropathic Low Back Pain[NCT00638443] | Phase 4 | 29 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2008-03-31 | Completed | ||
| [information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024] | |||||||
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. At defined intervals (every 30 seconds) subjects were asked what their pain level was according to the NRS. The area under the curve of present pain intensity is the total area combined for the amount of time the subject walked. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale * minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 76.0 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 95.7 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 95.0 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 86.4 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 123.3 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 79.6 |
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. At defined intervals subjects were asked what their pain level was according to the NRS. When the subject reached their maximum distance, they were asked their NRS score. This was recorded as final pain intensity. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 4.6 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 6.6 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 6.2 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 6.7 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 8.0 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 7.1 |
The mBPI is a series of questions that rates the severity and impact of pain on daily function. The questionnaire is made up of 4 pain severity items using the NRS scale, and seven 11-point pain interference scales (0 indicating no interference and 10 indicating complete interference). For the interference score, a total score of 10 indicates pain completely interferes with activities. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 3.7 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 4.2 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 2.7 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 4.3 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 6.2 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 2.8 |
The ODI is a set of 10 questions each with five choices (maximum score of 5 points per question) designed to determine how back pain has affected the ability to manage everyday life (pain intensity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sleeping, social life, traveling, and change positions). A score of 0 indicates no disability and total score of 50 would indicate 100% disability. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 37.9 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 98.4 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 38.0 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 44.1 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 37.0 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 29.7 |
Subjects were asked to rate their low back pain according to the PGA. PGA is the impact of disease activity. PGA was measured on a 5-point scale, where 1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 2.8 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 2.8 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 3.1 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 2.6 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 3.3 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 2.6 |
After the subject completed the treadmill test they were asked to immediately return to the seated position. At this point a timer was started. When the subjects pain level returned to baseline (level of pain subject felt in a seated position before walking) the time was stopped. This was recorded as recovery time. Maximum recovery time is 15 minutes. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 1.10 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 1.50 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 2.02 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 1.58 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 2.15 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 1.57 |
The RMDQ consists of 24 yes/no statements about activity limitations due to back pain. These questions center on movement, ambulation, and self-care activities. Positive (yes) answers each contribute 1 point to cumulative score with total scores ranging from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severely disabled). (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 12.8 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 15.3 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 13.2 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 15.2 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 13.7 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 7.4 |
The SSS is a series of questions asking about symptom severity, physical function, and satisfaction. The physical function section is a series of 5 questions (maximum 4 points per question) and asks to rate function for each question based on comfortably, sometimes with pain, always with pain, no functional ability. The total score (max=20) is divided by five. The maximum score for the physical function section (max=4) indicates no ability to function. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 2.5 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 2.5 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 2.6 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 2.6 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 2.6 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 2.2 |
The SSS is a series of questions asking about symptom severity, physical function, and satisfaction. The symptom severity section is a set of 7 questions (maximum score is 5 points per question) and asks to rate pain for each question based on no pain, mild, moderate, severe or very severe pain. The total score (maximum=35) is added up and divided by seven. The maximum score for the symptom severity section (score=5) indicates very severe symptom severity. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 2.6 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 2.9 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 3.2 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 3.2 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 3.6 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 2.9 |
Using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0=no pain, 10=worst pain imaginable)the time to first symptoms (Tfirst) with a NRS score greater than or equal to 4 (moderate pain level), with treadmill ambulation was measured. Patients were excluded from the trial if there pain at rest was greater than or equal to 4/10. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 1.73 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 3.02 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 3.93 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 2.65 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 0.83 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 5.43 |
