Efficacy of trunk balance exercises for individuals with chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial

Management of Low Back Pain With Concurrent Hamstring Tightness: A Case Report Highlighting the Efficacy of Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation, Mulligan's Two-Leg Rotation Technique, and Exercise Regimen

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent musculoskeletal issue characterized by discomfort in the lumbosacral region. LBP localized between the 12th thoracic vertebra and inferior gluteal folds is common and often lacks a clear etiology. Various factors contribute to LBP, including increased lumbar lordosis, diminished abdominal muscle strength, reduced back extensor muscle endurance, and flexibility limitations in the back extensors, iliopsoas, and hamstrings. Treatment modalities for LBP encompass surgical intervention, pharmacotherapy, lumbar injections, psychotherapy, chiropractic care, and physiotherapy, with manual therapy being a prominent approach. Physiotherapists employ a spectrum of manual techniques, including mobilization, manipulation, and massage, to address LBP. Hamstring flexibility plays a pivotal role in spinal mechanics, and tight or shortened hamstrings can exacerbate LBP. Mulligan's techniques, notably the two-leg rotation (TLR) technique, are valuable interventions for addressing hamstring tightness in cases of LBP. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) was also used to manage pain and improve strength. This case report outlines the management of a 32-year-old male presenting with LBP and hamstring tightness coupled with core muscle weakness. Through comprehensive assessment and physiotherapeutic interventions, significant improvements were observed in pain intensity, lumbar range of motion, disability, straight leg raise (SLR), and core muscle strength following a three-week physiotherapy intervention.

Physiotherapeutic Rehabilitation for a Geriatric Patient With Discitis Associated With Pott's Spine: A Case Report

Discitis linked to Pott's spine is an infrequent yet severe issue, especially difficult to manage among elderly individuals due to age-related bodily changes and concurrent health issues. This report details the successful physiotherapy-based recovery of a senior patient afflicted with discitis related to Pott's spine. The individual, a 61-year-old man, presented symptoms including intense back pain, restricted movement, and neurological issues. The diagnosis was confirmed via imaging scans, indicating spinal tuberculosis and vertebral disc involvement. Treatment embraced a comprehensive approach involving medication alongside physiotherapy. The physiotherapeutic regimen aimed at pain alleviation, enhancing spinal flexibility, strengthening weakened muscles, and promoting functional autonomy. Techniques such as manual therapy, targeted exercises, and patient education were employed. Despite the challenges posed by the patient's age and existing conditions, significant enhancements in pain management, mobility, and everyday functioning were noted during the rehabilitation journey. This case underscores the significance of prompt diagnosis, collaborative care, and personalized physiotherapeutic interventions in attaining positive outcomes for elderly patients grappling with discitis associated with Pott's spine. Further investigation is needed to delineate optimal rehabilitation approaches for this intricate condition among the elderly.

Synergistic Benefits of Motor Control Exercises and Balance Training in Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Chronic low back pain, frequently attributed to Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction (SIJD), remains a prevalent concern in orthopedic and physiotherapy arenas. Despite the recognition of motor control exercises (MCEs) and balance training (BT) as potential rehabilitative measures, studies elucidating their combined efficiency for SIJD are scarce. This research study aimed to ascertain the combined and individual efficacies of MCE and BT in alleviating SIJD symptoms.

METHODS

A double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted, enrolling 120 SIJD-diagnosed patients aged 30-60 years. Participants were randomly allocated into four groups: MCEs alone, BT alone, combined MCEs and BT, and a control group receiving usual care. Interventions spanned 12 weeks, with evaluations at the start and end and a 24-week follow-up. Primary outcomes encompass pain intensity (assessed via Visual Analog Scale), functional disability (utilizing the Oswestry Disability Index), and life quality (using the Short Form-36).

RESULTS

Post a 12-week intervention, participants receiving combined MCE and BT demonstrated substantial improvements in VAS (Median: 3.5, IQR: 2-5; p = 0.0035), ODI (Median: 15%, IQR: 10-20%; p = 0.0035), and SF-36 scores (Median: 70, IQR: 65-75; p = 0.0035) compared to baseline. In contrast, standalone MCE or BT and control groups exhibited lesser efficacy. By the 24-week follow-up, the combined group maintained their gains, outperforming the other groups. The research tools employed showed high reliability with Cronbach's alpha >0.85.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the superior efficacy of integrating motor control exercises (MCEs) and balance training (BT) for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction (SIJD)-related chronic low back pain. This combined approach promises enhanced patient outcomes, highlighting its potential as a primary strategy in SIJD management. Future studies should further explore its long-term benefits and integration with other therapeutic modalities.

Individualized Training of Back Muscles Using Iterative Learning Control of a Compliant Balance Board

Here we present the GyroTrainer, a bespoke mechatronic balance board system designed to trigger activation of the back muscles while the user engages in a balance-challenging game. The GyroTrainer uses admittance control coupled with an iterative learning approach so as to tailor the admittance control parameters, i.e. difficulty level, according to the user's skill. Our experimental evaluation demonstrated that an individualized admittance control stiffness could be identified for each user, which corresponds with a desired level of difficulty and increased back muscle activity. A first game implementation demonstrates the feasibility of utilizing the GyroTrainer system and the individually identified admittance control stiffness for gamification of back muscle training.

