Late effects of early hunger and mother-litter separation on learning and memory in male rats.

V. Nováková,J. Šterc

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(73)90363-6

1973-08-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Chloé Quentin,Reza Bagheri,Ukadike C. Ugbolue,Emmanuel Coudeyre,Carole Pélissier,Alexis Descatha,Thibault Menini,Jean-Baptiste Bouillon-Minois,Frédéric Dutheil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168430

IF: 4.614

2021-08-10

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract: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.

public, environmental & occupational health,environmental sciences
Exercise intervention for patients with chronic low back pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Ying Li,Lei Yan,Lingyu Hou,Xiaoya Zhang,Hanping Zhao,Chengkun Yan,Xianhuang Li,Yuanhe Li,Xiaoan Chen,Xiaorong Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1155225

IF: 5.2

2023-11-17

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract: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.

public, environmental & occupational health
Unveiling the Efficacy of Physiotherapy Strategies in Alleviating Low Back Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Interventions and Outcomes

Priya Tikhile,Deepali S Patil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.56013

2024-03-12

Cureus

Abstract:Low back pain (LBP) presents a significant burden globally, affecting individuals of all ages, but it is more common in adults aged 30-60 years old and demographics including race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Physiotherapy interventions are commonly employed to manage LBP due to their non-invasive nature and potential for addressing underlying biomechanical dysfunctions. This comprehensive review aims to evaluate the efficacy of various physiotherapy strategies in alleviating LBP, considering a range of interventions and their associated outcomes. Through a thorough examination of existing literature from January 2017 to October 2023, this review synthesises evidence on the effectiveness of interventions such as manual therapy, exercise therapy, electrotherapy modalities, and education-based approaches. The review also scrutinizes the comparative effectiveness of different physiotherapy modalities and their suitability for specific patient populations, considering factors such as chronicity, severity, and underlying pathology. By critically evaluating the evidence base, this review aims to provide insights into the most effective physiotherapy strategies for alleviating LBP, chronic low back pain (CLBP) and chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) and guiding clinical practice toward evidence-based interventions. The Visual Analogue Scale and Numerical Pain Rating Scale for pain, Oswestry Disability Index and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for disability, Modified-Modified Schober Test for measurement of lumbar flexion and extension and static and dynamic balance for assessing postural stability and balance were among the measures used to foresee enhancements in pain, disability, balance, and LBP symptoms. Twenty-one studies that fulfilled the criteria for inclusion (aged 20 to 50 years and of both genders) were added to the review. Exercises for core stability, strengthening, orthosis (a medical device designed to support, align, stabilise, or correct musculoskeletal structures and functions), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, heat massage therapy, interferential current (a form of electrical stimulation used in physical therapy), Mulligan's mobilization (a manual therapy technique), low-level laser therapy, and McGill stabilization exercises (core exercises) were among the therapeutic strategies. The McKenzie method (back exercises), ultrasound, sensory-motor training, Swiss ball exercises, and other techniques reduced pain and enhanced strength, balance, and ease of daily activities. Every therapeutic approach has an impact on recovery rates ranging from minimal to maximal. Conventional physical therapy is less effective than most recent advanced techniques like mobilisation and exercises. In summary, the integration of manual techniques, orthoses and alternative intervention strategies with conservative therapeutic approaches can effectively alleviate pain, enhance function and yield better overall outcomes. To get more information about the optimal dosage, therapeutic modalities and long-term effects of these treatments, more admirable research is required. This paper aims to expand the scientific discourse by exploring non-traditional physiotherapy interventions and assessing their efficacy in light of the rigorous standards set forth by the latest WHO guidelines.
Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.

