A randomized clinical trial for the effect of static stretching and strengthening exercise on pelvic tilt angle in LBP patients

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Active Stretching of the Hamstrings and Core Control for Low Back Pain and Musculoskeletal Discomfort during Prolonged Sitting among Young People

Introduction: Stretching exercises are important in both the prevention and treatment of nonspecific low back pain (NLBP). The aim of this trial was to determine whether an 8-week active hamstring stretching protocol combined with core stabilization and education regarding the maintenance of a neutral lumbar spine during activities could reduce NLBP and low back discomfort during prolonged sitting among young people. Methods: Participants (52 students aged 18-25) were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the Experimental group (the hamstring stretching group) and the Control group (only education). The intervention was conducted for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity (VAS), low back discomfort (LBD), and functional disability (ODI). The secondary outcome measures were satisfaction with the intervention (GPE) and flexibility of the hamstring (SLR). Results: After the 8-week intervention in the E-group, results of VAS, ODI, and LBD were significantly lower comparing to baseline. In the C-group, no significant differences were observed. After the exercises program, there were differences between the E-group and C-group in VAS, LBD, GPE, and SLR tests (p < 0.05, p < 0.05, p < 0.05, and p < 0.0001, respectively). Conclusions: In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence that an eight-week program of active hamstring stretching and core stabilization exercises can significantly reduce NLBP and musculoskeletal discomfort during prolonged sitting in young adults. These findings highlight the importance of targeted exercise interventions in managing and preventing NLBP, particularly among sedentary populations. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings and explore their applicability to broader populations and over extended periods.

The effects of hamstring stretching exercises on pain intensity and function in low back pain patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objectives

This meta-analysis aims to synthesize the available data on the effectiveness of hamstring stretching exercises in relieving pain intensity and improving function for patients with low back pain.

Methods

Google Scholars, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, MEDLINE, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP were searched from inception to August 2023. We included randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of hamstring stretching exercises in patients with low back pain. The primary outcomes assessed were pain intensity, hamstring muscle flexibility, and function. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias were performed independently by two reviewers.

Results

Our searches retrieved 344 trials, of which 14 met the inclusion criteria for this review (n = 735 participants). The combined meta-analysis showed hamstring stretching resulted in lower pain scores (standardized mean difference = -0.72, 95% confidence interval: -1.35 to -0.09; I 2 = 89%, p = 0.03) in different categories of low back pain. Subgroup analysis showed that hamstring stretching led to a larger range of motion for cases of back pain with radiating pain (standardized mean difference = 2.39, 95% confidence interval: 1.76 to 3.02; I 2 = 0%, p < 0.001). The combined meta-analysis revealed that hamstring stretching resulted in lower Oswestry Disability Index scores in comparison to regular treatment, particularly in individuals suffering from low back pain across all subtypes (mean difference = -6.97, 95% confidence interval: -13.34 to -0.60; I 2 = 95%, p = 0.03).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of hamstring stretching exercises in reducing pain intensity in various categories of low back pain and improving the straight leg raise in patients experiencing back pain with radiating pain. Additionally, it highlights the improvement in function for patients with back pain across all subtypes.

An Eight-Week Randomized Controlled Trial of Active Mobilization of the Hamstrings for Non-Specific Low Back Pain and Musculoskeletal Discomfort during Prolonged Sitting among Young People: Study Protocol

Participants will be recruited from the Faculty of Physical Education and randomly assigned to either the hamstring stretching group or the control group with education only. The primary outcome measures will be pain intensity, musculoskeletal discomfort, and functional disability. Secondary outcome measures will be satisfaction with the intervention and flexibility of the hamstring. A total of 44 participants fulfilling the inclusion criteria will complete the study. As an increase in LBP frequency is observed, it seems justified to determine effective interventions for LBP and musculoskeletal discomfort in young people. The findings of this study will provide information about the effect of an 8-week intervention involving active hamstring flexibility exercises with hip flexion mobilization on the reduction of LBP and musculoskeletal discomfort during prolonged sitting in young adults. We hope this study will add to the development of ergonomic recommendations for young people with LBP.

Effects of Stretching or Strengthening Exercise on Spinal and Lumbopelvic Posture: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Abnormal posture (e.g. loss of lordosis) has been associated with the occurrence of musculoskeletal pain. Stretching tight muscles while strengthening the antagonists represents the most common method to treat the assumed muscle imbalance. However, despite its high popularity, there is no quantitative synthesis of the available evidence examining the effectiveness of the stretch-and-strengthen approach.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted, searching PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included controlled clinical trials investigating the effects of stretching or strengthening on spinal and lumbopelvic posture (e.g., pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, head tilt) in healthy individuals. Effect sizes were pooled using robust variance estimation. To rate the certainty about the evidence, the GRADE approach was applied.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies with 969 participants were identified. Neither acute (d = 0.01, p = 0.97) nor chronic stretching (d=-0.19, p = 0.16) had an impact on posture. Chronic strengthening was associated with large improvements (d=-0.83, p = 0.01), but no study examined acute effects. Strengthening was superior (d = 0.81, p = 0.004) to stretching. Sub-analyses found strengthening to be effective in the thoracic and cervical spine (d=-1.04, p = 0.005) but not in the lumbar and lumbopelvic region (d=-0.23, p = 0.25). Stretching was ineffective in all locations (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Moderate-certainty evidence does not support the use of stretching as a treatment of muscle imbalance. In contrast, therapists should focus on strengthening programs targeting weakened muscles.

Effect of Eutonia, Holistic Gymnastics, and Pilates on body posture for pre-adolescent girls: Randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Postural changes frequently occur in pre-adolescent girls, with sedentary lifestyle with reduced physical activity level as one of the risk factors.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of Eutonia, Holistic Gymnastics, and Pilates on body posture in pre-adolescent girls.

METHODS

A randomized prospective quantitative clinical trial was conducted. The study included girls aged 10-13 years and compared the effects of Eutonia, Holistic Gymnastics, and Pilates on body posture. The sample comprised 80 girls divided into three intervention groups as follows: Eutonia group, 26 girls; Holistic Gymnastics group, 27 girls; and Pilates group, 27 girls. Ten sessions of 1 h each were conducted on a weekly basis. Static posture was analyzed using the Postural Analysis Software SAPO; dynamic posture, using the modified Layout for Assessing Dynamic Posture LADy; and lifestyle, using the Body Posture Evaluation Instrument Back PEI questionnaire. The data were statistically analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) by Kruskal-Wallis' averages test at 5% significance level (p < 0,05).

RESULTS

The results showed that the three body movement practices improved the head inclination in the frontal plane (1,49°) and pelvic anteversion in the right (1,9°) and left profiles (2,09°). In addition, 25% of pre-teens started to carry their school bag correctly, improving their posture.

CONCLUSION

The body movement practices of Eutonia, Holistic Gymnastics, and Pilates improved head inclination, pelvic anteversion, and the correctness rate of carrying the schoolbag.

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.