Effect of Trunk-Focused Exercises on Pain, Disability, Quality of Life, and Trunk Physical Fitness in Low Back Pain and How Potential Effect Modifiers Modulate Their Effects: A Systematic Review With Meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of trunkfocused exercise programs (TEPs) and moderator factors on chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analyses. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and CENTRAL databases from their inception to June 2022. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing TEPs to control or general exercises. DATA SYNTHESIS: We used random-effects models to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) plus confidence interval (CI) and heterogeneity (I²) for pain, disability, quality of life, and trunk performance. The impact of moderator factors was analyzed through meta-regression. RESULTS: Forty randomized controlled trials (n = 2391) were included. TEPs showed positive effects for all outcomes versus control (SMD 0.90-2.46; 95% CI, -0.04 to 4.96; I2 61%-98%). There were small effects in favor of TEPs versus general exercises for pain (SMD = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-0.37; I² = 13.4%) and disability (SMD = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.02-0.38; I² = 0%). Trunk and/or hip range-of-motion improvements were associated with greater reductions in pain (P<.01; β = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.25-0.87) and disability (P<.01; β = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.05). Low body mass was associated with higher pain reduction (P = .03; β = -0.17; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Trunk-focused exercise programs had positive effects on pain, disability, quality of life, and trunk performance compared to control groups, and on pain and disability compared to general exercises. Increasing trunk and/or hip range of motion was associated with greater pain and disability reduction, and lower body mass with higher pain reduction. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(2):64-93. Epub: 16 January 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11091.

Well-described exercises for chronic low back pain in Life Science Literature: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic exercise (TE) is recommended in multimodal treatment for patients with non-specific chronic back pain (cLBP).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify an exercise or a spectrum of exercises, well described and reproducible by the clinician, for cLBP patients.

METHODS

Systematic review by researching in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and Scopus. Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) supported the TE in patients with non-specific cLBP, provided that it was well described and could be repeated by another therapist. Methodological evaluation was performed using the PEDro scale and only studies with a score of ⩾ 6 were included. The assessment of the intervention description was carried out with the TIDieR checklist. The risk of bias was examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included in this systematic review. The defective description and the poorly reporting of the intervention makes it more difficult for the clinician to include the TE into clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study showed that the reporting of the intervention in high quality RCT on chronic low back pain is low, threatening the external validity of the results.

Efficacy of balance training on postural control in patients with rotator cuff disease: a randomized controlled study

We evaluated the efficacy of adding balance training to a physical therapy program on postural control and health-related quality of life in patients with rotator cuff disease. Forty-two participants were randomly allocated to the control and intervention groups. Both groups received physical therapy (education, stretching, supervised strength training, and home exercise program) 3 days/week for 6 weeks. The intervention group was instructed to perform balance exercises at home. The primary outcomes were the stability index, the Fourier transformation (F5 and F6), the weight distribution index, and the fall index, as assessed by the posturography during eight conditions with different combinations of standing (solid surface, pillows, and different head positions) and vision (eyes open/closed). The secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index to assess the health-related quality of life, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. The adherence to in-person and home-based therapy was high (>83%). The intervention group significantly improved the stability index, F5, and F6 parameters but each in only one condition (P < 0.05). No significant improvement was found in the conditions for the other primary outcomes and in the health-related quality of life. (P > 0.05). We conclude that adding the balance training protocol to the physical therapy program does not improve postural control and health-related quality of life in patients with rotator cuff disease.

TREATMENT OF NON-SPECIFIC CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN: RESISTANCE TRAINING WITH OR WITHOUT USING WEIGHTS?

ABSTRACT Introduction: Dysfunction of the core muscles contributes to the persistence of pain in patients with chronic low back pain. Evidence shows that the active approach is beneficial in the rehabilitation of these patients. However, there is uncertainty as to the most effective methods or form of exercise, as the literature offers little guidance in this regard. Objective: To analyze and compare the impact on quality of life, function, flexibility, abdominal strength and abdominal fat rate in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain after a program of resistance training using two different forms of exercise. Methods: Thirty individuals, aged between 18 and 65 years, participated in the study. Twenty performed physical training program twice a week for eight weeks, and ten did not perform any physical exercises, but received guidance and pain relief. The physically active individuals were randomly divided in two groups and received similar resistance training, focusing on the same muscle groups. Ten performed training with dumbbells and bodybuilding machines (TRCP) and ten did not use this equipment (TRSP). All were assessed before and after the intervention, through questionnaires on quality of life and function, and tests for flexibility, abdominal strength and measurement of the abdominal fat rate. Results: In the intra-group comparison (initial vs eight weeks), there were no significant differences in quality of life in any of the groups. However, regarding function, the three groups showed significant improvement, with TRSP showing the best evolution. For flexibility and abdominal strength gain, TRCP showed the best evolution in both instruments. For decrease in abdominal fat rate, only TRCP showed significant differences. In the intergroup comparison, there were no significant differences for any of the evaluated outcomes. Conclusion: The two exercise programs were effective in improving function, flexibility and abdominal strength in patients with chronic, non-specific low back pain. However, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the outcomes in the comparison between groups. Level evidence II, Comparative prospective study.