Jill A Hayden,Jenna Ellis,Rachel Ogilvie,Antti Malmivaara,Maurits W van Tulder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009790.pub2

IF: 8.4

2021-09-29

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract: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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 conserva -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis

Patrick J Owen,Clint T Miller,Niamh L Mundell,Simone J J M Verswijveren,Scott D Tagliaferri,Helena Brisby,Steven J Bowe,Daniel L Belavy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100886

IF: 18.4793

2019-10-30

British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract: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.

sport sciences
Comparative effectiveness of exercise interventions for low back pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 41 randomised controlled trials

Simiao Tian,Dewei Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32650-3

IF: 202.731

2018-10-01

The Lancet

Abstract:BackgroundLow back pain is a major health concern in China because of its high prevalence among the general population. Exercise is universally recommended as a core treatment to reduce the symptoms, but the relative efficacy of different types of exercise have not been evaluated, and the most appropriate exercise intervention is still unknown. We therefore aimed to compare and rank the effectiveness of different exercise interventions in relieving pain and improving function in patients with low back pain using a network meta-analysis.MethodsWe carried out a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and the reference lists of relevant articles for randomised controlled trials (RCT) published up to May 15, 2018. We included RCT studies comparing exercise interventions with each other or with controls (usual care or no exercise), for adults with low back pain. We excluded non-RCT studies and studies that did not investigate exercise interventions. The primary outcomes were improvement in pain intensity (as measured by the numerical rating scale, the visual analogue scale, or others) and disability (as measured by the Morris disability index, the Oswestry disability index, or others). We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI to measure effect sizes, and did pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis to combine both direct (within trial) and indirect (between trial) evidence of exercise effectiveness. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework.FindingsWe identified 5167 relevant studies, and of these we included 41 trials involving 3050 participants. 22 types of exercise interventions for low back pain published until May 15, 2018 were included. In terms of pain relief, aerobic, extension, stabilisation, strengthening, and stretching exercise (alone, not in combination) were significantly more effective than usual exercise, with SMD ranging between −2.19 (95% CI −4·25 to −0·13, extension exercise) and −0·71 (–1·37 to −0·05, stretching exercise). Aerobic strengthening, aerobic strengthening plus stretching, aquatic aerobics and any combination of stabilisation, strengthening, and stretching exercise were also more efficacious compared with usual exercise. When all interventions were considered, stabilisation plus strengthening exercise (SMD −4·27, 95% CI −6·03 to −2·51; P-score, 96% likelihood) was ranked the most effective for pain relief, followed by flexion (–2·38, −4·81 to 0·05; 78%), extension (–2·19, −4·25 to −0·13; 76%), and aquatic aerobic exercise (–1·76, −2·88 to −0·63; 72%). Regarding disability, only aerobic (–0·68, −1·22 to −0·14), stabilisation (–1·15, −2·17 to −0·12), aerobic strengthening (–1·06, −2·09 to −0·03), aquatic aerobic (–1·21, −2·32 to −0·09), stabilisation plus strengthening (–2·88, −4·61 to −1·14), strengthening plus stretching (–1·56, −2·88 to −0·24), and strengthening plus stretching plus stabilisation exercises (–1·66, −2·45 to −0·88) were more efficacious than usual exercise. Of all of the studied interventions, a combined intervention of stabilisation and strengthening exercise showed the greatest effect on disability, with a P-score of 92%. The strength of evidence according to the GRADE assessment was low to moderate.InterpretationAn approach combining stabilisation and strengthening exercises is likely to be most effective in the management of low back pain, but most individual exercise interventions alone and various combinations of interventions also had significant beneficial effects compared with usual exercise. These results should serve evidence-based practice and guide patients and caregivers on the choice of intervention.FundingNational Natural Science Foundation of China (81371942), and Doctoral Scientific Research Foundation of Liaoning Province, China (201601304).
How to tackle non-specific low back pain among adult patients? A systematic review with a meta-analysis to compare four interventions

Yawen Jiang,Yaping Xu,Xiangrui Kong,En Zhao,Chunxia Ma,Yihang Lv,Hongqi Xu,He Sun,Xiaojuan Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-04392-2

