↓ Skip to main content

Survey of integrative lumbar spinal stenosis treatment in Korean medicine doctors: preliminary data for clinical practice guidelines

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Survey of integrative lumbar spinal stenosis treatment in Korean medicine doctors: preliminary data for clinical practice guidelines
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12906-017-1942-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoon Jae Lee, Joon-Shik Shin, Jinho Lee, Me-riong Kim, Yong-jun Ahn, Ye-sle Shin, Ki Byung Park, Byung-Cheul Shin, Myeong Soo Lee, Joo-Hee Kim, Jae-Heung Cho, In-Hyuk Ha

Abstract

Considering that large variations exist amongst practitioners in lumbar disorder management and the significant costs that lumbar disorders incur, determining clinical practice patterns to provide preliminary data for standardization should be given higher priority. Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is commonly treated using integrative non-surgical methods by Korean medicine doctors (KMDs) in Korea, and this is the first study to assess current Korean medicine practice trends for LSS. A survey on KMD diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and decision-making in LSS treatment was developed in a 3-step procedure of preliminary drafting, revision based on extramural expert opinion, and final editing. The survey was conducted at the internal conference of a spine-specialty Korean medicine hospital on January 25th, 2015. The response rate was high at 79.19% (n = 118/149). Participants replied that they treated 7.3 ± 6.8 LSS patients/day using a multimodal treatment method consisting of acupuncture, pharmacopuncture, herbal medicine, Chuna manipulation, and electroacupuncture. Acupuncture mainly used Ashi points and MSAT, and pharmacopuncture mainly Shinbaro solution. The most frequently prescribed herbal medicine was Chungpa-jun, and the most commonly applied Chuna techniques were sidelying lumbar extension dysfunction correction technique, and prone lumbosacral joint distraction method. Radiological findings were mainly referred to for diagnosis, and clinical symptoms, age, radiological findings, and medical history were regarded to be important for prognosis. Participants replied that 7.8 ± 3.3 weeks were required for 50% reduction in pain, and 16.1 ± 7.7 weeks for 80% reduction. These results suggest that KMDs in Korea combine a conventional approach to LSS and a Korean medicine approach to low back pain for integration of empirical- and evidence-based diagnosis and treatment. The findings may contribute in bridging the divide between evidence and clinical practice guidelines for Korean medicine treatment of LSS and real-world clinical practice in future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 20%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Other 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 23 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Sports and Recreations 4 5%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2019.
All research outputs
#13,567,909
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,519
of 3,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,757
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#34
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.