Deprescribing paracetamol in pain conditions: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To examine evidence on deprescribing paracetamol in pain conditions and inform future strategies for paracetamol deprescription.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with pain conditions, taking paracetamol.

RESULTS

After two independent teams of reviewers screening for titles, abstracts, and then full texts, 16 original articles were included. Deprescribing strategies were grouped into 5 categories: (1) Pharmacological, (2) Psychological, (3) Physiological, (4) Policy, and (5) Combination. We found strategies were predominately consumer-focused, conducted in community settings and involved individuals experiencing musculoskeletal pain (such as low back pain and osteoarthritis). A total of twelve studies investigated interventions targeting dose reduction and four studies examined interventions focusing on discontinuation of paracetamol. The most common strategies used to deprescribe paracetamol in pain conditions were physiological strategies, followed by psychological strategies. All included studies demonstrated some level of effectiveness to deprescribe paracetamol in a pain conditions through dose reduction or discontinuation, although the effectiveness of deprescribing strategies were highly variable, ranging from the majority of participants discontinuing their paracetamol use, to less than 10% reducing their paracetamol use upon the latest follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

There are clear opportunities for prospective trials to be designed more purposely and primarily focused to influence reduction and cessation of paracetamol for specific pain conditions where deprescription is appropriate.

Interventions for the Management of Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: Revision 2021

Low back pain (LBP) remains a musculoskeletal condition with an adverse societal impact. Globally, LBP is highly prevalent and a leading cause of disability. This is an update to the 2012 Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), clinical practice guideline (CPG) for LBP. The overall objective of this update was to provide recommendations on interventions delivered by physical therapists or studied in care settings that included physical therapy providers. It also focused on synthesizing new evidence, with the purpose of making recommendations for specific nonpharmacologic treatments. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(11):CPG1-CPG60. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.0304.

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.

Trunk muscle endurance, strength and flexibility in rural subsistence farmers and urban industrialized adults in western Kenya

OBJECTIVES

High trunk muscle endurance, strength, and moderate flexibility reportedly help maintain musculoskeletal health, but there is evidence for tradeoffs among these variables as well as sex differences in trunk muscle endurance and strength. To test if these observations extend similarly to both men and women in nonindustrial and industrial environments, we investigated intra-individual associations and group and sex differences in trunk muscle endurance, strength, and flexibility among 74 (35 F, 39 M; age range: 18-61 years) adults from the same Kalenjin-speaking population in western Kenya. We specifically compared men and women from an urban community with professions that do not involve manual labor with rural subsistence farmers, including women who frequently carry heavy loads.

METHODS

Trunk muscle endurance, strength, and flexibility were measured with exercise tests and electromyography (EMG).

RESULTS

We found a positive correlation between trunk extensor strength and endurance (R = .271, p ≤ .05) and no associations between strength or endurance and flexibility. Rural women had higher trunk extensor and flexor endurance, EMG-determined longissimus lumborum endurance, and trunk extensor strength than urban women (all p ≤ .05). Rural women had higher trunk extensor and flexor endurance than rural men (both p ≤ .05). Urban women had lower trunk flexor and extensor endurance than urban men (both p ≤ .01).

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of physical activity among nonindustrial subsistence farmers, particularly head carrying among women, appear to be associated with high trunk muscle endurance and strength, which may have important benefits for helping maintain musculoskeletal health.

Efficacy of the lumbar stabilization and thoracic mobilization exercise program on pain intensity and functional disability reduction in chronic low back pain patients with lumbar radiculopathy: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exercise programs in the treatment of chronic lumbar pain are quite diverse, but it has been proven that stabilization exercises are the most effective.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the lumbar stabilization exercise program in a closed and open kinetic chain (LSCO) and lumbar stabilization exercises and thoracic mobilization program in a closed kinetic chain (LSTMC), and evaluated the clinical effectiveness of each program.

METHODS

Prospective, randomized, controlled trial in 80 chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with lumbar radiculopathy of both sexes (35 male, 45 female), average age (48.45 ± 10.22 years), divided in two groups that performed different sets of exercises. Participants were given laser therapy, transcutaneous electro-nerve stimulation and an eight-week kinesiotherapy that included exercises to strengthen the deep lumbar spine stabilizers. Retesting was done after four and eight weeks.

RESULTS

Statistically significant (p< 0.05) superior recovery of the LSTMC group subjects compared to the LSCO group was achieved at all measurement intervals in the pain intensity and functional disability parameters.

CONCLUSION

Patients who performed the lumbar stabilization and thoracic mobilization exercise program in a closed kinetic chain had the most effective reduction of pain intensity and functional disability.