IF: 2.6

2024-01-03

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Abstract:Abstract Objective To tackle non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) among patients and find the most effective solution and to quantitatively synthesize the overall effect of motor control training (MCT) compared with Pilates, McKenzie method, and physical therapy (PT) in pain and physical function. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of four types of intervention (MCT, Pilates, McKenzie method, and PT) for LBP were collected by searching PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Scopus databases from the establishment of the database to September 30, 2023. The risk of bias was evaluated for included studies using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0). Taking pain and physical function in the experimental and control groups as outcome indicators, subgroup analysis was performed according to the intervention method to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results A total of 25 RCTs, including 1253 patients, were included. Meta-analysis showed that MCT effectively relieved pain [SMD = −0.65, 95% CI (− 1.00, − 0.29), p < 0.01] and improved physical function [SMD = −0.76, 95% CI (− 1.22, − 0.31), p < 0.01] comparing with other 3 types of intervention. Subgroup analysis suggested that MCT could alleviate pain [SMD = −0.92, 95% CI (− 1.34, − 0.50), p < 0.01] and improve physical function [SMD = −1.15, 95% CI (− 1.72, − 0.57), p < 0.01] compared with PT, but it had no statistical significance compared with Pilates [pain: SMD = 0.13, 95% CI (− 0.56, 0.83), p = 0.71; physical function: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI (− 0.72, 0.91), p = 0.81] and the McKenzie method [pain: SMD = −0.03, 95% CI (− 0.75, 0.68), p = 0.93; physical function: SMD = −0.03, 95% CI (− 1.00, 0.94), p = 0.95]. Conclusions MCT can effectively relieve pain and improve physical function in patients with NSLBP. It is more effective compared with PT for LBP, while no differences were detected between MCT and Pilates, as well as McKenzie method. Therefore, MCT, Pilates, and the McKenzie method should be encouraged as exercise interventions for NSLBP rehabilitation.

orthopedics
The best exercise modality and dose for reducing pain in adults with low back pain: A systematic review with model-based Bayesian network meta-analysis

Zhide Liang,Shudong Tian,Chuanzhi Wang,Meng Zhang,Hengzhi Guo,Yingdanni Yu,Xianliang Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2024.12153

2024-03-08

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To quantify the dose-response relationship between overall and specific exercise modalities and pain, in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Systematic Review with Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis (NMA). LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases from inception to June 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions in adults with non-specific chronic LBP and at least one pain outcome reported at the main trial endpoint. DATA SYNTHESIS: A random effects NMA was conducted. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0, and used the GRADE approach to judge the certainty of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: Eighty-two trials were included (n=5,033 participants). We found a nonlinear dose-response relationship between total exercise and pain in patients with non-specific chronic LBP. The maximum significant response was observed at 920 METs-min (standardized mean difference = -1.74; 95% credible intervals: [-2.43, -1.04]). The minimum clinically-important difference (MCID) for achieving meaningful pain improvement was 520 METs-min per week. The dose to achieve MCID varied by type of exercise; Pilates was the most effective. The certainty of the evidence was very low to moderate for all outcomes. CONCLUSION: The dose-response relationship of different exercise modalities to improve pain in patients with non-specific chronic LBP had a U-shaped trajectory and low to moderate certainty evidence. The clinical effect was most pronounced with Pilates exercise.

rehabilitation,orthopedics,sport sciences
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.

Rubén Fernández-Rodríguez,Celia Álvarez-Bueno,Iván Cavero-Redondo,Ana Torres-Costoso,Diana P Pozuelo-Carrascosa,Sara Reina-Gutiérrez,Carlos Pascual-Morena,Vicente Martínez-Vizcaíno

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2022.10671

2022-06-20

Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

Abstract:To determine which type of exercise is best for reducing pain and disability in adults with chronic low back pain (LBP). Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Six electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to July 2021. RCTs testing the effects of exercise on reducing self-perceived pain or disability in adults (18-65 years) with chronic LBP. We followed the PRISMA-NMA statement when reporting our NMA. A frequentist NMA was conducted. The probability of each intervention being the most effective was conducted according to SUCRA values. 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 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%). Although most exercise interventions had benefits for managing pain and disability in chronic LBP, the most beneficial programmes were those that included: (i) at least 1-2 sessions/week of Pilates or strength exercises; (ii) sessions of <60 min of core-based, strength or mind-body exercises; and, (iii) training programs from 3 to 9 weeks of Pilates and core-based exercises.