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. When the subject reached their maximum distance, the treadmill testing was stopped. This was recorded as total distance based on number of minutes and seconds walked. Minutes was converted to meters based on calculation of defined speed of the treadmill. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | meters (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 266.6 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 249.5 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 177.9 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 290.1 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 160.8 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 294.8 |
The VAS asked subjects to place a mark indicative of their low back pain during the past day on a 100mm line, with 0mm representing no pain and 100mm representing extreme pain. (NCT00652093)
Timeframe: study visit
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Opana Then Darvocet Then Placebo | 51.3 |
| Opana Then Placebo Then Darvocet | 57.9 |
| Placebo Then Opana Then Darvocet | 56.2 |
| Placebo Then Darvocet Then Opana | 46.7 |
| Darvocet Then Opana Then Placebo | 63.3 |
| Darvocet Then Placebo Then Opana | 55.1 |
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. At defined intervals (every 30 seconds) subjects were asked what their pain level was according to the NRS. The area under the curve of present pain intensity multiplied by the amount of time the subject walked. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale * minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 100.59 |
| Diphenhydramine | 95.26 |
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. At defined intervals subjects were asked what their pain level was according to the NRS. When the subject reached their maximum distance, they were asked their NRS score. This was recorded as final pain intensity. Using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0=no pain, 10=worst pain imaginable)the time to first symptoms (Tfirst) with a NRS score greater than or equal to 4 (moderate pain level), with treadmill ambulation was measured. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 1.82 |
| Diphenhydramine | 1.53 |
The mBPI is a series of questions that rates the severity and impact of pain on daily function. The questionnaire is made up of 4 pain severity items using the NRS scale, and seven pain interference sub-scales. The final interference score is an average of the seven sub-scales (0 indicating no interference and 10 indicating complete interference). (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 3.70 |
| Diphenhydramine | 3.58 |
The ODI is a set of 10 questions each with five choices (maximum score of 5 points per question) designed to determine how back pain has affected the ability to manage everyday life (pain intensity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sleeping, social life, traveling, and change positions). A total score range of 0-50; score of 0 indicates no disability and a score of 50 would indicate 100% disability. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 37.77 |
| Diphenhydramine | 36.49 |
Subjects were asked to rate their low back pain according to the PGA. PGA is the impact of disease activity. PGA was measured on a 5-point scale, where 1=very good, 2=good, 3=fair, 4=poor, and 5=very poor. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 2.75 |
| Diphenhydramine | 2.83 |
After the subject completed the treadmill test they were asked to immediately return to the seated position. At this point a timer was started. When the subjects pain level returned to baseline (level of pain subject felt in a seated position before walking) the time was stopped. This was recorded as recovery time. Maximum recovery time is 15 minutes. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 2.36 |
| Diphenhydramine | 3.15 |
The RMDQ consists of 24 yes/no statements about activity limitations due to back pain. These questions center on movement, ambulation, and self-care activities. Positive (yes) answers each contribute 1 point to cumulative score with total scores ranging from 0 (no disability) to 24 (severely disabled). (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 12.98 |
| Diphenhydramine | 11.48 |
The SSS is a series of questions asking about symptom severity, physical function, and satisfaction. The symptom severity section is a set of 7 questions (maximum score is 5 points per question) and asks to rate pain for each question based on no pain, mild, moderate, severe or very severe pain. The total score (maximum=35) is added up and divided by seven. The maximum score for the symptom severity section (score=5) indicates very severe symptom severity. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 3.09 |
| Diphenhydramine | 2.94 |
The SSS is a series of questions asking about symptom severity, physical function, and satisfaction. The physical function section is a series of 5 questions (maximum 4 points per question) and asks to rate function for each question based on comfortably, sometimes with pain, always with pain, no functional ability. The total score (max=20) is divided by five. The maximum score for the physical function section (max=4) indicates no ability to function. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 2.40 |
| Diphenhydramine | 2.94 |
Using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0=no pain, 10=worst pain imaginable)the time to first symptoms (Tfirst) with a NRS score greater than or equal to 4 (moderate pain level), with treadmill ambulation was measured. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | minutes (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 2.52 |
| Diphenhydramine | 3.06 |
Subjects were instructed to walk on the treadmill and to tell the research coordinator to stop testing when they reached the point at which they typically would need to stop and sit down, or until 15 minutes had elapsed. When the subject reached their maximum distance, the treadmill testing was stopped. This was recorded as total distance based on number of minutes and seconds walked. Minutes was converted to meters based on calculation of defined speed of the treadmill. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | meters (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 237.49 |
| Diphenhydramine | 261.55 |
The VAS asked subjects to place a mark indicative of their low back pain during the past day on a 100mm line, with 0mm representing no pain and 100mm representing extreme pain. (NCT00638443)
Timeframe: 10 days
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pregabalin | 52.31 |
| Diphenhydramine | 46.31 |
4 reviews available for celecoxib and Low Back Ache
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Pregabalin and gabapentin for chronic low back pain without radiculopathy: a systematic review.