Efficacy of Core Stability in Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain

(1) Background: Management of chronic low back pain (cLBP) is often multidisciplinary, involving a combination of treatments, including therapeutic exercises. Core stability exercises aim to improve pain and disability in cLBP increasing spinal stability, neuromuscular control, and preventing shear force that causes injury to the lumbar spine. The purpose of this study was to review the available evidence about the effectiveness in reducing pain and improving disability of core stability exercises for non-specific cLBP. (2) Methods: We perform a systematic research on common Medline databases: PubMed, Pedro, and Cochrane Library. Search results were limited to articles written in English and published between January 2005 and November 2020.The search provided a total of 420 articles. Forty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria and 371 articles were excluded. (3) Results: Core stability provides great therapeutic effects in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain reducing pain intensity, functional disability, and improving quality of life, core muscle activation, and thickness. Evidences suggest that core stability is more effective than rest or no/minimal intervention and combination with other types of exercise for cLBP have shown grater efficacy. (4) Conclusion: Core stability could be proposed in a comprehensive approach in cLBP, the combination with other modalities of therapeutic exercise should be promoted. Patient compliance is crucial to determine the efficacy of the intervention.

The effect of treatment regimens on salivary cortisol levels in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders

BACKGROUND

Increased levels of circulating cortisol have been associated with pain severity in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (CMD). Little is known about the potential association between pain management and salivary cortisol alterations in CPM patients treated with different regimens.

OBJECTIVES

This prospective feasibility study aimed to determine the effect of two treatment regimens in comparison with sham therapy on pain intensity and disability and salivary cortisol concentration (SCC) in patients with CMD.

METHODS

Thirty patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups of 10: two experimental groups (A and B) and a control group (C). The experimental groups followed physiotherapy treatment (A) or acupuncture (B), while the control group (C) followed a sham therapy for 10 sessions. Pain data were collected using the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) questionnaire and SCC was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at pre- and posttreatment.

RESULTS

Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that patients treated with acupuncture experienced greater decreases in pain intensity/pain disability (P < 0.05) than the physiotherapy and sham therapy groups. No statistical differences were found between the three groups for the SCC outcome variable. Bonferroni adjustments showed that the mean values of SCC were significantly decreased at posttreatment (P < 0.05) across the three groups.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant decrease in both pain and cortisol outcomes at posttreatment in patients with CMD. Because of the limitations of this study, we cannot draw conclusions regarding whether the lower SCC could be an indication of pain reduction in patients with CMD.

Effect of segmental stabilizing exercises augmented by pelvic floor muscles training on women with postpartum pelvic girdle pain: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pelvic girdle pain (PGP) is a significant problem that affects daily living activities in postpartum women.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the effect of stabilizing exercises with or without pelvic floor muscles (PFM) training on pain, functional disability, trunk range of motion (ROM) and PFM strength in women with PGP.

METHODS

Forty postpartum women participated in the study. Their age ranged from 25-35 years and their body mass index (BMI) was 25-29.9 kg/m2. They were randomly assigned into two groups equal in number. Group (A) received local stabilizing exercises, while group (B) received stabilizing exercises and PFM training. Pain, functional disability, trunk ROM and PFM strength have been evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Schober test and Kegel periniometer respectively.

RESULTS

Both groups (A and B) revealed a significant decrease (p= 0.001) in pain and functional disability and a significant increase (p= 0.001) in trunk ROM and PFM strength. However, group (B) showed a significant decrease (p= 0.001) in pain, and functional disability and a significant increase in PFM strength when compared with group (A).

CONCLUSIONS

PFM training should be an essential part in rehabilitation programs of PGP postpartum.

The Effects of Stabilization Exercise on the Thickness of Lateral Abdominal Muscles During Standing Tasks in Women With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Triple-Blinded Clinical Trial Study

CONTEXT

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) often presents with a dysfunction in deep abdominal muscles activity during standing tasks. Although some studies indicated that deep abdominal muscle activity improved during some functional tasks following stabilization exercise (SE), there is no study to evaluate the effect of SE on lateral abdominal muscles thickness during standing postural tasks.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate the lateral abdominal muscles thickness in the participants with CLBP while standing on a balance board and (2) to compare the effects of SE and a general exercise (GE) program on the lateral muscles thickness changes.

METHODS

This was a between-groups, triple-blinded randomized controlled trial design. In total, 40 females with CLBP were randomly assigned into 2 groups:  GE (control group) and supervised progressive SE (experimental group). Diagnostic ultrasound imaging was used before and after the intervention to measure lateral abdominal muscles thickness during standing on 2 different levels of platform in the Biodex Balance System. Visual analog scale and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire were used to evaluate changes in pain intensity and disability.

RESULTS

The results indicated significant increases in transverse abdominis muscle thickness during all standing tasks (P = .02) and significant decreases in pain intensity and disability following SE intervention (P < .001). However, the lateral abdominal muscle thicknesses were not changed after GE intervention while standing postural tasks (P > .05). The GE group revealed only significant decreases in pain intensity after intervention (P = .03).

CONCLUSION

Supervised progressive SE improved the activity of deep abdominal muscles in standing postural tasks in the patients with CLBP.