rehabilitation,orthopedics,sport sciences
Exercise therapy for treatment of acute non-specific low back pain: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Wilhelmina IJzelenberg,Teddy Oosterhuis,Jill A Hayden,Bart W Koes,Maurits W van Tulder,Sidney M Rubinstein,Annemarie de Zoete

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.02.732

IF: 4.06

2024-03-21

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Abstract:Objective To assess the effectiveness of exercise for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) versus our main comparisons: 1) sham treatment, and 2) no treatment at short-term (main follow-up time). Data Sources and Study Selection A comprehensive search up till November 2021 was conducted in numerous databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of exercise in adults with acute LBP (< 6 weeks). Studies examining LBP with a specific aetiology were excluded. The primary outcomes were back pain, back-specific functional status and recovery. Data Extraction Two review authors independently conducted the study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Data Synthesis We identified 23 RCTs (2674 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence that exercise therapy compared with sham/placebo treatment has no clinically relevant effect on pain (mean difference (MD) −0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) −5.79 to 4.19; 1 study, 299 participants) and on functional status (MD 2.00, 95% CI −2.20 to 6.20; 1 study, 299 participants) in the short term. There is very low-quality evidence which suggests no difference in effect on pain and functional status for exercise vs. no treatment (2 studies; n=157, not pooled due to heterogeneity) at short-term follow-up. Similar results were found for the other follow-up moments. The certainty of the evidence was downgraded because many RCTs had a high risk of bias, were small in size and/or there was substantial heterogeneity. Conclusion Exercise therapy compared to sham/placebo and no treatment may have no clinically relevant effect on pain or functional status in the short term in people with acute non-specific LBP, but the evidence is very uncertain. Owing to insufficient reporting of adverse events, we were unable to reach any conclusions on the safety or harms related to exercise therapy.

rehabilitation,sport sciences
Clinical efficacy of acupuncture therapy combined with core muscle exercises in treating patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Xia Li,Guohua Zhai,Hongkai Zhang,Xuefei Li,Mingqi Wu,Sidi Zhang,Jiawen Cui,Zhanying Tang,Zhijun Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1372748

IF: 3.9

2024-04-04

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Introduction This meta-analysis aimed to determine the clinical efficacy of acupuncture combined with core muscle exercises on pain and functional status in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Methods This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-analysis criteria for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Randomized controlled trials published till November 2023 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and Wanfang databases. The search strategy was related to disease type, intervention, and control measures and was structured around the search terms “low back pain,” “acupuncture therapy,” and “exercise.” Two reviewers applied inclusion and exclusion criteria. Sensitivity and fixed effects analyses were performed to determine the primary outcomes. Results We included 11 randomized controlled trials ( n = 727) on acupuncture combined with core muscle exercises in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Compared with controls, clinical efficacy was significant, with improvements in pain scores (visual analog pain scale and numerical rating scale) and Oswestry Disability Index in the intervention group. Discussion Acupuncture therapy combined with core muscle exercises improved pain and functional status in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain, with favorable clinical outcomes compared with single-core muscle training. Multicenter large-sample trials are required to obtain more reliable conclusions.

medicine, general & internal
An Analysis of the Effectiveness of Strengthening or Stretching Exercises in Patients Performing Prolonged Sedentary Work with Non-Specific Lower Back Pain

