Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 285

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Enhanced Therapeutic Alliance Modulates Pain Intensity and Muscle Pain Sensitivity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: An Experimental Controlled Study

Fuentes, Jorge, Armijo-Olivo, Susan, Funabashi, Martha, Miciak, Maxi, Dick, Bruce, Warren, Sharon, Rashiq, Saifee, Magee, David J., Gross, Douglas P.·2014·Physical Therapy

Abstract

Background: Physical therapy influences chronic pain by means of the specific ingredient of an intervention as well as contextual factors including the setting and therapeutic alliance (TA) between provider and patient. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of enhanced versus limited TA on pain intensity and muscle pain sensitivity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) receiving either active or sham interferential current therapy (IFC). Design: An experimental controlled study with repeated measures was conducted. Participants were randomly divided into 4 groups: (1) AL (n=30), which included the application of active IFC combined with a limited TA; (2) SL (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with a limited TA; (3) AE (n=29), which received active IFC combined with an enhanced TA; and (4) SE (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with an enhanced TA. Methods: One hundred seventeen individuals with CLBP received a single session of active or sham IFC. Measurements included pain intensity as assessed with a numerical rating scale (PI-NRS) and muscle pain sensitivity as assessed via pressure pain threshold (PPT). Results: Mean differences on the PI-NRS were 1.83 cm (95% CI=14.3–20.3), 1.03 cm (95% CI=6.6–12.7), 3.13 cm (95% CI=27.2–33.3), and 2.22 cm (95% CI=18.9–25.0) for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively. Mean differences on PPTs were 1.2 kg (95% CI=0.7–1.6), 0.3 kg (95% CI=0.2–0.8), 2.0 kg (95% CI=1.6–2.5), and 1.7 kg (95% CI=1.3–2.1), for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively. Limitations: The study protocol aimed to test the immediate effect of the TA within a clinical laboratory setting. Conclusions: The context in which physical therapy interventions are offered has the potential to dramatically improve therapeutic effects. Enhanced TA combined with active IFC appears to lead to clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes when treating patients with CLBP.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2522/ptj.20130118

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 77 references

Cited by

See all 285

Metadata

Authors
Fuentes, J., Armijo-Olivo, S., Funabashi, M., Miciak, M., Dick, B., Warren, S., Rashiq, S., Magee, D. J., & Gross, D. P.
Venue
Physical Therapy
Published
2014-04-01
Volume
94
Issue
4
Pages
477-489
ISSN
  • 0031-9023 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-6724
OpenAlex
W2163587592
Cited by
285
References
77
FWCI
8.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Enhanced Therapeutic Alliance Modulates Pain Intensity and Muscle Pain Sensitivity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: An Experimental Controlled Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2522/ptj.20130118
The paper
Fuentes, J., Armijo-Olivo, S., Funabashi, M., Miciak, M., Dick, B., Warren, S., Rashiq, S., Magee, D. J., & Gross, D. P. (2014). Enhanced Therapeutic Alliance Modulates Pain Intensity and Muscle Pain Sensitivity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: An Experimental Controlled Study. Physical Therapy. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20130118

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.