[Chronic low back pain : Comparison of mobilization and core stability exercises]

Physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches in patients with chronic low-back pain: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis

Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a major cause of disability and healthcare expenditure worldwide. Its prevalence is increasing globally from somatic and psychosocial factors. While non-pharmacological management, and in particular physiotherapy, has been recommended as a first-line treatment for cLBP, it is not clear what type of physiotherapeutic approach is the most effective in terms of pain reduction and function improvement. This analysis is rendered more difficult by the vast number of available therapies and a lack of a widely accepted classification that can effectively highlight the differences in the outcomes of different management options. This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. In January 2024, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. All the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy of physiotherapy programs in patients with cLBP were accessed. Studies reporting on non-specific or mechanical cLPB were included. Data concerning the Visual Analogic Scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Data from 12,773 patients were collected. The mean symptom duration was 61.2 ± 51.0 months and the mean follow-up was 4.3 ± 5.9 months. The mean age was 44.5 ± 9.4 years. The mean BMI was 25.8 ± 2.9 kg/m2. The Adapted Physical Exercise group evidenced the lowest pain score, followed by Multidisciplinary and Adapted Training Exercise/Complementary Medicine. The Adapted Physical Exercise group evidenced the lowest RMQ score followed by Therapeutic Exercises and Multidisciplinary. The Multidisciplinary group evidenced the lowest ODI score, followed by Adapted Physical Exercise and Physical Agent modalities. Within the considered physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches to manage nonspecific and/or mechanic cLBP, adapted physical exercise, physical agent modalities, and a multidisciplinary approach might represent the most effective strategy to reduce pain and disability.

Best Exercise Options for Reducing Pain and Disability in Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain: Pilates, Strength, Core-Based, and Mind-Body. A Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine which type of exercise is best for reducing pain and disability in adults with chronic low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Systematic review with a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

LITERATURE SEARCH

Six electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to July 2021.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs testing the effects of exercise on reducing self-perceived pain or disability in adults (aged 18-65 years) with chronic LBP.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We followed the PRISMA-NMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, incorporating NMAs of health care interventions) statement when reporting our NMA. A frequentist NMA was conducted. The probability of each intervention being the most effective was conducted according to surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.

RESULTS

We included 118 trials (9710 participants). There were 28 head-to-head comparisons, 7 indirect comparisons for pain, and 8 indirect comparisons for disability. Compared with control, all types of physical exercises were effective for improving pain and disability, except for stretching exercises (for reducing pain) and the McKenzie method (for reducing disability). The most effective interventions for reducing pain were Pilates, mind-body, and core-based exercises. The most effective interventions for reducing disability were Pilates, strength, and core-based exercises. On SUCRA analysis, Pilates had the highest likelihood for reducing pain (93%) and disability (98%).

CONCLUSION

Although most exercise interventions had benefits for managing pain and disability in chronic LBP, the most beneficial programs were those that included (1) at least 1 to 2 sessions per week of Pilates or strength exercises; (2) sessions of less than 60 minutes of core-based, strength, or mind-body exercises; and (3) training programs from 3 to 9 weeks of Pilates and core-based exercises. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(8):505-521. Epub: 19 June 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10671.

Kinesiological Treatment of Early Spine Osteoarthritis in a Motorcyclist

This case report speculates that the prolonged vibrations from enduro off-road sports are deleterious to the spine. The results of this case report may also aid sports physicians in better understanding this complex and relatively unknown phenomenon. No published data are present in the current literature that demonstrate the correlation between early spine osteoarthritis from enduro motorcycle overuse and the long-term management effects of a non-invasive kinesiological approach to reduce pain and inflammation and improve spine mobility and muscle strength.