Topics: Celecoxib; Gabapentin; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pregabalin; Radiculopathy | 2023 |
Opioids for chronic pain: new evidence, new strategies, safe prescribing.
Topics: Age Factors; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; C | 2013 |
[An antinociceptive effect of chondroprotectors: a myth or a reality?].
Topics: Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; C-Reactive Protein; Celecoxib; Chondroitin Sulf | 2015 |
Cost-effectiveness of duloxetine in chronic low back pain: a Quebec societal perspective.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Amitriptyline; Analgesics; Cardiovascular Diseases; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; C | 2013 |
7 trials available for celecoxib and Low Back Ache
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial.
Topics: Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Propiophenones; Pr | 2021 |
Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial.
Topics: Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Propiophenones; Pr | 2021 |
Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial.
Topics: Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Propiophenones; Pr | 2021 |
Efficacy and safety of treating chronic nonspecific low back pain with radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), rESWT combined with celecoxib and eperisone (C + E) or C + E alone: a prospective, randomized trial.
Topics: Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Propiophenones; Pr | 2021 |
Intradiscal application of a PCLA-PEG-PCLA hydrogel loaded with celecoxib for the treatment of back pain in canines: What's in it for humans?
Topics: Animals; Back Pain; Biocompatible Materials; Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Cyclooxygenase 2; Dogs; Extrac | 2018 |
Clinical Efficacy of Celecoxib Compared to Acetaminophen in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Celecoxib; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Magnetic R | 2016 |
Randomized and controlled prospective trials of Ultrasound-guided spinal nerve posterior ramus pulsed radiofrequency treatment for lower back post-herpetic neuralgia.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Amines; Amitriptyline; Analgesics; Celecoxib; Cyclohexanecarboxyl | 2015 |
Pregabalin, celecoxib, and their combination for treatment of chronic low-back pain.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Analgesics; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Comb | 2009 |
The efficacy of rebamipide add-on therapy in arthritic patients with COX-2 selective inhibitor-related gastrointestinal events: a prospective, randomized, open-label blinded-endpoint pilot study by the GLORIA study group.
Topics: Alanine; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; E | 2013 |
Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Double-Bli | 2003 |
Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Double-Bli | 2003 |
Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Double-Bli | 2003 |
Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Double-Bli | 2003 |
7 other studies available for celecoxib and Low Back Ache
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
[Evaluation of the effectiveness of treatment of patients with nonspecific pain syndrome in the lower back with celecoxib and a combined preparation of B vitamins].
Topics: Adult; Celecoxib; Chronic Pain; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Male; Meloxicam; Middle Aged; Pain Me | 2022 |
Development of an Experimental Animal Model for Lower Back Pain by Percutaneous Injury-Induced Lumbar Facet Joint Osteoarthritis.
Topics: Animals; Celecoxib; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Models, Animal; | 2015 |
Effect of Tramadol/Acetaminophen on Motivation in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Analgesics, Opioid; Apathy; | 2016 |
Further qualification of a therapeutic responder index for patients with chronic low back pain.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Cyclooxy | 2011 |
Fixed drug eruption caused by etoricoxib with tolerance to celecoxib and parecoxib.
Topics: Aged; Arm; Celecoxib; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Drug Eruptions; Etoricoxib; Female; Humans; Isoxa | 2012 |
[Hypersensitivity to celecoxib].
Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury; Dr | 2003 |
Preliminary development of a responder index for chronic low back pain.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Clinical Trials as Topic | 2007 |
Preliminary development of a responder index for chronic low back pain.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Clinical Trials as Topic | 2007 |
Preliminary development of a responder index for chronic low back pain.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Clinical Trials as Topic | 2007 |
Preliminary development of a responder index for chronic low back pain.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Celecoxib; Chronic Disease; Clinical Trials as Topic | 2007 |