Ewa Szczepaniak-Kucharska

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0054.7266

2024-06-30

Abstract:Background: Non-specific LBP refers to back pain which arises from the spine, intervertebral discs and surrounding soft tissues in the absence of pathologic lesions. Most cases of non-specific LBP are not the result of a single injury from a high load, but the result of repetitive, cumulative micro-injuries. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of strengthening, stretching and mixed exercises in patients with non-specific LBP and their impact on pain intensity. Material and methods: We analysed 90 patients with non-specific LBP who performed prolonged sedentary work. Patients were qualified following history-taking, a physical examination and radiological evaluation if no pathology had been revealed on examination or on the available diagnostic imaging scans. The participants were randomly divided into 3 groups of 30 individuals each. The patients in each group performed one type of exercise (strengthening, stretching, mixed) for a period of 3 months. Both before starting and on completion of the exercise period, the patients were assessed with an original questionnaire as well as the Rolland-Morris, Oswestry and SF-12 scoring systems. Results: Strengthening exercises were the most effective in reducing pain; on completion of the exercise period, pain assessed with the NRS scale was 2 points in the strengthening exercise group, 3 points, in the mixed group, and 4 points in the stretching group. The SF-12 questionnaire showed an improvement in the patients' health (increase in "excellent" and "very good" scores from 7% to 60%). According to the Oswestry disability questionnaire, strengthening exercises were the most effective (mean disability score of 4). Conclusions: 1. The use of strengthening exercises in patients with non-specific LBP most effectively improves function and reduces back pain. 2. The use of stretching and mixed exercises in patients with non-specific LBP improves function and reduces back pain, but to a lesser extent than strengthening exercises.
Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Review of the Evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

Roger Chou,Laurie Hoyt Huffman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00007

IF: 39.2

2007-10-02

Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Many nonpharmacologic therapies are available for treatment of low back pain.PURPOSE: To assess benefits and harms of acupuncture, back schools, psychological therapies, exercise therapy, functional restoration, interdisciplinary therapy, massage, physical therapies (interferential therapy, low-level laser therapy, lumbar supports, shortwave diathermy, superficial heat, traction, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasonography), spinal manipulation, and yoga for acute or chronic low back pain (with or without leg pain).DATA SOURCES: English-language studies were identified through searches of MEDLINE (through November 2006) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2006, Issue 4). These electronic searches were supplemented by hand searching of reference lists and additional citations suggested by experts.STUDY SELECTION: Systematic reviews and randomized trials of 1 or more of the preceding therapies for acute or chronic low back pain (with or without leg pain) that reported pain outcomes, back-specific function, general health status, work disability, or patient satisfaction.DATA EXTRACTION: We abstracted information about study design, population characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and adverse events. To grade methodological quality, we used the Oxman criteria for systematic reviews and the Cochrane Back Review Group criteria for individual trials.DATA SYNTHESIS: We found good evidence that cognitive-behavioral therapy, exercise, spinal manipulation, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation are all moderately effective for chronic or subacute (>4 weeks' duration) low back pain. Benefits over placebo, sham therapy, or no treatment averaged 10 to 20 points on a 100-point visual analogue pain scale, 2 to 4 points on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, or a standardized mean difference of 0.5 to 0.8. We found fair evidence that acupuncture, massage, yoga (Viniyoga), and functional restoration are also effective for chronic low back pain. For acute low back pain (<4 weeks' duration), the only nonpharmacologic therapies with evidence of efficacy are superficial heat (good evidence for moderate benefits) and spinal manipulation (fair evidence for small to moderate benefits). Although serious harms seemed to be rare, data on harms were poorly reported. No trials addressed optimal sequencing of therapies, and methods for tailoring therapy to individual patients are still in early stages of development. Evidence is insufficient to evaluate the efficacy of therapies for sciatica.LIMITATIONS: Our primary source of data was systematic reviews. We included non-English-language trials only if they were included in English-language systematic reviews.CONCLUSIONS: Therapies with good evidence of moderate efficacy for chronic or subacute low back pain are cognitive-behavioral therapy, exercise, spinal manipulation, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation. For acute low back pain, the only therapy with good evidence of efficacy is superficial heat.

medicine, general & internal
Water-Based Exercise in Patients With Nonspecific Chronic Low-Back Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Carlos Babiloni-Lopez,Nicole Fritz,Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo,Juan C. Colado