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain has been the leading cause of disability globally for at least the past three decades and results in enormous direct healthcare and lost productivity costs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of exercise treatment on pain and functional limitations in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo and other conservative treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which includes the Cochrane Back and Neck trials register), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), and conducted citation searching of relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies. The review includes data for trials identified in searches up to 27 April 2018. All eligible trials have been identified through searches to 7 December 2020, but have not yet been extracted; these trials will be integrated in the next update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed exercise treatment compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo or other conservative treatment on the outcomes of pain or functional limitations for a population of adult participants with chronic non-specific low back pain of more than 12 weeks' duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened and assessed studies independently, with consensus. We extracted outcome data using electronic databases; pain and functional limitations outcomes were re-scaled to 0 to 100 points for meta-analyses where 0 is no pain or functional limitations. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and used GRADE to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence. When required, we contacted study authors to obtain missing data. To interpret meta-analysis results, we considered a 15-point difference in pain and a 10-point difference in functional limitations outcomes to be clinically important for the primary comparison of exercise versus no treatment, usual care or placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 249 trials of exercise treatment, including studies conducted in Europe (122 studies), Asia (38 studies), North America (33 studies), and the Middle East (24 studies). Sixty-one per cent of studies (151 trials) examined the effectiveness of two or more different types of exercise treatment, and 57% (142 trials) compared exercise treatment to a non-exercise comparison treatment. Study participants had a mean age of 43.7 years and, on average, 59% of study populations were female. Most of the trials were judged to be at risk of bias, including 79% at risk of performance bias due to difficulty blinding exercise treatments. We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise treatment is more effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons for pain outcomes at earliest follow-up (MD -15.2, 95% CI -18.3 to -12.2), a clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to heterogeneity. For the same comparison, there was moderate-certainty evidence for functional limitations outcomes (MD -6.8 (95% CI -8.3 to -5.3); this finding did not meet our prespecified threshold for minimal clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to some evidence of publication bias.  Compared to all other investigated conservative treatments, exercise treatment was found to have improved pain (MD -9.1, 95% CI -12.6 to -5.6) and functional limitations outcomes (MD -4.1, 95% CI -6.0 to -2.2). These effects did not meet our prespecified threshold for clinically important difference. Subgroup analysis of pain outcomes suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than education alone (MD -12.2, 95% CI -19.4 to -5.0) or non-exercise physical therapy (MD -10.4, 95% CI -15.2 to -5.6), but with no differences observed for manual therapy (MD 1.0, 95% CI -3.1 to 5.1). In studies that reported adverse effects (86 studies), one or more adverse effects were reported in 37 of 112 exercise groups (33%) and 12 of 42 comparison groups (29%). Twelve included studies reported measuring adverse effects in a systematic way, with a median of 0.14 (IQR 0.01 to 0.57) per participant in the exercise groups (mostly minor harms, e.g. muscle soreness), and 0.12 (IQR 0.02 to 0.32) in comparison groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise is probably effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo for pain. The observed treatment effect for the exercise compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons is small for functional limitations, not meeting our threshold for minimal clinically important difference. We also found exercise to have improved pain (low-certainty evidence) and functional limitations outcomes (moderate-certainty evidence) compared to other conservative treatments; however, these effects were small and not clinically important when considering all comparisons together. Subgroup analysis suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than advice or education alone, or electrotherapy, but with no differences observed for manual therapy treatments.

Comparison of efficacy of a supervised versus non-supervised physical therapy exercise program on the pain, functionality and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of supervised physical therapy program versus non-supervised on pain, functionality, fear of movement and quality of life in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain.

DESIGN

A randomized double-blind clinical trial.

SETTING

Clinical outpatient unit; home.

SUBJECTS

A total of 64 participants with non-specific chronic low back pain were randomized into either supervised exercise group (n = 32) or non-supervised home exercise group (n = 32).

INTERVENTIONS

The supervised group was treated with therapy exercises (strengthen lumbopelvic musculature), while the non-supervised received an informative session of the exercises, which were performed un-supervised at home. Both groups received three weekly sessions for eight weeks.

MAIN MEASURES

Pain, disability, fear of movement, quality of life, trunk muscle endurance and trunk anteflexion motion were assessed at baseline, two, and six months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Although analysis of variance (ANOVA) test showed statistically significant differences between groups for pain (P = 0.028; supervised: 2.5 ± 2.1; non-supervised: 3.5 ± 1.5) and disability for Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (P = 0.004; supervised: 3.1 ± 2.2; non-supervised: 5.1 ± 3.0) and for Oswestry Disability Index (P = 0.034; supervised: 14.5 ± 7.1; non-supervised: 19.2 ± 10.0) at 8 weeks immediately posttreatment, there were no differences between the groups in patient-rated pain, functionality, fear of movement and quality of life at six months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Patients with chronic low back pain who received supervised exercise showed more improvement in both the short and long term in all patient-rated outcomes over the non-supervised group, but the differences were small and not clinically significant.

Effects of supplemental heat therapy in multimodal treated chronic low back pain patients on strength and flexibility

BACKGROUND

The beneficial effects of thermotherapy on analgesia and relaxation are widely known for various diseases. To date, however, thermotherapy in chronic low back pain is not explicitly recommended in international guidelines. The effects of thermotherapy on biomechanical parameters within a multimodal back pain treatment concept are also unknown.

METHODS

Within a multimodal treatment concept, 176 patients with chronic low back pain were treated either with or without supplemental heat wrap therapy. The range of movement and strength parameters of the trunk in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and rotation were measured before and after 12 weeks of treatment.

FINDINGS

The range of movement as well as strength parameters of the trunk improved on average within the multimodal treatment. Patients receiving additional thermotherapy supplemental to basic multimodal treatment showed a further improvement of strength parameters regarding extension (P = 0.09, 1 - β = 0.41), rotation to the right (P = 0.09, 1 - β = 0.41) and rotation to the left (P = 0.08, 1 - β = 0.42) in comparison to those conducting only the multimodal treatment. No group differences were detected in flexibility.

INTERPRETATION

The implementation of thermotherapy for several hours a day (heat wrap therapy) in daily clinical practice additional to an individualized, evidence-based multimodal treatment concept can be recommended to enhance strength parameters. The potential causes of improved strength parameters as well as the meaning for the patients in activity of daily living are discussed.