Low-dose, non-supervised, health insurance initiated exercise for the treatment and prevention of chronic low back pain in employees. Results from a randomized controlled trial

Quantitative evaluation of risk factors for low back pain in young patients using synthetic magnetic resonance imaging and proton density fat fraction analyses

Background

Lumbar intervertebral disc and paravertebral muscle degeneration are common causes of chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, the exact etiology of CLBP in young patients remains unclear. Identifying the risk factors for CLBP in young patients could expedite the development of effective preventive recommendations.

Objectives

To identify the factors influencing the presence and severity of CLBP in young patients by analyzing the associations between the fat content of the paravertebral muscles, T2 value of the lumbar intervertebral disc (LIVD), and visual analog scale (VAS) score.

Design

Data for 23 patients diagnosed with CLBP were compared to those of 20 healthy young individuals.

Methods

The T2 values of the LIVD and fat content of the psoas major (PM), multifidus (MF), and erector spinae (ES) muscles for 23 young patients with CLBP and 20 healthy individuals were measured and compared using synthetic magnetic resonance imaging and proton density fat fraction analyses. Moreover, the factors (T2 values and fat content) associated with severe CLBP (assessed using the VAS score) were analyzed.

Results

The fat content of the right MF and ES was higher in patients with CLBP than in healthy individuals (p < 0.05). The T2 values of each LIVD in the CLBP and control groups were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Moreover, the VAS scores did not correlate with the T2 values of the patients (p > 0.05). The fat content of the bilateral MF and ES muscles was positively associated with the VAS score in young patients with CLBP (left MF: r = 0.506, p = 0.01; right MF: r = 0.532, p = 0.01; left ES: r = 0.636, p < 0.01; and right ES: r = 0.716, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Degeneration of the MF and ES may contribute to CLBP in young patients. In addition, the severity of CLBP is positively correlated with the degree of fat infiltration in the MF and ES.

Endogenous Opioids and Exercise-Related Hypoalgesia: Modern Models, Measurement, and Mechanisms of Action

This chapter will focus on the role exercise appears to have on activation and modulating factors within the central nervous system related to endogenous like opioids and its possible contribution to exercise-induced hypoalgesia. The implications for the exercise-mediated alterations of CNS activation factors related to opioids, specifically endorphins and enkephalins, will be presented. In this update, we discuss utilization of new technology and methods to monitor mechanisms of opioid involvement to suggest their contribution with exercise mediated hypoalgesia as well as their relationships to alterations of perceptions of pain and mood. Several special populations were included to suggest that not all individuals will respond to the exercise by mediating hypoalgesia. Factors that may confound the current understanding and suggestions from the recent literature will be presented as well as suggestions for future investigations.

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.

Attention to Progression Principles and Variables of Exercise Prescription in Workplace-Related Resistance Training Interventions: A Systematic Review of Controlled Trials

Background

The workplace is an important setting for adult health promotion including exercise training such as resistance training (RT). Since the reporting of exercise training interventions is generally inconsistent, the objective of this systematic review was to investigate the attention to principles of RT progression and variables of RT exercise prescription in workplace-related RT interventions.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in the databases LIVIVO, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science (2000–2020). Controlled trials with apparently healthy “employees” and a main focus on RT were included. RT principles and variables were extracted and rated by two reviewers (reported, not reported, or unclear). Sum scores for each RT intervention and percentages regarding each principle and variable were calculated.

Results

Overall, 21 articles were included (18 primary studies, 3 protocols). Summarized narratively, the interventions showed different positive effects on strength- or performance-related and/or health- or complaint-related outcomes. The reporting of the RT principles and variables was varied [progressive overload: 94% of the studies, specificity: 78%, variation (periodization): 39%, muscle action: 94%, loading: 94%, volume; 67%, exercise selection: 89%, exercise order: 47%, rest periods between sets: 33%, rest periods between exercises: 27%, repetition velocity: 44%, and frequency: 100%].

Conclusion

Several key RT principles and variables were reported inconsistently, reducing reproducibility and pointing to the need for standardized RT intervention reporting in workplace-related interventions. Exercise science and workplace promotion should be further linked, since accurate reporting is a prerequisite for transferring robust findings into practice.

Core muscle functional strength training for reducing the risk of low back pain in military recruits: An open-label randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Core muscle functional strength training (CMFST) has been reported to reduce injuries to the lower extremity. However, no study has confirmed whether CMFST can reduce the risk of low back pain (LBP).

OBJECTIVE

This study identified the effects of CMFST on the incidence of LBP in military recruits.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION

We performed a prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled study in a population of young healthy male naval recruits from a Chinese basic combat training program. Participants were randomly assigned to either the core group or the control group. In additional to normal basic combat training, recruits in the core group underwent a CMFST program for 12 weeks, while recruits in the control group received no extra training.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

At the beginning of the study and at the 12th week, the number of participants with LBP was counted, and lumbar muscle endurance was measured. In addition, when participants complained of LBP, they were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ).

RESULTS

A total of 588 participants were included in the final analysis (295 in the core group and 293 in the control group). The incidence of LBP in the control group was about twice that of the core group over the 12-week study (20.8% vs 10.8%, odds ratio: 2.161-2.159, P < 0.001). The core group had better lumbar muscle endurance at 12 weeks than the control group ([200.80 ± 92.98] s vs [147.00 ± 84.51] s, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in VAS score between groups, but the core group had a significantly lower RMDQ score at week 12 than the control group (3.33 ± 0.58 vs 5.47 ± 4.41, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the CMFST effectively reduced the incidence of LBP, improved lumbar muscle endurance, and relieved the dysfunction of LBP during basic military training.

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.

Effect of Home Exercise Training in Patients with Nonspecific Low-Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Exercise therapy is recommended to treat non-specific low back pain (LBP). Home-based exercises are promising way to mitigate the lack of availability of exercise centers. In this paper, we conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis on the effects of home-based exercise on pain and functional limitation in LBP.

METHOD

PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and ScienceDirect were searched until April 20th, 2021. In order to be selected, studies needed to report the pain and functional limitation of patients before and after home-based exercise or after exercise both in a center and at-home. Random-effect meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted.

RESULTS

We included 33 studies and 9588 patients. We found that pain intensity decreased in the exclusive home exercise group (Effect size = -0.89. 95% CI -0.99 to -0.80) and in the group which conducted exercise both at-home and at another setting (-0.73. -0.86 to -0.59). Similarly, functional limitation also decreased in both groups (-0.75. -0.91 to -0.60, and -0.70, -0.92 to -0.48, respectively). Relaxation and postural exercise seemed to be ineffective in decreasing pain intensity, whereas trunk, pelvic or leg stretching decreased pain intensity. Yoga improved functional limitation. Supervised training was the most effective method to improve pain intensity. Insufficient data precluded robust conclusions around the duration and frequency of the sessions and program.

CONCLUSION

Home-based exercise training improved pain intensity and functional limitation parameters in LBP.

Effectiveness of workplace intervention strategies in lower back pain prevention: a review

The aim of this study was to identify effective work place intervention strategies for the prevention of low back pain (LBP). The study focused on interventions to two major groups: personal interventions and technical interventions. Data basis were searched for with inclusion criteria: study design based on randomised controlled trial; outcome measures including non-specific LBP occurrence expressed by prevalence or intensity; intervention met the definition of the technical and/or personal (physical exercises, behavioural training, educational) intervention programme. Eighteen papers were selected for full analysis. The diversification of quantitative indicators of differences between control and intervention groups were carried out using Cohen's d index. The results of analysis showed strong differences in effects among intervention strategies, as well as among different cases within similar intervention strategies. LBP severity before intervention and the length of intervention were discussed as potentially influencing factors. The results of the analysis suggest that the most effective strategies for LBP prevention include technical modifications of the workstand and education based on practical training. Behavioural and physical training seems to be of lesser importance. LBP severity before intervention and the time when the measurements of outcome measures take place play an important role in the effectiveness of intervention.

Prevention strategies to reduce future impact of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of prevention strategies to reduce future impact of low back pain (LBP), where impact is measured by LBP intensity and associated disability.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro and The Cochrane (CENTRAL) databases from inception to 22 October 2018.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs evaluating any intervention aiming to prevent future impact of LBP, reporting an outcome measure of LBP intensity and/or disability measured at least 3 months post-randomisation, and the intervention group must be compared with a group that received no intervention/placebo or minimal intervention. Trials restricting recruitment to participants with current LBP were excluded.

RESULTS

27 published reports of 25 different trials including a total of 8341 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The pooled results, from three RCTs (612 participants), found moderate-quality evidence that an exercise programme can prevent future LBP intensity (mean difference (MD) -4.50; 95% CI -7.26 to -1.74), and from 4 RCTs (471 participants) that an exercise and education programme can prevent future disability due to LBP (MD -6.28; 95% CI -9.51 to -3.06). It is uncertain whether prevention programmes improve future quality of life (QoL) and workability due to the overall low-quality and very low-quality available evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides moderate-quality evidence that an exercise programme, and a programme combining exercise and education, are effective to reduce future LBP intensity and associated disability. It is uncertain whether prevention programmes can improve future QoL and workability. Further high-quality RCTs evaluating prevention programmes aiming to reduce future impact of LBP are needed.

Treatment of Low Back Pain with a Digital Multidisciplinary Pain Treatment App: Short-Term Results

BACKGROUND

Even though modern concepts of disease management of unspecific low back pain (LBP) postulate active participation of patients, this strategy is difficult to adapt unless multidisciplinary pain therapy is applied. Recently, mobile health solutions have proven to be effective aides to foster self-management of many diseases.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper was to report on the retrospective short-term results of a digital multidisciplinary pain app for the treatment of LBP.

METHODS

Kaia is a mobile app that digitalizes multidisciplinary pain treatment and is in the market as a medical product class I. For the current study, the data of anonymized Kaia users was retrospectively analyzed. User data were evaluated for 12 weeks regarding duration of use and effect on in-app user reported pain levels, using the numerical rating scale (NRS), depending on whether LBP was classified as acute, subacute, or chronic back pain according to current guidelines.

RESULTS

Data of 180 users were available. The mean age of the users was 33.9 years (SD 10.9). Pain levels decreased from baseline NRS 4.8 to 3.75 for all users at the end of the observation period. Users who completed 4, 8, or 12 weeks showed an even more pronounced decrease in pain level NRS (baseline 4.9 [SD 1.7] versus 3.6 [SD 1.5] at 4 weeks; baseline 4.7 [SD 1.8] versus 3.2 [SD [2.0] at 8 weeks; baseline 4.6 [SD 2.2] versus 2.6 [SD 2.0] at 12 weeks). In addition, subgroup analysis of acute, subacute, or chronic classification revealed no significant main effect of group (P>.30) on the reduction of pain. Conclusions: This retrospective study showed that in a pre-selected population of app users, an app digitalizing multidisciplinary rehabilitation for the self-management of LBP reduced user-reported pain levels significantly. The observed effect size was clinically relevant. Ongoing prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will adjust for potential bias and selection effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study showed that in a pre-selected population of app users, an app digitalizing multidisciplinary rehabilitation for the self-management of LBP reduced user-reported pain levels significantly. The observed effect size was clinically relevant. Ongoing prospective RCTs will adjust for potential bias and selection effects.