Trunk and hip muscle activity during the Balance-Dexterity task in persons with and without recurrent low back pain

Coordination of the trunk and hips is crucial for successful dynamic balance in many activities of daily living. Persons with recurrent low back pain (rLBP), both while symptomatic and during periods of symptom remission, exhibit dysfunctional muscle activation patterns and coordination of these joints. In a novel dynamic balance task where persons in remission from rLBP exhibit dissociated trunk motion, it is unknown how trunk and hip musculature are coordinated. Activation of hip and trunk muscles were acquired from nineteen persons with and without rLBP during the Balance-Dexterity Task, which involves balancing on one limb while compressing an unstable spring with the other. There were no between-group differences in activation amplitude for any muscle groups tested. In back-healthy control participants, hip and trunk muscle activation amplitudes increased proportionally in response to the added instability of the spring (R = 0.837, p < 0.001). Increases in muscle activation amplitudes in the group in remission from rLBP were not proportional (R = 0.113, p = 0.655). Instead, hip muscle activation in this group was associated with task performance, i.e. dexterous control of the spring (R = 0.676, p = 0.002). These findings highlight atypical coordination of hip and trunk musculature potentially related to task demands in persons with rLBP even during remission from pain.

Comparison of balance and stabilizing trainings on balance indices in patients suffering from nonspecific chronic low back pain

The objective of the current research was to compare the impact of balance and stabilizing trainings on balance indices in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. In this randomized, controlled, single-blinded clinical trial, 20 people suffering from nonspecific chronic low back pain were randomly assigned to two groups of balance and stabilizing trainings. Trainings of both groups were performed for 6 weeks and four sessions per week. The overall, lateral, and anterior-posterior stability indices, pain, and disability were measured using Biodex balance system, visual analog scale, and Oswestry scale, before and after treatment, respectively. Paired t-test and independent t-test were used for analyzing the data. In the balance group, the pain severity was changed from 6.33 ± 1.63 to 4.33 ± 2.6 (P = 0.005) and dynamic anterior-posterior stability index in the standing position on left leg with closing eyes was changed from 5.56 ± 2.25 to 3.45 ± 1. 57 (P = 0.03). In the stabilizing group, pain severity was changed from 4. 16 ± 1.47 to 1.33 ± 0.81 (P = 0.0001) and disability index was changed from 17.33 ± 5.60 to 5.33 ± 3.93 (P = 0.01). Reduction in pain and disability in the stabilizing group and increase in two balance indices were significant in the balance training group compared to those in other group (P < 0.05). Research findings revealed that the impact of stabilizing trainings was significant in reducing pain and disability compared to that in balance trainings.

Validation of the Japanese Version of the Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire in Patients with Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in the role of disturbed body perception in people with persistent pain problems such as chronic low back pain (CLBP). A questionnaire, the Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ), was recently developed as a simple and quick way of assessing disturbed perceptual awareness of the back in people with CLBP and appears to have acceptable psychometric properties. The aim of the present study was to develop a Japanese version of the FreBAQ (FreBAQ-J) and evaluate its psychometric properties in a sample of Japanese people with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

Translation of the FreBAQ into Japanese was conducted using a forward-backward method. One hundred participants with LBP completed the resultant FreBAQ-J. A subset of the participants completed the FreBAQ-J again 2 weeks later. Validity was investigated by examining the relationship between the FreBAQ-J and clinical valuables. Rasch analysis was used to assess targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning.

RESULTS

The FreBAQ-J was significantly correlated with pain in motion, disability, pain-related catastrophizing, fear of movement, and anxiety symptomatology. The FreBAQ-J had acceptable internal consistency, a minor departure from unidimensionality, and good test-retest reliability, and was functional on the category rating scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The FreBAQ-J has acceptable psychometric properties and is suitable for use in people with LBP. Participants with high levels of disturbed body perception are well targeted by the scale. The functioning of one item (item 8) was poor. Further study is warranted to confirm if this item should be excluded.

Whole-body vibration training as a workplace-based sports activity for employees with chronic low-back pain

The goal of this randomized and controlled study was to examine whether whole-body vibration (WBV) training is able to reduce back pain and physical disability in seated working office employees with chronic low-back pain in a real-world setting. A total of 41 subjects (68.3% female/mean age 45.5±9.1 years/mean BMI 26.6±5.2) were randomly allocated to an intervention group (INT [n=21]) or a control group (CON [n=20]). The INT participated in WBV training 2.5 times per week for 3 months. The primary outcome was the change in the Roland and Morris disability questionnaire (RMQ) score over the study period. In addition, secondary outcomes included changes in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Work Ability Index Questionnaire, the quality of life questionnaire SF-36, the Freiburger activity questionnaire, and an isokinetic test of the musculature of the trunk. Compliance with the intervention in the INT reached a mean of 81.1%±31.2% with no long-lasting unwanted side effects. We found significant positive effects of 3 months of WBV training in the INT compared to the CON regarding the RMQ (P=.027), the ODI (P=.002), the SF-36 (P=.013), the Freiburger activity questionnaire (P=.022), the post-interventional sick-leave in the INT (P=.008), and trends regarding a positive effect of the intervention on the muscular capacity of the muscles of the trunk in flexion. WBV training seems to be an effective, safe, and suitable intervention for seated working employees with chronic low-back pain.

Climbing Has a Positive Impact on Low Back Pain: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of climbing versus no treatment to treat chronic low back pain.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Tertiary.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 30 patients with chronic low back pain were recruited and randomly assigned to 2 different groups: climbing and control. The inclusion criteria were defined as chronic low back pain, age between 18 and 45 years, body mass index lower than 25, and no climbing experience.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients in the climbing group were instructed to climb 5 different climbing routes. A climbing activity of 10 sessions in 8 weeks, at least once a week with a minimum duration of 1 hour, was mandatory.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The participants were examined before (T0) and after therapy (8 weeks, T8) and after another 6 weeks (T14). The outcome was evaluated using Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Likert scale, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Radiologists evaluating MRI were blinded. The study was performed as a single-center study.