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000004635

2024-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Babiloni-Lopez, C, Fritz, N, Ramirez-Campillo, R, and Colado, JC. Water-based exercise in patients with nonspecific chronic low-back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 38(1): 206–219, 2024—This study aimed to systematically review and synthesize evidence (i.e., active [land-based training] and nonactive controls [e.g., receiving usual care]) regarding the effects of water-based training on patients with nonspecific chronic low-back pain (NSCLBP). Web of Science (WOS), PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, EBSCO (SPORTDiscus; CINAHL), and PEDro were searched, with no date restrictions, until October 2021. The included studies satisfied the following criteria: (a) NSCLBP (≥12 weeks) patients, (b) water-based intervention, (c) control group (land-based trained; nonactive group), and (d) outcomes related to pain, disability, quality of life, or flexibility. The main outcome analyzed in the meta-analysis was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included disability, body mass index, and flexibility. The random-effects model was used, and effect size (ES) values are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The impact of heterogeneity was assessed ( I 2 statistic), with values of 75% representing low, moderate, and high levels, respectively. Alpha was set at p < 0.05. In conclusion, 15 studies ( n = 524) were meta-analyzed. After intervention, pain intensity was reduced compared with nonactive controls (ES = −3.61; p < 0.001) and a similar reduction was noted when compared with land-based trained group (ES = −0.14; p = 0.359). Greater decrease in disability (ES = 2.15; p < 0.001) and greater increase in sit-and-reach (i.e., flexibility; ES = −2.44; p < 0.001) were noted after intervention compared with the nonactive group. In conclusion, water-based exercise therapy reduces pain intensity, disability, and increases flexibility in NSCLBP compared with nonactive subjects and was equally effective compared with land-based exercise to reduce pain. Favorable effects may be expected at ≤8 weeks. However, due to several methodological issues (e.g., high heterogeneity), for the improvement of most outcomes, we are unable to provide other than a weak recommendation in favor of intervention compared with control treatment.

sport sciences
Low Back Exercises: Evidence for Improving Exercise Regimens

Stuart M McGill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/78.7.754

1998-07-01

Physical Therapy

Abstract:Despite the wide variety of exercises that are prescribed for the low back, the scientific foundation to justify their choice is not as complete as one may think, or expect. Thus, the clinician must often call upon "clinical opinion" when selecting exercise. Given that low back tissues may need stressing to enhance their health but too much loading can be detrimental, choosing the optimal exercise requires judgment based on clinical experience and scientific evidence. To assist in developing better exercise programs, this review documents some recent biomechanical evidence from my laboratory and from laboratories of other researchers that has been reported in various publications in an attempt to update clinicians on issues of low back exercise. Among the issues examined are mechanisms of injury; the relative importance of "strength" (ie, maximum force a muscle can produce during a single exertion to create joint torque), "flexibility," and "endurance"; and training to enhance stability. Finally, some specific exercises are described that have been shown to challenge muscle and enhance performance but that are performed in such a way as to minimize loading of the spine to reduce the risk of injury exacerbation. These exercises form a basic program for rehabilitation and maintenance of low back health.

English Else
Tolerability and Muscle Activity of Core Muscle Exercises in Chronic Low-back Pain

Joaquín Calatayud,Adrian Escriche-Escuder,Carlos Cruz-Montecinos,Lars L. Andersen,Sofía Pérez-Alenda,Ramón Aiguadé,José Casaña,Calatayud,Escriche-Escuder,Cruz-Montecinos,Andersen,Pérez-Alenda,Aiguadé,Casaña

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193509

IF: 4.614

2019-09-20

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract:Most of the studies evaluating core muscle activity during exercises have been conducted with healthy participants. The objective of this study was to compare core muscle activity and tolerability of a variety of dynamic and isometric exercises in patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). 13 outpatients (average age 52 years; all with standing or walking work in their current or latest job) performed 3 consecutive repetitions at 15-repetition maximum during different exercises in random order. Surface electromyography was recorded for the rectus abdominis; external oblique and lumbar erector spinae. Patients rated tolerability of each exercise on a 5-point scale. The front plank with brace; front plank and modified curl-up can be considered the most effective exercises in activating the rectus abdominis; with a median normalized EMG (nEMG) value of 48% (34–61%), 46% (26–61%) and 50% (28–65%), respectively. The front plank with brace can be considered the most effective exercise in activating the external oblique; with a nEMG of 77% (60–97%). The squat and bird-dog exercises are especially effective in activing the lumbar erector spinae; with nEMG of 40% (24–87%) and 29% (27–46%), respectively. All the exercises were well tolerated; except for the lateral plank that was mostly non-tolerated. In conclusion; the present study provides a variety of dynamic and isometric exercises; where muscle activity values and tolerability can be used as guide to design evidence-based exercise programs for outpatients with NSCLBP.

