The effect of EMS, IFC, and TENS on patient-reported outcome measures for chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Transcutaneous electrotherapies have been widely used to treat CLBP but, with the partial exception of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), their effect on pain, disability, quality-of-life, and psychosocial outcomes have not been systematically reviewed. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to clarify the overall effect of transcutaneous electrotherapies on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in CLBP patients.

Methods

Four databases and two study registries were searched for studies that utilized transcutaneous electrotherapies as a primary intervention for CLBP, compared against active or passive controls. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. Studies were grouped by intervention vs. comparison, and by time of follow-up. Meta-analyses were conducted where appropriate.

Results

A total of 89 full-text were assessed for eligibility; 14 studies were included, with 6 in the meta-analyses (all TENS or mixed TENS). Pain: meta-analyses revealed no significant difference for TENS vs. active control, TENS vs. passive control, or mixed TENS vs. active control at post-intervention, nor for mixed TENS vs. active control at 1-month post-intervention. Interferential current (IFC) was more effective than active control (2 studies), while electromyostimulation (EMS) was generally superior to passive, but not active, controls (6 studies).

Disability

Meta-analyses revealed no significant difference for TENS vs. active control at post-intervention, mixed TENS vs. active control at post-intervention, or mixed TENS vs. active control at 1-month post-intervention. IFC was more effective than active control (2 studies), while the EMS results were mixed (6 studies). We were unable to perform meta-analyses for quality-of-life or psychosocial outcomes.

Conclusion

There is moderate evidence that TENS is similar to all controls for improving pain and disability. There is limited evidence that IFC is superior to active controls for improving pain and disability. There is limited evidence that EMS is superior to passive but not active controls for improving pain, and similar to all controls for improving disability.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=452851, Identifier (CRD42023452851).

Effect of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and cranio-cervical flexor training on pain and function in chronic mechanical neck pain: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic neck pain is known to be caused by the weakness of the deep neck flexors and disturbances in the mechanoreceptors and the proprioceptors of the cervical spine. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) is hypothesized to balance the relative stiffness and weakness of the muscles and activate the mechanoreceptors and proprioceptors.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate PNF techniques and the craniocervical flexor training (CCFT) techniques for pain and function in chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was conducted on 66 chronic mechanical neck pain patients randomly assigned to either the PNF or CCFT groups using block randomization for a duration of 4 weeks. Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Neck disability Index (NDI) and Active cervical range of motion (ACROM) were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of intervention. Data were analysed using independent t test and MANOVA.

RESULTS

The mean difference scores for NPRS and NDI were 2.18 and 15.72 in PNF group and 2.26 and 15.76 in the CCFT groups, respectively. Both the groups showed a change that was statistically significant. Also, the mean differences for the ACROM in all the planes in both the groups were statistically significant. However, the between group changes did not reveal any statistical significance in this study except for the right rotation in the CCFT group (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study concluded that the PNF treatment is also beneficial to pain and function in treating chronic mechanical neck pain patients as its results stand similar to the CCFT treatment, which is already established to be a reliable tool to treat this condition.

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Adults

PURPOSE

To evaluate benefits and harms of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic primary low back pain (CPLBP) in adults to inform a World Health Organization (WHO) standard clinical guideline.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from various electronic databases from July 1, 2007 to March 9, 2022. Eligible RCTs targeted TENS compared to placebo/sham, usual care, no intervention, or interventions with isolated TENS effects (i.e., combined TENS with treatment B versus treatment B alone) in adults with CPLBP. We extracted outcomes requested by the WHO Guideline Development Group, appraised the risk of bias, conducted meta-analyses where appropriate, and graded the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs (adults, n = 1027; adults ≥ 60 years, n = 28) out of 2010 records and 89 full text RCTs screened were included. The evidence suggested that TENS resulted in a marginal reduction in pain compared to sham (9 RCTs) in the immediate term (2 weeks) (mean difference (MD) = -0.90, 95% confidence interval  -1.54 to -0.26), and a reduction in pain catastrophizing in the short term (3 months) with TENS versus no intervention or interventions with TENS specific effects (1 RCT) (MD = -11.20, 95% CI -17.88 to -3.52). For other outcomes, little or no difference was found between TENS and the comparison interventions. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low certainty evidence, TENS resulted in brief and marginal reductions in pain (not deemed clinically important) and a short-term reduction in pain catastrophizing in adults with CPLBP, while little to no differences were found for other outcomes.