RESULTS

Evaluating the Oswestry Disability Index, a significant difference in the time course between the 2 groups was detected (P = 0.022). Significant improvements comparing climbing and control group were also found when assessing VAS in a minimal finger-floor-distance position (P = 0.048). Patients in the climbing group showed a reduction in size of disc protrusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Climbing may be an effective and low-cost therapy option for people with chronic low back pain.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Low back pain is a very common disease but still a challenge to treat. Therapy strategies vary from conservative ones, pharmacological treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and weak opioids, to invasive treatment with acupuncture, injections, and operative reconstruction. Some can be costly and not without risks. For instance, many people who use NSAIDs are at risk of common side effects such as gastrointestinal complications (irritation, ulcers, and bleeding) that may lead to hospitalization. Climbing could offer reduction of pain and better performance in daily life, because it offers a closed chain muscle training that has the potential to improve posture, perception of the trunk midline, and muscle control. Climbing may also lead to a better adherence to continuing treatment than traditional physical therapy and exercise due to a more exciting aspect of the sports activity.

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

BACKGROUND

For the treatment of chronic low back pain (cLBP), both core stability and mobilization exercises were introduced. The aim of this prospective randomized clinical pilot study was to compare the efficacy of mobilization and core stability exercises with regard to objective and subjective outcome measures in patients with cLBP.

METHOD

After a per-protocol analysis, the data of 27 patients with cLBP, who were randomly allocated to one of the two groups, were analyzed. The intervention group (GM) performed mobilization exercises using the BALLance-Methode®, the control group (GS) carried out core stability exercises for 4 weeks, and continued the exercises for an additional 4 weeks at home. Flexibility, strength endurance of the core stabilizing muscles, pain-induced disability, and pain avoidance behavior were the objective and subjective outcomes that were measured before, 4 weeks after, and 8 weeks after the onset of the intervention. The significance of differences within and between groups was analyzed.

RESULTS

During the observation period, only in the GS patients could maintain the prone-plank position and the side-plank position improvements over time (p < 0.001), with significant differences compared with the GM (p < 0.05). Within both groups significant improvements in the subjective outcome measures were found (p < 0.05). Therefore, no significant differences existed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

With regard to their daily complaints, patients with cLBP can be treated using standardized mobilization exercises in addition to core stability exercises.

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.

The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials: a systematic review and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common and costly health complaint for which there are several moderately effective treatments. In some fields there is evidence that funder and financial conflicts are associated with trial outcomes. It is not clear whether effect sizes in back pain trials relate to journal impact factor, reporting conflicts of interest, or reporting funding.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of English-language papers reporting randomised controlled trials of treatments for non-specific low back pain, published between 2006-2012. We modelled the relationship using 5-year journal impact factor, and categories of reported of conflicts of interest, and categories of reported funding (reported none and reported some, compared to not reporting these) using meta-regression, adjusting for sample size, and publication year. We also considered whether impact factor could be predicted by the direction of outcome, or trial sample size.

RESULTS

We could abstract data to calculate effect size in 99 of 146 trials that met our inclusion criteria. Effect size is not associated with impact factor, reporting of funding source, or reporting of conflicts of interest. However, explicitly reporting 'no trial funding' is strongly associated with larger absolute values of effect size (adjusted β=1.02 (95 % CI 0.44 to 1.59), P=0.001). Impact factor increases by 0.008 (0.004 to 0.012) per unit increase in trial sample size (P<0.001), but does not differ by reported direction of the LBP trial outcome (P=0.270).

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of associations between effect size and impact factor, reporting sources of funding, and conflicts of interest reflects positively on research and publisher conduct in the field. Strong evidence of a large association between absolute magnitude of effect size and explicit reporting of 'no funding' suggests authors of unfunded trials are likely to report larger effect sizes, notwithstanding direction. This could relate in part to quality, resources, and/or how pragmatic a trial is.

Trunk motor control deficits in acute and subacute low back pain are not associated with pain or fear of movement

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

A subgroup of patients with acute to subacute low back pain (LBP) presenting with trunk movement control deficits, pain provocation with segmental testing, and segmental hypermobility have been clinically identified as having movement coordination impairments (MCIs) of the trunk. It is hypothesized that these patients have proprioceptive, postural, and movement control impairments of the trunk associated with LBP. Although trunk control impairments have been identified in patients with chronic LBP, they have not been investigated in this subgroup or closer to symptom onset.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to identify trunk motor control (postural control and movement precision) impairments in a subgroup of patients with acute to subacute LBP who have been clinically identified to have MCIs and determine association of these impairments with pain and fear of movement.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

The study design includes observational design, university biomechanics laboratory, and clinical practice.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Thirty-three patients with acute to subacute LBP presenting with trunk MCIs and 33 healthy controls matched with gender, age, and body mass index were identified.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-report measures included Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Oswestry Disability Index Questionnaire, and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and physiologic measures included postural control and movement precision.

METHODS

Center-of-pressure movement was measured while subjects attempted to volitionally control trunk posture and movement while sitting on a platform with a hemisphere mounted underneath. This created an unstable surface that required coordinated trunk control to maintain an upright seated posture. Postural control was tested using eyes-open and -closed balance protocols. Movement precision was tested with a dynamic control test requiring movement of the center of pressure along a discrete path. Group trunk motor control performance was compared with analysis of variance and t test. Performance association with pain and fear of movement were assessed with Pearson correlations.

RESULTS

Patients' postural control in the eyes-closed condition (p=.02) and movement precision (p=.04) were significantly impaired compared with healthy controls, with moderate-to-large group difference effect sizes. These trunk motor control impairments were not significantly associated with the patients self-reported pain characteristics and fear of movement.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with clinical identification of trunk MCIs demonstrated decreased trunk motor control, suggesting that impairments in proprioception, motor output, or central processing occur early in the back pain episode. This information may help to guide interventions to address these specific limitations, improving delivery of care.

Core strength training for patients with chronic low back pain

[Purpose] Through core strength training, patients with chronic low back pain can strengthen their deep trunk muscles. However, independent training remains challenging, despite the existence of numerous core strength training strategies. Currently, no standardized system has been established analyzing and comparing the results of core strength training and typical resistance training. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the results of previous studies to explore the effectiveness of various core strength training strategies for patients with chronic low back pain. [Methods] We searched for relevant studies using electronic databases. Subsequently, we evaluated their quality by analyzing the reported data. [Results] We compared four methods of evaluating core strength training: trunk balance, stabilization, segmental stabilization, and motor control exercises. According to the results of various scales and evaluation instruments, core strength training is more effective than typical resistance training for alleviating chronic low back pain. [Conclusion] All of the core strength training strategies examined in this study assist in the alleviation of chronic low back pain; however, we recommend focusing on training the deep trunk muscles to alleviate chronic low back pain.

Effectiveness of the Godelieve Denys-Struyf (GDS) method in people with low back pain: cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Godelieve Denys-Struyf method (GDS) is a motor learning intervention that may be applied in group or individualized sessions.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to compare the effectiveness of routine physical therapy, group GDS (GDS-G) sessions, and group and individualized GDS (GDS-I) sessions.

DESIGN

This was a cluster randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The study took place in 21 primary care physical therapy units ("clusters") of the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS).

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were 461 people with subacute and chronic low back pain (LBP).

INTERVENTION

Clusters were randomized into 3 groups. All participants received medical treatment and a 15-minute group education session on active management. Additional interventions were as follows: control (fifteen 40-minute sessions of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, microwave treatment, and standardized exercises), GDS-G (eleven 50-minute group GDS sessions), and GDS-I (the same 11 sessions plus four 50-minute individualized GDS sessions).

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes at baseline and 2, 6, and 12 months later were LBP and pain referred down the leg (separate pain intensity numeric rating scales) and disability (Roland-Morris Questionnaire [RMQ]). Secondary outcomes were use of medication and self-reported health (mental and physical component summaries of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-12]). Separate linear mixed models for LBP, pain referred down the leg, and disability were developed to adjust for potential confounders. Randomization, outcome assessment, and data analyses were masked.

RESULTS

At 12 months, disability improved 0.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]=-0.4, 1.8) RMQ point in the control group, 1.5 (95% CI=0.4, 2.7) RMQ points in the GDS-I group, and 2.2 (95% CI=1.2, 3.2) RMQ points in the GDS-G group. There were no differences in pain.

LIMITATIONS

The amount of exercise was smaller in the control group, and GDS-I sessions were provided by junior physical therapists.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement in disability was slightly higher with group GDS sessions than with the program routinely used in clusters within the SNHS. Adding individualized GDS sessions eliminated this advantage. Further studies should compare the GDS with other types of exercise.

An update of stabilisation exercises for low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is a large and costly problem. It has a lifetime prevalence of 80% and results in high levels of healthcare cost. It is a major cause for long term sickness amongst the workforce and is associated with high levels of fear avoidance and kinesiophobia. Stabilisation (or ‘core stability’) exercises have been suggested to reduce symptoms of pain and disability and form an effective treatment. Despite it being the most commonly used form of physiotherapy treatment within the UK there is a lack of positive evidence to support its use. The aims of this systematic review update is to investigate the effectiveness of stabilisation exercises for the treatment of NSLBP, and compare any effectiveness to other forms of exercise.

Methods

A systematic review published in 2008 was updated with a search of PubMed, CINAHL, AMED, Pedro and The Cochrane Library, October 2006 to October 2013. Two authors independently selected studies, and two authors independently extracted the data. Methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale. Meta-analysis was carried out when appropriate.

Results

29 studies were included: 22 studies (n = 2,258) provided post treatment effect on pain and 24 studies (n = 2,359) provided post treatment effect on disability. Pain and disability scores were transformed to a 0 to 100 scale. Meta-analysis showed significant benefit for stabilisation exercises versus any alternative treatment or control for long term pain and disability with mean difference of -6.39 (95% CI -10.14 to -2.65) and -3.92 (95% CI -7.25 to -0.59) respectively. The difference between groups was clinically insignificant. When compared with alternative forms of exercise, there was no statistical or clinically significant difference. Mean difference for pain was -3.06 (95% CI -6.74 to 0.63) and disability -1.89 (95% CI -5.10 to 1.33).

Conclusion

There is strong evidence stabilisation exercises are not more effective than any other form of active exercise in the long term. The low levels of heterogeneity and large number of high methodological quality of available studies, at long term follow-up, strengthen our current findings, and further research is unlikely to considerably alter this conclusion.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-416) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects of proprioceptive exercises on pain and function in chronic neck- and low back pain rehabilitation: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Proprioceptive training (PrT) is popularly applied as preventive or rehabilitative exercise method in various sports and rehabilitation settings. Its effect on pain and function is only poorly evaluated. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise and analyse the existing data on the effects of PrT on pain alleviation and functional restoration in patients with chronic (≥ 3 months) neck- or back pain.

METHODS

Relevant electronic databases were searched from their respective inception to February 2014. Randomised controlled trials comparing PrT with conventional therapies or inactive controls in patients with neck- or low back pain were included. Two review authors independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias (RoB). Data extraction was performed by the first author and crosschecked by a second author. Quality of findings was assessed and rated according to GRADE guidelines. Pain and functional status outcomes were extracted and synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively.

RESULTS

In total, 18 studies involving 1380 subjects described interventions related to PrT (years 1994-2013). 6 studies focussed on neck-, 12 on low back pain. Three main directions of PrT were identified: Discriminatory perceptive exercises with somatosensory stimuli to the back (pPrT, n=2), multimodal exercises on labile surfaces (mPrT, n=13), or joint repositioning exercise with head-eye coordination (rPrT, n=3). Comparators entailed usual care, home based training, educational therapy, strengthening, stretching and endurance training, or inactive controls. Quality of studies was low and RoB was deemed moderate to high with a high prevalence of unclear sequence generation and group allocation (>60%). Low quality evidence suggests PrT may be more effective than not intervening at all. Low quality evidence suggests that PrT is no more effective than conventional physiotherapy. Low quality evidence suggests PrT is inferior to educational and behavioural approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few relevant good quality studies on proprioceptive exercises. A descriptive summary of the evidence suggests that there is no consistent benefit in adding PrT to neck- and low back pain rehabilitation and functional restoration.

Variables associated with level of disability in working individuals with nonacute low back pain: a cross-sectional investigation

STUDY DESIGN

Single-site, exploratory, cross-sectional design.

OBJECTIVE

To identify variables associated with disability related to low back pain (LBP), as measured by the modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (mOSW), in a sample of working adults with nonacute LBP.

BACKGROUND

Compared to acute LBP, there is little information available in the literature to identify variables associated with LBP-related disability in working individuals with stage 2 and stage 3 LBP.

METHODS

Data analyzed were from working individuals with nonacute LBP (n = 235). The response variable was dichotomized by mOSW score (less than 20 or 20 or greater), and the regressor variables included 27 self-report, sociodemographic, impairment-based, and kinematic measures used to assess individuals with LBP. Logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with mOSW.

RESULTS

One hundred eleven subjects had a mOSW score of 20 or greater, and 124 subjects had a mOSW score of less than 20. Logistic regression analysis identified 4 variables associated with LBP-related disability (mOSW): duration of LBP (P = .006), numeric pain rating (P<.0001), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire physical activity subscale (P = .0007), and limits of stability movement velocity in the forward direction (P = .02). The best model had an R2(u) of 0.25.

CONCLUSION

The odds of LBP-related disability (mOSW) in this sample of nonacute working individuals were found to increase with longer duration of LBP, higher numeric pain rating scores, higher Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire physical activity subscale scores, and slower limits of stability movement velocity in the forward direction. The identification of limits of stability movement velocity is a novel finding that may support a link between sensorimotor balance deficits and disability in working individuals with nonacute LBP.

Patient age is related to the types of physical therapy interventions provided for chronic low back pain: an observational study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a longitudinal cohort of patients treated for chronic low back pain (CLBP).

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patient age is associated with types of physical therapy interventions received for CLBP.

BACKGROUND

Advancing age is associated with less positive treatment outcomes in patients with CLBP. If patient age influences a therapist's choice of interventions, it may partially explain the difference in treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Data were examined in a sample of 7392 patients (62% women, 38% men; mean ± SD age, 56.7 ± 16.5 years) with CLBP. We used a generalized estimating equation to examine the probability of each subject receiving each of the individual intervention categories in the presence of the other intervention categories.

RESULTS

A significant interaction between intervention category and age existed after controlling for gender, duration of symptoms, comorbidities, payer source, and functional status at initial intake (χ(2) = 130.27, df = 8, P<.0001). The changes in probability of receiving an intervention category averaged 10% as patient age increased. The probability of receiving exercise or task-specific training did not change with advancing age. The probability of receiving postural exercises, pain modalities, joint mobility techniques, ice, or McKenzie exercises decreased with advancing age. The probability of receiving augmented soft tissue mobilization and balance/mobility training increased as age increased.

CONCLUSION

The impact of age on physical therapist treatment choices varies depending on the type of intervention. Other variables in addition to age may have an impact on treatment choice. Further research is needed to determine how therapists incorporate age into their clinical decision making.