public, environmental & occupational health,environmental sciences
Exercise treatment effect modifiers in persistent low back pain: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 3514 participants from 27 randomised controlled trials

Jill A Hayden,Maria N Wilson,Samuel Stewart,Jennifer L Cartwright,Andrea O Smith,Richard D Riley,Maurits van Tulder,Tom Bendix,Francesca Cecchi,Leonardo O P Costa,Ninna Dufour,Manuela L Ferreira,Nadine E Foster,Maruti R Gudavalli,Jan Hartvigsen,Pieter Helmhout,Jan Kool,George A Koumantakis,Francisco M Kovacs,Tiina Kuukkanen,Audrey Long,Luciana G Macedo,Luciana A C Machado,Chris G Maher,Wolf Mehling,Giovanni Morone,Tom Peterson,Eva Rasmussen-Barr,Cormac G Ryan,Tuulikki Sjögren,Rob Smeets,J Bart Staal,Monica Unsgaard-Tøndel,Henry Wajswelner,Ella W Yeung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-101205

IF: 18.4793

2019-11-28

British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract:Background Low back pain is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Exercise therapy is widely recommended to treat persistent non-specific low back pain. While evidence suggests exercise is, on average, moderately effective, there remains uncertainty about which individuals might benefit the most from exercise. Methods In parallel with a Cochrane review update, we requested individual participant data (IPD) from high-quality randomised clinical trials of adults with our two primary outcomes of interest, pain and functional limitations, and calculated global recovery. We compiled a master data set including baseline participant characteristics, exercise and comparison characteristics, and outcomes at short-term, moderate-term and long-term follow-up. We conducted descriptive analyses and one-stage IPD meta-analysis using multilevel mixed-effects regression of the overall treatment effect and prespecified potential treatment effect modifiers. Results We received IPD for 27 trials (3514 participants). For studies included in this analysis, compared with no treatment/usual care, exercise therapy on average reduced pain (mean effect/100 (95% CI) −10.7 (−14.1 to –7.4)), a result compatible with a clinically important 20% smallest worthwhile effect. Exercise therapy reduced functional limitations with a clinically important 23% improvement (mean effect/100 (95% CI) −10.2 (−13.2 to –7.3)) at short-term follow-up. Not having heavy physical demands at work and medication use for low back pain were potential treatment effect modifiers—these were associated with superior exercise outcomes relative to non-exercise comparisons. Lower body mass index was also associated with better outcomes in exercise compared with no treatment/usual care. This study was limited by inconsistent availability and measurement of participant characteristics. Conclusions This study provides potentially useful information to help treat patients and design future studies of exercise interventions that are better matched to specific subgroups. Protocol publication https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-64

sport sciences
Hormonal changes of adolescence.

E. Reiter,A. Root

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-7125(16)31930-7

1975-11-01

Abstract:
Effects of exercise therapy on disability, mobility, and quality of life in the elderly with chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Shi-Kun Zhang,Mei-Ling Gu,Ting Zhang,Hong Xu,Su-Jie Mao,Wen-Sheng Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-03988-y