Exercise intervention for patients with chronic low back pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Purpose

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is an aging and public health issue that is a leading cause of disability worldwide and has a significant economic impact on a global scale. Treatments for CLBP are varied, and there is currently no study with high-quality evidence to show which treatment works best. Exercise therapy has the characteristics of minor harm, low cost, and convenient implementation. It has become a mainstream treatment method in clinics for chronic low back pain. However, there is insufficient evidence on which specific exercise regimen is more effective for chronic non-specific low back pain. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of different exercise therapies on chronic low back pain and provide a reference for exercise regimens in CLBP patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to 10 May 2022. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used for selection. We collected information from studies to compare the effects of 20 exercise interventions on patients with chronic low back pain.

Results

This study included 75 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 5,254 participants. Network meta-analysis results showed that tai chi [standardized mean difference (SMD), -2.11; 95% CI, -3.62 to -0.61], yoga (SMD, -1.76; 95% CI -2.72 to -0.81), Pilates exercise (SMD, -1.52; 95% CI, -2.68, to -0.36), and sling exercise (SMD, -1.19; 95% CI, -2.07 to -0.30) showed a better pain improvement than conventional rehabilitation. Tai chi (SMD, -2.42; 95% CI, -3.81 to -1.03) and yoga (SMD, -2.07; 95% CI, -2.80 to -1.34) showed a better pain improvement than no intervention provided. Yoga (SMD, -1.72; 95% CI, -2.91 to -0.53) and core or stabilization exercises (SMD, -1.04; 95% CI, -1.80 to -0.28) showed a better physical function improvement than conventional rehabilitation. Yoga (SMD, -1.81; 95% CI, -2.78 to -0.83) and core or stabilization exercises (SMD, -1.13; 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.59) showed a better physical function improvement than no intervention provided.

Conclusion

Compared with conventional rehabilitation and no intervention provided, tai chi, toga, Pilates exercise, sling exercise, motor control exercise, and core or stabilization exercises significantly improved CLBP in patients. Compared with conventional rehabilitation and no intervention provided, yoga and core or stabilization exercises were statistically significant in improving physical function in patients with CLBP. Due to the limitations of the quality and quantity of the included studies, it is difficult to make a definitive recommendation before more large-scale and high-quality RCTs are conducted.

The Effect of Transcutaneous Electrotherapy on Lumbar Range of Motion and Paraspinal Muscle Characteristics in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) affects paraspinal muscle size, quality (e.g., fatty infiltration), range of motion (ROM), and strength. Although transcutaneous electrotherapies are used to treat CLBP, their effects on paraspinal-related outcomes are not fully known. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the overall effect of transcutaneous electrotherapies on trunk/lumbar ROM, paraspinal muscle morphology, and trunk muscle function (including strength and endurance) in CLBP patients. A systematic search of four databases and two study registers was conducted between 1 February 2022 and 15 September 2022. Two reviewers were responsible for screening and data extraction. Of the 3939 independent records screened, 10 were included in the systematic review and 2 in the meta-analysis. The results suggest there is limited evidence that both EMS and EMS plus exercise are superior to passive and active controls, respectively, for improving trunk muscle endurance. There is limited evidence that neither TENS nor mixed TENS are superior to controls for improving trunk muscle endurance. There is limited evidence that NMES is superior to passive controls for improving trunk muscle strength. The effect of transcutaneous electrotherapy on the other investigated outcomes was inconclusive. Future transcutaneous electrotherapy studies should focus on paraspinal-based outcomes that are under-studied.

Comparing the effect of rhythmic stabilization and combination of isotonic technique on grip strength, pinch strength and dexterity of hand among middle aged healthy individuals - a randomized clinical trial

Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the effects of Rhythmic Stabilization and a combination of isotonic technique on grip  strength, pinch strength, and dexterity of hand among middle aged healthy individuals. Methods Forty middle aged healthy individuals were selected on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants were randomly allocated to two groups, with 20 in group A (Rhythmic Stabilization) and 20 in group B (Combination of Isotonic Technique). Treatment was given for 4 weeks, thrice a week. Outcome measures: grip strength, pinch strength, and dexterity were assessed by the Jamar hand dynamometer, the Pinch gauge, and the Perdue peg board, respectively. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. Results Notably, Group A participants showed a significant improvement in all outcome measures compared to Group B (p<0.05) when compared. Both the interventions were effective for dexterity outcome in both groups (p<0.05).  Conclusion: This study provides evidence that application of Rhythmic Stabilization improves grip strength and pinch strength.  This suggests that static Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) exercises performed on the fingers can improve dexterity, grip strength, and pinch strength in the middle-aged population. Highlights As age increases, there is decrease in grip strength and dexterity of a person. The grip strength, finger strength and dexterity are inter-related. The Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation increases strength of muscles. The static PNF exercises are more effective than the dynamic PNF exercises to improve strength of grip strength, finger strength and dexterity.

Efficacy and safety of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation for chronic low back pain: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation for chronic low back pain.

Materials and methods: Eleven databases were searched from their inception through January 2021. The primary outcomes were pain intensity, individual activities, quality of life, and adverse events.

Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 184 patients (mean age: 37.8±3.1 years; range, 35 to 50 years) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled effect size showed proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation, relieved pain (standard means difference [SMD]: -0.835, 95% CI: -1.139 to -0.531, p<0.001, n=4), and improved individual activity (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, SMD: -1.765, 95% CI: -2.642 to -0.888, p<0.001, n=2; Oswestry Disability Index, SMD: -0.893, 95% CI: -1.434 to -0.352, p=0.001, n=1) for chronic low back pain (CLBP).

Conclusion: This study verified that proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation could relieve pain and improve individual activities without serious adverse events in patients with CLBP; however, it should be cautiously recommended due to the small number of included RCTs.

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.

Characterising the Features of 381 Clinical Studies Evaluating Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Pain Relief: A Secondary Analysis of the Meta-TENS Study to Improve Future Research

Background and Objectives: Characterising the features of methodologies, clinical attributes and intervention protocols, of studies is valuable to advise directions for research and practice. This article reports the findings of a secondary analysis of the features from studies screened as part of a large systematic review of TENS (the meta-TENS study). Materials and Methods: A descriptive analysis was performed on information associated with methodology, sample populations and intervention protocols from 381 randomised controlled trials (24,532 participants) evaluating TENS delivered at a strong comfortable intensity at the painful site in adults with pain, irrespective of diagnosis. Results: Studies were conducted in 43 countries commonly using parallel group design (n = 334) and one comparator group (n = 231). Mean ± standard deviation (SD) study sample size (64.05 ± 58.29 participants) and TENS group size (27.67 ± 21.90 participants) were small, with only 13 of 381 studies having 100 participants or more in the TENS group. Most TENS interventions were ‘high frequency’ (>10 pps, n = 276) and using 100 Hz (109/353 reports that stated a pulse frequency value). Of 476 comparator groups, 54.2% were active treatments (i.e., analgesic medication(s), exercise, manual therapies and electrophysical agents). Of 202 placebo comparator groups, 155 used a TENS device that did not deliver currents. At least 216 of 383 study groups were able to access other treatments whilst receiving TENS. Only 136 out of 381 reports included a statement about adverse events. Conclusions: Clinical studies on TENS are dominated by small parallel group evaluations of high frequency TENS that are often contaminated by concurrent treatment(s). Study reports tended focus on physiological and clinical implications rather than the veracity of methodology and findings. Previously published criteria for designing and reporting TENS studies were neglected and this should be corrected in future research using insights gleaned from this analysis.

Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training reduces pain and disability in individuals with chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

and purpose: Although proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) exercises are used in rehabilitation practice, their effects in patients with low back pain (LBP) remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of PNF training for pain and disability in patients with LBP.

METHODS

In this systematic review, we searched five databases from the earliest date available to October 2020. Three comparisons were performed: PNF versus control, PNF versus core strengthening, and PNF versus conventional physical therapy.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria (722 patients). PNF training improved pain (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.2 to -0.9, n = 174) and disability (SMD: -3.29; 95% CI: -5.3 to -1.3, n = 144) compared to the control. PNF training also yielded a greater benefit for pain reduction (mean difference [MD]: -1.8, 95% CI: -2.2 to -0.3, n = 177) and disability improvement (MD: -6.6, 95% CI: -9.3 to -3.8, n = 113) than did core strengthening.

CONCLUSION

PNF training seems to be a useful strategy for decreasing pain and improving disability in patients with LBP. However, the quality of evidence for the outcomes of both pain and disability was low to moderate.

Does TENS Reduce the Intensity of Acute and Chronic Pain? A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Characteristics and Outcomes of 169 Reviews and 49 Meta-Analyses

Background and Objectives: Uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) to alleviate pain spans half a century. There has been no attempt to synthesise the entire body of systematic review evidence. The aim of this comprehensive review was to critically appraise the characteristics and outcomes of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical efficacy of TENS for any type of acute and chronic pain in adults. Materials and Methods: We searched electronic databases for full reports of systematic reviews of studies, overviews of systematic reviews, and hybrid reviews that evaluated the efficacy of TENS for any type of clinical pain in adults. We screened reports against eligibility criteria and extracted data related to the characteristics and outcomes of the review, including effect size estimates. We conducted a descriptive analysis of extracted data. Results: We included 169 reviews consisting of eight overviews, seven hybrid reviews and 154 systematic reviews with 49 meta-analyses. A tally of authors' conclusions found a tendency toward benefits from TENS in 69/169 reviews, no benefits in 13/169 reviews, and inconclusive evidence in 87/169 reviews. Only three meta-analyses pooled sufficient data to have confidence in the effect size estimate (i.e., pooled analysis of >500 events). Lower pain intensity was found during TENS compared with control for chronic musculoskeletal pain and labour pain, and lower analgesic consumption was found post-surgery during TENS. The appraisal revealed repeated shortcomings in RCTs that have hindered confident judgements about efficacy, resulting in stagnation of evidence. Conclusions: Our appraisal reveals examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating benefit. There were no examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating no benefit. Therefore, we recommend that TENS should be considered as a treatment option. The considerable quantity of reviews with 'insufficient data' and meaningless findings have clouded the issue of efficacy. We offer solutions to these issues going forward.

Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization combined treatment on chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic low back pain (CLBP) requires a treatment period of ⩾ 6 weeks to decrease pain and disability and is ineffective as sole treatment. Instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) has rapid effects in musculoskeletal disorders.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effects of a 3-week combined TENS and IASTM treatment (TICT) on CLBP.

METHODS

Thirty-two young men with CLBP were randomly divided into the TICT and control groups (n= 16 each). Patients were evaluated with the visual analog (VAS) and face pain-rating scales (FPRS) for pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and passive straight leg raise (PSLR) test for flexibility, and the supine bridge test (SBT) for endurance before and after the treatment course. The TICT group received TICT on the lower back, glutes, and hamstrings, six times in 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Group, time, and group × time interaction effects on pain were significant (VAS and FPRS, all p< 0.001). Group × time interaction (ODI, p< 0.001; PSLR, p< 0.05; SBT, p< 0.01) and group (ODI, p< 0.05) and time main effects (ODI, p< 0.001; PSLR, p< 0.01; SBT, p< 0.001) on motor function were significant.

CONCLUSION

Thus, short-term TICT decreased pain level and increased motor function in CLBP patients, yet further investigation is needed on different age and gender groups.

Effectiveness of specific stabilization exercise compared with traditional trunk exercise in women with non-specific low back pain: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background

Non-specific low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. The primary physiotherapeutic treatment for LBP is physical exercise, but evidence suggesting a specific exercise as most appropriate for any given case is limited.

Objective

To determine if specific stabilization exercise (SSE) is more effective than traditional trunk exercise (TTE) in reducing levels of pain, disability and inflammation in women with non-specific low back pain (LBP).

Design

A pilot randomized controlled trial was conducted in Rovira i Virgili University, Catalonia.

Methods

Thirty-nine females experiencing non-specific LBP were included in two groups: the TTE program and SSE program, both were conducted by a physiotherapist during twenty sessions. The primary outcome was pain intensity (10-cm Visual Analogue Scale). Secondary outcomes were disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire), and inflammation (IL-6 and TNF-α plasma levels). Measurements were taken at baseline, at half intervention, at post-intervention, and a month later.

Results

Mean group differences in change from baseline to post-intervention for TTE were: -4.5 points (CI 3.3 to 5.6) for pain, -5.1 points (CI 3.0 to 7.3) for disability, 0.19 pg/mL (95% CI [-1.6-1.2]) for IL-6 levels, and 46.2 pg/mL (CI 13.0 to 85.3) for TNF-α levels. For SSE, differences were: -4.3 points (CI 3.1 to 5.6) for pain, -6.1 points (CI 3.7 to 8.6) for disability, 1.1 pg/mL (CI 0.0 to 2.1) for IL-6 levels , and 12.8 pg/mL (95% CI [-42.3-16.7]) for TNF-α levels. There were an insignificant effect size and no statistically significant overall mean differences between both groups.

Conclusion

This study suggests that both interventions (traditional trunk and specific stabilization exercises) are effective in reducing pain and disability in non-specific LBP patients, but the two programs produce different degrees of inflammation change.

Clinical trial registration number

NCT02103036.

Effectiveness of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation on Pain Intensity and Functional Disability in Patients with Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to investigate the effectiveness of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) training on back pain intensity and functional disability in people with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

Totally, five electronic databases, including PubMed/Medline (NLM), Scopus, Google Scholar, PEDro, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials were searched up to October 31, 2018. Clinical trials with a concurrent comparison group (s) that compared the effectiveness of PNF training with any other physical therapy intervention were selected. Publication language was restricted to English language articles. Methodologic quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. The measures of continuous variables were summarized as Hedges's g.

RESULTS

In total, 20 eligible trials were identified with 965 LBP patients. A large effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-2.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]=3.23 to -1.05) and significant effect were observed favoring the use of PNF training to alleviate back pain intensity in patients with LBP. Moreover, large effect size and the significant result were also determined for the effect of PNF training on functional disability improvement (SMD=-2.68, 95% CI=-3.36 to -2.00) in population with LBP. A qualitative synthesis of results indicated that PNF training can significantly improve sagittal spine ROM. Statistical heterogeneity analysis showed that there was considerable statistical heterogeneity among the selected trials for the primary outcomes (I2 ≥ 86.6%).

CONCLUSION

There is a low quality of evidence and weak strength of recommendation that PNF training has positive effects on back pain and disability in LBP people. Further high-quality randomized clinical trials regarding long-term effects of PNF training versus validated control intervention in a clinical setting is recommendable.

Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis

Objective

Examine the effectiveness of specific modes of exercise training in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP).

Design

Network meta-analysis (NMA).

Data sources

MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, CENTRAL.

Eligibility criteria

Exercise training randomised controlled/clinical trials in adults with NSCLBP.

Results

Among 9543 records, 89 studies (patients=5578) were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 70 (pain), 63 (physical function), 16 (mental health) and 4 (trunk muscle strength) for NMA. The NMA consistency model revealed that the following exercise training modalities had the highest probability (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA)) of being best when compared with true control: Pilates for pain (SUCRA=100%; pooled standardised mean difference (95% CI): −1.86 (–2.54 to –1.19)), resistance (SUCRA=80%; −1.14 (–1.71 to –0.56)) and stabilisation/motor control (SUCRA=80%; −1.13 (–1.53 to –0.74)) for physical function and resistance (SUCRA=80%; −1.26 (–2.10 to –0.41)) and aerobic (SUCRA=80%; −1.18 (–2.20 to –0.15)) for mental health. True control was most likely (SUCRA≤10%) to be the worst treatment for all outcomes, followed by therapist hands-off control for pain (SUCRA=10%; 0.09 (–0.71 to 0.89)) and physical function (SUCRA=20%; −0.31 (–0.94 to 0.32)) and therapist hands-on control for mental health (SUCRA=20%; −0.31 (–1.31 to 0.70)). Stretching and McKenzie exercise effect sizes did not differ to true control for pain or function (p>0.095; SUCRA<40%). NMA was not possible for trunk muscle endurance or analgesic medication. The quality of the synthesised evidence was low according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria.

Summary/conclusion

There is low quality evidence that Pilates, stabilisation/motor control, resistance training and aerobic exercise training are the most effective treatments, pending outcome of interest, for adults with NSCLBP. Exercise training may also be more effective than therapist hands-on treatment. Heterogeneity among studies and the fact that there are few studies with low risk of bias are both limitations.

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Background and Objectives

This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to a control and to other nerve stimulation therapies (NSTs) for the treatment of chronic back pain.

Methods

Citations were identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2014 using the following keywords: nerve stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, back pain, chronic pain. Control treatments included sham, placebo, or medication only. Other NSTs included electroacupuncture, percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and percutaneous neuromodulation therapy.

Results

Twelve randomized controlled trials including 700 patients were included in the analysis. The efficacy of TENS was similar to that of control treatment for providing pain relief (standardized difference in means [SDM] = −0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.58 to 0.18; P = 0.293). Other types of NSTs were more effective than TENS in providing pain relief (SDM = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.15–1.57; P = 0.017). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was more effective than control treatment in improving functional disability only in patients with follow-up of less than 6 weeks (SDM = −1.24; 95% CI, −1.83 to −0.65; P < 0.001). There was no difference in functional disability outcomes between TENS and other NSTs.

Conclusions

These results suggest that TENS does not improve symptoms of lower back pain, but may offer short-term improvement of functional disability.

Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training improves pain-related and balance outcomes in working-age patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training and general trunk exercises have been applied to treat chronic low back pain patients. However, there is currently little study to support the use of one treated intervention over the other to improve clinical outcomes and balance ability.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training on pain intensity, disability and static balance ability in working-age patients with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

Forty-four chronic low back pain participants aged 18-50 years were randomized either to a three-week proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training or to a control group receiving general trunk exercises. Pain intensity, disability and static balance ability were measured before and after the three-week intervention.

RESULTS

The proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training intervention showed a statistically significantly greater reduction in pain intensity and improved functional disability than the controls at three weeks (between-group difference: pain intensity 1.22 score, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.88, p<0.001; disability 2.23 score, 95% CI: 1.22 to 3.24, p<0.001. The proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training intervention also had statistically better parameters of static balance ability than the control group (between-group difference: ellipse sway area during eye opened and closed conditions 129.09mm², 95% CI: 64.93 to 175.25, p<0.01 and 336.27mm², 95% CI: 109.67 to 562.87, p<0.05, respectively; the centre of pressure velocity during eye opened and eye closed conditions 6.68mm/s, 95% CI: 4.41 to 8.95, p<0.01 and 6.77mm/s, 95% CI: 4.01 to 9.54, p<0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The three-week proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training provides better pain intensity, disability and static balance ability than general trunk exercises for working-age individuals with chronic low back pain but the effects do not reach the clinical meaningful level. The therapists should consider carefully when making recommendations regarding these interventions, taking into account effectiveness and costs.

Effects of two proprioceptive training programs on ankle range of motion, pain, functional and balance performance in individuals with ankle sprain

BACKGROUND

Following ankle sprain, residual symptoms are often apparent, and proprioceptive training is a treatment approach. Evidence, however, is limited and the optimal program has to be identified.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of two post-acute supervised proprioceptive training programs in individuals with ankle sprain.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from a physiotherapy center for ankle sprain rehabilitation. In a pre-post treatment, blinded-assessor design, 22 individuals were randomly allocated to a balance or a proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) group. Both groups received 10 rehabilitation sessions, within a six-week period. Dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), pain, functional and balance performance were assessed at baseline, at the end of training and eight weeks after training.

RESULTS

Follow-up data were provided for 20 individuals. Eight weeks after training, statistically significant (p< 0.017) improvements were found in dorsiflexion ROM and most functional performance measures for both balance and PNF groups. Eight weeks after training, significant (p< 0.017) improvements in the frontal plane balance test and pain were observed for the balance group.

CONCLUSIONS

Balance and PNF programs are recommended in clinical practice for improving ankle ROM and functional performance in individuals with sprain. Balance programs are also recommended for pain relief.

Meta-analysis of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for relief of spinal pain

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis analysing the existing data on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) or interferential current (IFC) for chronic low back pain (CLBP) and/or neck pain (CNP) taking into account intensity and timing of stimulation, examining pain, function and disability. Seven electronic databases were searched for TENS or IFC treatment in non-specific CLBP or CNP. Four reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TENS or IFC intervention in adult individuals with non-specific CLBP or CNP. Primary outcomes were for self-reported pain intensity and back-specific disability. Two reviewers performed quality assessment, and two reviewers extracted data using a standardized form. Nine RCTs were selected (eight CLBP; one CNP), and seven studies with complete data sets were included for meta-analysis (655 participants). For CLBP, meta-analysis shows TENS/IFC intervention, independent of time of assessment, was significantly different from placebo/control (p < 0.02). TENS/IFC intervention was better than placebo/control, during therapy (p = 0.02), but not immediately after therapy (p = 0.08), or 1-3 months after therapy (p = 0.99). Analysis for adequate stimulation parameters was not significantly different, and there was no effect on disability. This systematic review provides inconclusive evidence of TENS benefits in low back pain patients because the quality of the studies was low, and adequate parameters and timing of assessment were not uniformly used or reported. Without additional high-quality clinical trials using sufficient sample sizes and adequate parameters and outcome assessments, the outcomes of this review are likely to remain unchanged.

SIGNIFICANCE

These data highlight the need for additional high-quality RCTs to examine the effects of TENS in CLBP. Trials should consider intensity of stimulation, timing of outcome assessment and assessment of pain, disability and function.

A randomized controlled trial on the long-term effects of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation training, on pain-related outcomes and back muscle activity, in patients with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

The role of exercise therapy in improving pain-related clinical outcomes and trunk muscle activity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) has been widely reported. There is little information on the effect of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) training in patients with CLBP. The purpose of the present study was therefore to investigate the persistence of the effects of PNF training on pain intensity, functional disability, patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and lower back muscle activity in patients with CLBP.

METHODS

Forty-two participants with CLBP were randomly assigned either to 4-week PNF training or to a control group receiving a Low back pain educational booklet. Pain-related outcomes, including pain intensity, functional disability, patient satisfaction, HRQOL and lumbar erector spinae (LES) muscle activity, were measured before and after the intervention, and at a follow-up session 12 weeks after the last intervention session.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, after undergoing a 4-week PNF training intervention, participants showed a significant reduction in pain intensity and functional disability, and improved patient satisfaction and HRQOL (p < 0.01). These effects were still significant at the 12-week follow-up assessment (p < 0.01). LES muscle activity in the PNF training group was significantly increased throughout the measurement periods compared with controls (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that 4-week PNF training has positive long-term effects on pain-related outcomes, and increases lower back muscle activity in patients with CLBP.

Motor control exercise for acute non-specific low back pain

BACKGROUND

Motor control exercise (MCE) is used by healthcare professionals worldwide as a common treatment for low back pain (LBP). However, the effectiveness of this intervention for acute LBP remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), four other databases and two trial registers from their inception to April 2015, tracked citations and searched reference lists. We placed no limitations on language nor on publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP. We considered trials comparing MCE versus no treatment, versus another type of treatment or added as a supplement to other interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. Secondary outcomes were function, quality of life and recurrence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened for potentially eligible studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. A third independent review author resolved disagreements. We examined MCE in the following comparisons: (1) MCE versus spinal manipulative therapy; (2) MCE versus other exercises; and (3) MCE as a supplement to medical management. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the quality of evidence. For missing or unclear information, we contacted study authors. We considered the following follow-up intervals: short term (less than three months after randomisation); intermediate term (at least three months but within 12 months after randomisation); and long term (12 months or longer after randomisation).

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials in this review (n = 197 participants). Study sample sizes ranged from 33 to 123 participants. Low-quality evidence indicates no clinically important differences between MCE and spinal manipulative therapy for pain at short term and for disability at short term and long term. Low-quality evidence also suggests no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for pain at short or intermediate term and for disability at intermediate term or long term follow-up. Moderate-quality evidence shows no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for disability at short term follow-up. Finally, very low-quality evidence indicates that addition of MCE to medical management does not provide clinically important improvement for pain or disability at short term follow-up. For recurrence at one year, very low-quality evidence suggests that MCE and medical management decrease the risk of recurrence by 64% compared with medical management alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified only three small trials that also evaluated different comparisons; therefore, no firm conclusions can be drawn on the effectiveness of MCE for acute LBP. Evidence of very low to moderate quality indicates that MCE showed no benefit over spinal manipulative therapy, other forms of exercise or medical treatment in decreasing pain and disability among patients with acute and subacute low back pain. Whether MCE can prevent recurrences of LBP remains uncertain.

Motor control exercise for chronic non-specific low-back pain

BACKGROUND

Non-specific low back pain (LBP) is a common condition. It is reported to be a major health and socioeconomic problem associated with work absenteeism, disability and high costs for patients and society. Exercise is a modestly effective treatment for chronic LBP. However, current evidence suggests that no single form of exercise is superior to another. Among the most commonly used exercise interventions is motor control exercise (MCE). MCE intervention focuses on the activation of the deep trunk muscles and targets the restoration of control and co-ordination of these muscles, progressing to more complex and functional tasks integrating the activation of deep and global trunk muscles. While there are previous systematic reviews of the effectiveness of MCE, recently published trials justify an updated systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of MCE in patients with chronic non-specific LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases and two trials registers from their inception up to April 2015. We also performed citation tracking and searched the reference lists of reviews and eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of MCE in patients with chronic non-specific LBP. We included trials comparing MCE with no treatment, another treatment or that added MCE as a supplement to other interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. We considered function, quality of life, return to work or recurrence as secondary outcomes. All outcomes must have been measured with a valid and reliable instrument.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors screened the search results, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data. A third independent review author resolved any disagreement. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Back and Neck (CBN) Review Group expanded 12-item criteria (Furlan 2009). We extracted mean scores, standard deviations and sample sizes from the included trials, and if this information was not provided we calculated or estimated them using methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook. We also contacted the authors of the trials for any missing or unclear information. We considered the following time points: short-term (less than three months after randomisation); intermediate (at least three months but less than 12 months after randomisation); and long-term (12 months or more after randomisation) follow-up. We assessed heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots, and by calculating the Chi(2) test and the I(2) statistic. We combined results in a meta-analysis expressed as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 trials (n = 2431) in this review. The study sample sizes ranged from 20 to 323 participants. We considered a total of 76.6% of the included trials to have a low risk of bias, representing 86% of all participants. There is low to high quality evidence that MCE is not clinically more effective than other exercises for all follow-up periods and outcomes tested. When compared with minimal intervention, there is low to moderate quality evidence that MCE is effective for improving pain at short, intermediate and long-term follow-up with medium effect sizes (long-term, MD -12.97; 95% CI -18.51 to -7.42). There was also a clinically important difference for the outcomes function and global impression of recovery compared with minimal intervention. There is moderate to high quality evidence that there is no clinically important difference between MCE and manual therapy for all follow-up periods and outcomes tested. Finally, there is very low to low quality evidence that MCE is clinically more effective than exercise and electrophysical agents (EPA) for pain, disability, global impression of recovery and quality of life with medium to large effect sizes (pain at short term, MD -30.18; 95% CI -35.32 to -25.05). Minor or no adverse events were reported in the included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low to moderate quality evidence that MCE has a clinically important effect compared with a minimal intervention for chronic low back pain. There is very low to low quality evidence that MCE has a clinically important effect compared with exercise plus EPA. There is moderate to high quality evidence that MCE provides similar outcomes to manual therapies and low to moderate quality evidence that it provides similar outcomes to other forms of exercises. Given the evidence that MCE is not superior to other forms of exercise, the choice of exercise for chronic LBP should probably depend on patient or therapist preferences, therapist training, costs and safety.

Evaluation of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation as a Treatment of Neck Pain due to Musculoskeletal Disorders

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to evaluate transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as a treatment for neck pain due to musculoskeletal disorders within the context of a physiotherapy treatment.

METHODS

Thirty subjects with neck pain were randomly allocated to two groups, treated with either TENS (n = 15) or placebo (n = 15). Each subject received one session for one hour. All subjects were evaluated before, during treatment, after switch off and again a week after by using Myometer machine. All subjects completed the follow-up assessment. Subjects referred for out-subjects' physiotherapy department, fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria, took part in the study.

RESULTS

The assessments were compared and used to measure outcome treatment. Improvement in their condition was measured in terms of a reduction in the individual's level of pain during the week after the end of the first session. At the end of the first session, the study showed that 11 subjects (73%) in the treatment and 7 subjects (43%) in the control groups had gained marked improvement. These results are statistically highly significant, (P = 0.01) at the end of the follow-up assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

A conclusion could be drawn that a single intense TENS treatment is an effective treatment for neck pain due to musculoskeletal disorders. On the other hand, TENS showed an effective pain relief with subjects who have a mild neck pain rather than those with severe symptoms.

KEYWORDS

Musculoskeletal disorders; Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; Neck pain.