Comparison of Lower Limb and Back Exercises for Runners with Chronic Low Back Pain

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.

Low back pain and biomechanical characteristics of back muscles in firefighters

Firefighters often experience low back pain (LBP), but their back muscle characteristics are not well studied. This study aimed to 1) compare the biomechanical characteristics of back muscles and self-reported back disabilities in frontline firefighters with and without LBP history, and 2) examine the relationships between back disability and biomechanical measurements. We recruited 42 male firefighters and assessed their perceived pain and disabilities, maximum isometric back extension strength, passive stiffness, and fatigability of the longissimus. 54.8% of the participants experienced LBP within the past year. Those indicating higher pain intensity also had greater disability as indicated by the Oswestry Disability Index. There were no significant differences in strength, stiffness or fatigability of the back muscles between firefighters with and without LBP history. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed no significant relationship between the back disability and any biomechanical or demographic measures, likely due to the high functional abilities of the participants.

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.

Effect of Hip Muscle Strengthening Exercises on Pain and Disability in Patients with Non-Specific Low Back Pain-A Systematic Review

Low back pain (LBP) is a health problem that affects 70-80% of the population in Western countries. Because of the biomechanical relationship between the lumbar region and the hip, it is thought that strengthening the muscles of this joint could improve the symptoms of people with LBP. The objective of this study is to evaluate the current evidence on the efficacy of hip strengthening exercises to reduce pain and disability in people with LBP. Clinical trials were collected from the PubMed, PEDro, and Scopus databases published up to September 2022. Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and using CASP and PEDro tools for methodological quality assessment, we selected studies that included hip strengthening exercises as part of LBP treatment and measured pain and/or disability parameters. Among the 966 records identified in the search, a total of 7 studies met the established selection criteria. Overall, participants who performed hip strengthening exercises had significantly improved in pain and disability. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed as "good". In conclusion, the addition of hip muscle strengthening exercises iterating interacted with LBP, effectively improving pain and disability.

Erector Spinae Muscle Activation During Forward Movement in Individuals With or Without Chronic Lower Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

To investigate the differences between erector spinae muscle activation in healthy individuals and patients with Chronic Lower Back Pain (CLBP) by conducting (a) systematic review and (b) meta-analysis.

Data Sources

PubMed, ScienceDirect, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar were used to conduct the searches, which included studies up to the 31st of March 2023 with no start date specified.

Study Selection

Any study otherwise meeting eligibility criteria was included if it reported either (1) a standard mean difference effect size; or (2) the means, SDs, and sample sizes for both the patient group and the comparator group.

Data Extraction

A total of 7 case control trials were used for the systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Synthesis

The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that total standardized mean difference in erector spinae muscle activation between healthy individuals vs patients with CLBP expressed in % maximum voluntary isometric contraction was 0.48 (95% confidence interval=0.21-0.74; P<.001) with the heterogeneity being I2=0% (P=.890). The electromyography (EMG) outputs showed significant differences in activation levels between the healthy and CLBP cohorts (P<.001).

Conclusions

A small effect size was found in the meta-analysis. The muscle activation levels of the erector spinae during forward propulsion were higher in CLBP individuals compared with healthy cohorts. The findings provide more clarity about the muscles that were the focus of previous research, what procedures were used to evaluate muscular contributions and what speeds the participants were moving at during the test sessions. Given the limited methodological quality of the included studies, the findings should be interpreted with caution. Future research should evaluate the effect of other factors such as walking distance and any changes in walking surfaces and gradients (ie, non-flat surfaces).

Home Exercise Programs Are Infrequently Prescribed in Trials of Supervised Exercise for Individuals With Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review of 292 Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES: To (1) determine how often home exercise programs (HEPs) are prescribed in supervised exercise trials for low back pain (LBP) and (2) describe characteristics of the HEP programs (design, purpose, dose, and adherence). DESIGN: Scoping review. LITERATURE SEARCH: PubMed, CINAHL, and Ovid MEDLINE were searched from January 1, 2010, to August 17, 2021. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials that included adults with LBP who received exercise interventions. DATA SYNTHESIS: The presence or absence of a prescribed HEP and any details of the HEP including design, dose, and adherence were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: Of 2689 potentially relevant trials, 292 were eligible for inclusion. Ninety-four trials (32%) included a HEP. The most commonly prescribed home exercises were core stability, trunk strengthening, and motor control exercises. There was great variation in the frequency and duration with which HEPs were prescribed. Adherence to HEPs was measured in fewer than half of the trials, and the methods for measuring adherence were inconsistent. Adherence to HEPs ranged from 29% to 82% in the 21 trials that reported adherence. CONCLUSION: Home exercise programs are not regularly prescribed in supervised exercise trials for LBP. There was considerable variation in prescribing HEPs and monitoring exercise adherence in trials of exercise-based treatments for adults with LBP. There is no consistent method used to measure participants' adherence to HEPs, and adherence percentages vary widely. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(3):120-142. Epub: 16 January 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11448.

Biomechanical factors associated with non-specific low back pain in adults: A systematic review

Low back pain (LBP) can result in increased direct medical and non-medical costs to patients, employers, and health care providers. This systematic review aimed to provide a better understanding of the biomechanical factors associated with chronic non-specific LBP in adults. SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched. In total, 26 studies were included and significant differences were noted between healthy controls and LBP patients in various motion. Biomechanical factors among adults with non-specific LBP were altered and differed as compared to healthy controls in various motion might be to compensate the pain during those motions. This review highlighted the biomechanical differences across those with non-specific LBP and healthy adults. Both groups showed a similar level of pain during functional tasks but LBP patients suffered from a moderate level of disability. Future studies should not rely on questionnaire-based pain scale only. The biomechanical factors summarized in this review can be used to diagnose non-specific LBP accurately, and as modifiable targets for exercise-based intervention.

Functional versus conventional strength and conditioning programs for back injury prevention in emergency responders

Back pain and back-related injuries are common complaints among emergency responders. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two strength and conditioning programs in improving back muscle characteristics and disabilities in emergency responders (firefighters/paramedics). Participants (n = 24) were randomized into two groups to complete 16 weeks of supervised exercise intervention: 1) Functional training used unilateral movements that mimicked the asymmetrical nature of emergency operations, 2) Conventional training performed bilaterally loaded exercises. Outcome measures were maximum isometric back extension strength, passive muscle stiffness, lumbar extensor fatigability, and revised Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire. A mixed model Analysis of Variance with repeated measures was performed to compare the difference over time and between groups. While the training effects were similar between groups, both programs improved isometric back extension strength (+21.3% functional, +20.3% conventional, p &lt; 0.001, ηp2 = 0.625) and lumbar extensor muscle fatigability (+17.4% functional, +9.5% conventional, p = 0.009, ηp2 = 0.191). Bilateral symmetry in muscle stiffness was improved as indicated by reduction in symmetry index (-7.1% functional, -11.8% conventional, p = 0.027, ηp2 = 0.151). All self-reported pain and disability scores fell within the category of “minimum functional limitation” throughout the intervention and 6-month follow-up periods. For frontline firefighters and paramedics, both functional and conventional strength training are effective for improving back muscle characteristics.

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.

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.

Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

While chronic exercise training has been demonstrated to be an effective non-pharmacological treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP), there has been a relative lack of evidence or clinical guidelines for whether a posterior chain resistance training programme provides any benefits over general exercise (GE).

OBJECTIVES

To determine if chronic posterior chain resistance training (PCRT), defined as exercise programmes of ≥6 weeks duration focused on the thoracic, lumbar and hip extensor musculature, is more effective than GE in improving pain, level of disability, muscular strength and the number of adverse events in recreationally active and sedentary individuals with CLBP.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were systematically searched from 25 September 2019 until 30 August 2020. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools checklist for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), articles were critically appraised and compared against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk difference (RD) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Eight articles were included, with a total of 408 participants (203 PCRT, 205 GE). Both PCRT and GE were effective in improving a number of CLBP-related outcomes, but these effects were often significantly greater in PCRT than GE, especially with greater training durations (i.e. 12-16 weeks compared to 6-8 weeks). Specifically, when compared to GE, PCRT demonstrated a greater reduction in pain (SMD = - 0.61 (95% CI - 1.21 to 0.00), p = 0.05; I2 = 74%) and level of disability (SMD = - 0.53 (95% CI - 0.97 to - 0.09), p = 0.02; I2 = 52%), as well as a greater increase in muscle strength (SMD = 0.67 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.13), p = 0.004; I2 = 0%). No differences in the number of adverse events were reported between PCRT and GE (RD = - 0.02 (95% CI - 0.10 to 0.05), p = 0.57; I2 = 72%).

CONCLUSION

Results of the meta-analysis indicated that 12-16 weeks of PCRT had a statistically significantly greater effect than GE on pain, level of disability and muscular strength, with no significant difference in the number of adverse events for recreationally active and sedentary patients with CLBP. Clinicians should strongly consider utilizing PCRT interventions for 12-16 weeks with patients with CLBP to maximize their improvements in pain, disability and muscle strength. Future research should focus on comparing the efficacy and adverse events associated with specific PCRT exercise training and movement patterns (i.e. deadlift, hip lift) in treating this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020155700 .

[Therapeutic exercise as treatment for spinal chronic pain: systematic review of randomized clinical trials]

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present review was to analyze and compare the effectiveness of different types of therapeutic exercise in people with chronic spinal pain.

METHODS

Data search was conducted using the electronic database MEDLINE. Randomized clinical trials, conducted in patients between 18 and 65 years old with chronic pain in the spine region, were included.

RESULTS

Two independent reviewers performed the analysis of methodological quality using the PEDro scale, with 13 studies finally selected. The different types of therapeutic exercise had significant effects on pain reduction, decrease of disability and improvement of the quality of life of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that there is no modality of therapeutic exercise superior to others. The combination of different therapeutic exercise modalities could be a complete tool for the management of chronic pain in the spine.

Effects of specific muscle activation for low back pain on activity limitation, pain, work participation, or recurrence: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Specific muscle activation (SMA) is a commonly used treatment for people with low back pain (LBP) however there is variability in systematic reviews to date on effectiveness. This may be because of the use of eligibility criteria incongruent with original descriptions of the SMA approach.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of SMA on improving activity limitation, pain, work participation or recurrence for people with LBP.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review METHODS: Computer databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English up to September 6, 2019. Eligibility criteria were chosen to ensure all clinically relevant RCTs were included and trials of poorly defined or executed SMA excluded. Outcomes for activity limitation, pain, work participation or recurrence were extracted.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight RCTs were included in this review with 18 being considered high quality. GRADE quality assessment revealed low to high quality evidence that SMA was more effective than exercise, conservative medical management, multi-modal physiotherapy, placebo, advice and minimal intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of SMA in accordance with the original clinical descriptions. We found significant evidence supporting the effectiveness of SMA for the treatment of LBP. Where significant results were demonstrated, the between-group differences were in many comparisons clinically important based on contemporary definitions and an effect size of 0.5 or more. Practitioners should consider SMA as a treatment component in their patients with LBP.

Moderate disability has negative effect on spatiotemporal parameters in patients with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

It is known that the patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) has different spatiotemporal characteristics than healthy controls such as average speed, cadence, step and stride length parameters. CLBP is a heterogeneous phenomenon in terms of causing various level of disability.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does disability levels make a difference on spatiotemporal characteristics of patients with CLBP?

METHODS

66 patients with CLBP and 32 healthy controls between the ages of 25 and 65 years participated to study. The patients who had neurological, orthopedic, cardiovascular, metastatic history excluded from study. Resting, activity and night pain and functional disability were evaluated with Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) respectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to their disability level: moderate and severe. Gait analyses were performed with Optogait treadmill-based photocell system (Version 1.6.4.0, Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). After two trials were done, the spatiotemporal characteristics recorded for one minute while patients walked their preferred speed on the treadmill. One-way ANOVA was used to compare these parameters among the perceived disability level (moderate, severe) and healthy controls.The level of significance was accepted as 0.05.

RESULTS

Step length, stride length, and preferred walking speed were the parameters that differentiate the gait between healthy controls and patients with CLBP (p < 0.05). According to post-hoc analyses, moderate CLBP was identified as the group most different from the healthy controls (p < 0.05).

SIGNIFICANCE

Results of this study describe how compensating mechanism were seen in CLBP subgroups. As opposed to expectations, an increase in disability would not create higher difference in spatiotemporal characteristics between healthy controls and patients with severe disability. We propose that patients with severe and moderate disability had different ways to normalize their gait.

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.

Knee pain is associated with lower back pain in young baseball players: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

Considerable research has focused on shoulder and elbow injuries among baseball players; however, although lumbar spine and knee injuries are commonly experienced, they are less frequently studied. During common motions in baseball, such as throwing, hitting, and running, energy is transferred from the lower extremities through the lower back to the upper body. Lower extremity pain, as well as lower back pain (LBP), can disrupt the kinematic chain, and it is important to understand the association between lower extremity complaints and LBP. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the association between knee pain and LBP among young baseball players.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted with young baseball players (aged 6-15 years, n = 1,609) using a self-reported questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression models were used for analyses. Variables considered in the models were sex, age, body mass index, team levels, number of days of training per week, number of hours in practice per day on weekdays and weekend, frequency of participation in games, practice intensity, and player position.

RESULTS

The point prevalence of LBP and knee pain was 8.4% and 13.1%, respectively. Knee pain was significantly associated with LBP. Using the absence of knee pain as a reference, the adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for LBP was 5.83 (3.93-8.65) (p < 0.001) in the presence of knee pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Knee pain was associated with LBP among young baseball players. Clinicians should pay attention to knee complaints to prevent and treat LBP among young baseball players.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.