2023-07-19

Abstract:Background: Exercise is an effective treatment in chronic low back pain (CLBP), but there are few studies on CLBP in the elderly, and the intervention effect is controversial. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different exercises therapy on CLBP, dysfunction, quality of life, and mobility in the elderly. Methods: We searched Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, EMBASE, and PubMed from the database inception till December 31, 2022. The publication languages were Chinese and English. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise intervention in the elderly (≥ 60 years) with CLBP were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and evaluated them using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials 2 (RoB2). The pooled effect sizes on different aspects of outcome measures were calculated. Results: Sixteen articles (18 RCTs) were included, comprising a total of 989 participants. The quality of included studies was relatively high. Meta-analysis results indicated that exercise therapy could improve visual analog scale (VAS) (WMD = - 1.75, 95% CI - 2.59, - 0.92, p < 0.05), Oswestry disability index (ODI) (WMD = - 9.42, 95% CI - 15.04, - 3.79, p < 0,005), short-form 36-item health survey physical composite summary (SF-36PCS) (WMD = 7.07, 95% CI 1.01, 13.14, p < 0.05), short-form 36-item health survey mental composite summary (SF-36MCS) (WMD = 7.88, 95% CI 0.09, 15.67, p < 0.05), and timed up and go test (TUG) (WMD = - 0.92, 95% CI - 2.22, 0.38, p < 0.005). Conclusion: Exercise therapy effectively improved VAS, ODI, and SF-36 indexes in the elderly. Based on the subgroup, when designing the exercise therapy regimen, aerobics, strength, and mind-body exercise (≥ 12 weeks, ≥ 3 times/week, ≥ 60 min) should be considered carefully, to ensure the safety and effectiveness for the rehabilitation of CLBP patients. More high-quality trials are needed in future to confirm the effect of exercise on SF-36 and TUG indexes.
Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

Roger Chou,Richard Deyo,Janna Friedly,Andrea Skelly,Robin Hashimoto,Melissa Weimer,Rochelle Fu,Tracy Dana,Paul Kraegel,Jessica Griffin,Sara Grusing,Erika D Brodt,Erika D. Brodt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/m16-2459

IF: 39.2

2017-02-14

Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: A 2007 American College of Physicians guideline addressed nonpharmacologic treatment options for low back pain. New evidence is now available.PURPOSE: To systematically review the current evidence on nonpharmacologic therapies for acute or chronic nonradicular or radicular low back pain.DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (January 2008 through February 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and reference lists.STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials of 9 nonpharmacologic options versus sham treatment, wait list, or usual care, or of 1 nonpharmacologic option versus another.DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, and a second checked abstractions for accuracy; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality.DATA SYNTHESIS: The number of trials evaluating nonpharmacologic therapies ranged from 2 (tai chi) to 121 (exercise). New evidence indicates that tai chi (strength of evidence [SOE], low) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (SOE, moderate) are effective for chronic low back pain and strengthens previous findings regarding the effectiveness of yoga (SOE, moderate). Evidence continues to support the effectiveness of exercise, psychological therapies, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, spinal manipulation, massage, and acupuncture for chronic low back pain (SOE, low to moderate). Limited evidence shows that acupuncture is modestly effective for acute low back pain (SOE, low). The magnitude of pain benefits was small to moderate and generally short term; effects on function generally were smaller than effects on pain.LIMITATION: Qualitatively synthesized new trials with prior meta-analyses, restricted to English-language studies; heterogeneity in treatment techniques; and inability to exclude placebo effects.CONCLUSION: Several nonpharmacologic therapies for primarily chronic low back pain are associated with small to moderate, usually short-term effects on pain; findings include new evidence on mind-body interventions.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42014014735).

medicine, general & internal

Late effects of early hunger and mother-litter separation on learning and memory in male rats.

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

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

Unveiling the Efficacy of Physiotherapy Strategies in Alleviating Low Back Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Interventions and Outcomes

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.

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

Comparative effectiveness of exercise interventions for low back pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 41 randomised controlled trials

How to tackle non-specific low back pain among adult patients? A systematic review with a meta-analysis to compare four interventions

The best exercise modality and dose for reducing pain in adults with low back pain: A systematic review with model-based Bayesian network meta-analysis

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.

Exercise therapy for treatment of acute non-specific low back pain: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Clinical efficacy of acupuncture therapy combined with core muscle exercises in treating patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

An Analysis of the Effectiveness of Strengthening or Stretching Exercises in Patients Performing Prolonged Sedentary Work with Non-Specific Lower Back Pain

Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Review of the Evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

Water-Based Exercise in Patients With Nonspecific Chronic Low-Back Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Low Back Exercises: Evidence for Improving Exercise Regimens

Tolerability and Muscle Activity of Core Muscle Exercises in Chronic Low-back Pain

Exercise treatment effect modifiers in persistent low back pain: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 3514 participants from 27 randomised controlled trials

Hormonal changes of adolescence.

Effects of exercise therapy on disability, mobility, and quality of life in the elderly with chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline