Exercise therapy for low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the cochrane collaboration back review group

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Exercise therapy is a widely used treatment for low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise therapy for low back pain with regard to pain intensity, functional status, overall improvement, and return to work. METHODS: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, PsycLIT, and reference lists of articles were searched. Randomized trials testing all types of exercise therapy for subjects with nonspecific low back pain with or without radiation into the legs were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Because trials were considered heterogeneous with regard to study populations, interventions, and outcomes, it was decided not to perform a meta-analysis, but to summarize the results using a rating system of four levels of evidence: strong, moderate, limited, or none. RESULTS: In this review, 39 trials were identified. There is strong evidence that exercise therapy is not more effective for acute low back pain than inactive or other active treatments with which it has been compared. There is conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with inactive treatments for chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was more effective than usual care by the general practitioner and just as effective as conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence summarized in this systematic review does not indicate that specific exercises are effective for the treatment of acute low back pain. Exercises may be helpful for patients with chronic low back pain to increase return to normal daily activities and work.     

The influence of intense exercise-based physical therapy program on back pain anticipated before and induced by physical activities.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Pain anticipated before and induced by physical activities has been shown to influence the physical performance of patients with chronic back pain. Limited data exist as to the influence of treatment on this component of pain. PURPOSE: This study attempted to determine if pain anticipated before and induced by physical activities was altered during an exercise-oriented physical therapy program for chronic back pain. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Subjects were recruited from three physical therapy sites with similar spine rehabilitation programs that used intense exercise delivered in a group format. During the recruitment period, 70 subjects with chronic low back pain and disability agreed to participate and complied with recommended treatments. The primary outcome measures were anticipated and induced pain as assessed by visual analog scales (VAS) during six tests of back flexibility and strength. Additional outcome measures included the performance levels of these six tests (trunk flexion, extension, straight leg raising, back strength, lifting from floor to waist and waist to shoulder height), global back and leg VAS and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire scores. METHODS: At evaluation for the spine rehabilitation programs, we recorded the anticipated and induced pain levels associated with the six tests of back function, the performance levels on each test and global pain and disability scores. Subjects then participated in the spine rehabilitation program that consisted of intense exercise delivered up to three times per week, for 2 hours over a period of 6 weeks. All outcome measures were reassessed at discharge. Pre- and posttreatment outcome scores were statistically compared using paired sample t tests and chi-squared test. Spearman correlation coefficients were used to compare anticipated and induced pain results with global back and leg pain VAS scores, Oswestry scores and physical performance levels for each physical test. RESULTS: Most measures of anticipated and induced pain improved between evaluation and discharge. Improvements were noted for global back pain (p<.001), leg pain (p=.001), disability (p<.001) and performance on each physical testing (p<.001) after treatment. Performances on all physical testing correlated with anticipated and induced pain for all tests at evaluation but only for measures of flexibility at discharge. Improvements in global pain and disability correlated with improvements in anticipated and induced pain with physical testing. CONCLUSION: Anticipated and induced pain with physical activities was lessened after physical therapy using exercise. Anticipated and induced pain with physical activities related to physical performance levels, global pain and disability ratings. These findings may help explain how exercise exerts a positive influence on chronic back pain and disability.     

A randomized clinical trial and subgroup analysis to compare flexion–distraction with active exercise for chronic low back pain

Many clinical trials on chiropractic management of low back pain have neglected to include specific forms of care. This study compared two well-defined treatment protocols. The objective was to compare the outcome of flexion–distraction (FD) procedures performed by chiropractors with an active trunk exercise protocol (ATEP) performed by physical therapists. A randomized clinical trial study design was used. Subjects, 18 years of age and older, with a primary complaint of low back pain (>3 months) were recruited. A 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for perceived pain, the Roland Morris (RM) Questionnaire for low back function, and the SF-36 for overall health status served as primary outcome measures. Subjects were randomly allocated to receive either FD or ATEP. The FD intervention consisted of the application of flexion and traction applied to specific regions in the low back, with the aid of a specially designed manipulation table. The ATEP intervention included stabilizing and flexibility exercises, the use of modalities, and cardiovascular training. A total of 235 subjects met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and signed the informed consent. Of these, 123 were randomly allocated to FD and 112 to the ATEP. Study patients perceived significantly less pain and better function after intervention, regardless of which group they were allocated to (P<0.01). Subjects randomly allocated to the flexion–distraction group had significantly greater relief from pain than those allocated to the exercise program (P=0.01). Subgroup analysis indicated that subjects categorized as chronic, with moderate to severe symptoms, improved most with the flexion–distraction protocol. Subjects categorized with recurrent pain and moderate to severe symptoms improved most with the exercise program. Patients with radiculopathy did significantly better with FD. There were no significant differences between groups on the Roland Morris and SF-36 outcome measures. Overall, flexion–distraction provided more pain relief than active exercise; however, these results varied based on stratification of patients with and without radiculopathy and with and without recurrent symptoms. The subgroup analysis provides a possible explanation for contrasting results among randomized clinical trials of chronic low back pain treatments and these results also provide guidance for future work in the treatment of chronic low back pain.     

Exercise and nonspecific low back pain: a literature review

We reviewed the literature to clarify the effects of exercise in preventing and treating nonspecific low back pain. We evaluated several characteristics of exercise programs including specificity, individual tailoring, supervision, motivation enhancement, volume, and intensity. The results show that exercise is effective in the primary and secondary prevention of low back pain. When used for curative treatment, exercise diminishes disability and pain severity while improving fitness and occupational status in patients who have subacute, recurrent, or chronic low back pain. Patients with acute low back pain are usually advised to continue their everyday activities to the greatest extent possible rather than to start an exercise program. Supervision is crucial to the efficacy of exercise programs. Whether general or specific exercises are preferable is unclear, and neither is there clear evidence that one-on-one sessions are superior to group sessions. Further studies are needed to determine which patient subsets respond to specific characteristics of exercise programs and which exercise volumes and intensities are optimal.     

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation versus usual care for chronic low back pain in the community: effects on quality of life.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation has been shown in controlled studies to improve pain and function in patients with chronic back pain. However, specialized back pain rehabilitation centers are rare and only a few patients can participate on this therapy. Implementation of multidisciplinary rehabilitation services in community medicine may enhance both early availability and treatment capacity for comprehensive back pain rehabilitation. PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program (MRP) that was organized by cooperation of local health-care providers in the community with that of the usual care by independent physicians for patients with chronic low back pain. STUDY DESIGN: A comparison between the outcomes (follow-up time of 6 months) of treatment for chronic back pain in the community in a prospective intervention group versus a prospective observational usual care group. PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients were recruited from independent physicians in the community of a selected region who participated voluntarily in the study. Patients were included in the study if they were seeking treatment of pain in the back with possible irradiation into the legs, the pain persisted for at least 3 months without decreasing intensity and there was no indication for surgical intervention. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome was assessed from patients' responses in self-report questionnaires at baseline and after an interval of 6 months. For outcome, we evaluated the health-related quality of life (German version of Short Form [SF] 36), the average pain severity (Numeric Rating Scale), the pain-related interference of function (German version of Brief Pain Inventory), depression (Allgemeine Depressionsskele), time off from work within 3 months before entering and leaving the study and the self-appraisal of improvement. METHODS: In a baseline group, the independent physicians treated the patients with usual care. In the intervention group, the patients were referred by the independent physicians to the study coordinator in the outpatient facilities of the Departments of Neurology or Orthopedics for inclusion in the MRP. The MRP was organized by cooperation of local health-care providers in the community with different specialties (sport teachers, clinical psychologist, physiotherapist and physician) who were experienced in the management of back pain. The MRP (4 hours per day, 3 days per week, 20 days) included 1.5 hours restorative exercise therapy, 0.5 hours physiotherapy, 1 hour cognitive-behavioral therapy, 0.5 hours progressive muscle relaxation and 0.5 hours education. RESULTS: Complete data sets were obtained from 157 patients in the usual care group (documented by 35 independent physicians) and 51 patients in the MRP group. Patients of the MRP group improved in the physical and mental health domains of the SF-36 more than patients treated by usual care (p<.05). Furthermore, days off work were more (p<.05) reduced by the MRP (16+/-35 days) than by usual care (-2+/-39 days). Finally, overall appraisal of successful outcome was better (p<.01) after MRP (54% of patients) as compared with usual care (24% of patients). However, the pain intensity (NRS), the pain-related interference with function (Brief Pain Inventory; BPI) and the depression scores (ADS) did not differ significantly between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: MRP is promising to improve health-related quality of life for patients with chronic back pain in the community. Before implementation of MRP in the repertoire of community medicine, superiority of MRP over usual care should be confirmed by a randomized controlled trial.     

Communication style and exercise compliance in physiotherapy (CONNECT). A cluster randomized controlled trial to test a theory-based intervention to increase chronic low back pain patients' adherence to physiotherapists' recommendations: study rationale, design, and methods

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Physical activity and exercise therapy are among the accepted clinical rehabilitation guidelines and are recommended self-management strategies for chronic low back pain. However, many back pain sufferers do not adhere to their physiotherapist's recommendations. Poor patient adherence may decrease the effectiveness of advice and home-based rehabilitation exercises. According to self-determination theory, support from health care practitioners can promote patients' autonomous motivation and greater long-term behavioral persistence (e.g., adherence to physiotherapists' recommendations). The aim of this trial is to assess the effect of an intervention designed to increase physiotherapists' autonomy-supportive communication on low back pain patients' adherence to physical activity and exercise therapy recommendations. METHODS: This study will be a single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial. Outpatient physiotherapy centers (N =12) in Dublin, Ireland (population = 1.25 million) will be randomly assigned using a computer-generated algorithm to either the experimental or control arm. Physiotherapists in the experimental arm (two hospitals and four primary care clinics) will attend eight hours of communication skills training. Training will include handouts, workbooks, video examples, role-play, and discussion designed to teach physiotherapists how to communicate in a manner that promotes autonomous patient motivation. Physiotherapists in the waitlist control arm (two hospitals and four primary care clinics) will not receive this training. Participants (N = 292) with chronic low back pain will complete assessments at baseline, as well as 1 week, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after their first physiotherapy appointment. Primary outcomes will include adherence to physiotherapy recommendations, as well as low back pain, function, and well-being. Participants will be blinded to treatment allocation, as they will not be told if their physiotherapist has received the communication skills training. Outcome assessors will also be blinded.We will use linear mixed modeling to test between arm differences both in the mean levels and the rates of change of the outcome variables. We will employ structural equation modeling to examine the process of change, including hypothesized mediation effects. DISCUSSION: This trial will be the first to test the effect of a self-determination theory-based communication skills training program for physiotherapists on their low back pain patients' adherence to rehabilitation recommendations. Trial Registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN63723433.     

Back pain revisited

The rationale for the judicious use of rotational exercises as well as concepts of exercise progression and modification in back rehabilitation are presented. Several rotational exercises that address both strength and flexibility are described. Other commonly used exercises in back rehabilitation are presented with the focus on detail in positioning and execution aimed at increasing the efficiency of the particular exercise. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1987;8(12):556-566.     

Rehabilitation — a valuable consideration in acute and chronic neck and low back pain in addition to standard chiropractic management: a case study

A case of chronic neck and low back pain, resistant to standard chiropractic management of manipulation/adjustment and verbal exercise instruction is presented. Identification of psychosocial factors and deconditioning, with a subsequent three month program of in-office rehabilitation including supervised progressive/resistance exercises and behavioural therapy was administered in conjunction with spinal manipulation/adjustment and passive modalities. The program proved effective in reducing the patient’s neck and low back pain. The beneficial effect of supervised exercises and behavioural therapy in patient management is illustrated.     

Prognosis of subacute low back pain patients according to pain response

Centralization of referred pain or failure to centralize has in earlier studies been shown to be a predictor of low back pain prognosis. Research suggests that there are differences in how males and females experience pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome after 1 year, and to evaluate the prognostic value of the pain response in a mechanical test at the first consultation at a spine clinic, and the influence of gender, in order to identify patients with especially high risk of chronicity. The patients in this study were low back pain patients, included consecutively from a spine clinic in Northern Denmark. The criteria for entering this spine clinic were neck or low back pain with radiating symptoms and a duration of 4–26 weeks, without satisfactory improvement after treatment in the primary care system. The 793 patients were categorised into four subgroups according to their pain response in a mechanical test performed at the initial examination: centralization, non-lasting centralization, peripheralization and no effect. The patients were instructed in doing specific exercises according to the test results. The four subgroups were compared after 1 year with regard to changes in back and leg pain, disability and return-to-work status. The statistical evaluation was undertaken for the study group as a whole and stratified according to gender. A significant improvement in all outcome measures was found in all the subgroups, among both men and women. There were no systematic or statistically significant differences in the prognosis between the four subgroups of patients. The proportion of Centralizers in this study was 18%. The mechanical test at baseline is important for deciding the subject-specific exercises, but when treated according to test results, the prognostic value of the test seems limited. The project is approved by the Regional Scientific Ethical Committee.     

Comparison of spinal fusion and nonoperative treatment in patients with chronic low back pain: long-term follow-up of three randomized controlled trials

Background contextChronic low back pain (cLBP) represents a major challenge to our health care systems. The relative efficacy of surgery over nonoperative treatment for the treatment of cLBP remains controversial, and little is known of the long-term comparative outcomes.PurposeTo compare the clinical outcome at long-term follow-up (LTFU) of patients who were randomized with either spinal fusion or multidisciplinary cognitive-behavioral and exercise rehabilitation for cLBP.Study design/settingLong-term clinical follow-up of three multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of surgery (instrumented or noninstrumented fusion, stabilization) versus nonoperative treatment (multidisciplinary cognitive-behavioral and exercise rehabilitation) in Norway and the United Kingdom.Patient sampleA total of 473 patients with cLBP of at least 1 year's duration who were all considered candidates for spinal fusion.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODIv2.1a for the United Kingdom and ODIv1 for Norway) score measured at LTFU. Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) pain intensity, pain frequency, pain medication use, work status, EuroQol VAS for health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care, and global treatment outcome at LTFU.MethodsPatients who consented to LTFU (average 11.4 [range 8–15] years after the initial treatment) completed the outcome questionnaires.ResultsOf 473 enrolled patients, 261 (55%) completed LTFU, 140/242 patients randomized to receive surgery and 121/231 randomized to receive multidisciplinary cognitive-behavioral and exercise rehabilitation. The intention-to-treat analysis showed no statistically or clinically significant differences between treatment groups for ODI scores at LTFU (adjusted for baseline ODI, previous surgery, duration of LBP, sex, age, and smoking habit): the mean adjusted treatment effect of fusion was ?0.7 points on the 0–100 ODI scale (95% confidence interval [CI], ?5.5 to 4.2). An as-treated analysis similarly demonstrated no advantage of surgery (treatment effect, ?0.8 points on the ODI (95% CI, ?5.9 to 4.3). The results for the secondary outcomes were largely consistent with those of the ODI, showing no relevant group differences.ConclusionsAfter an average of 11 years follow-up, there was no difference in patient self-rated outcomes between fusion and multidisciplinary cognitive-behavioral and exercise rehabilitation for cLBP. The results suggest that, given the increased risks of surgery and the lack of deterioration in nonoperative outcomes over time, the use of lumbar fusion in cLBP patients should not be favored in health care systems where multidisciplinary cognitive-behavioral and exercise rehabilitation programmes are available.     

Exercise as a treatment for chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Exercise is a widely prescribed treatment for chronic low back pain, with demonstrated effectiveness for improving function and work. PURPOSE: The goal of this article is to review several key aspects about the safety and efficacy of exercise that may help clinicians understand its utility in treating chronic back pain. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A computerized literature search of MEDLINE was conducted using "exercise," "fitness," "back pain," "backache" and "rehabilitation" as search words. Identified abstracts were scanned, and useful articles were acquired for further review. Additional references were acquired through the personal collections of research papers possessed by the authors and by reviewing prior review articles on this subject. These final papers were scrutinized for data relevant to the key aspects about exercise covered in this article. RESULTS: For people with acute, subacute or chronic low back pain, there is no evidence that exercise increases the risk of additional back problems or work disability. To the contrary, current medical literature suggests that exercise has either a neutral effect or may slightly reduce risk of future back injuries. Exercise can be prescribed for patients with chronic low back pain with three distinct goals. The first and most obvious goal is to improve or eliminate impairments in back flexibility and strength, and improve performance of endurance activities. There is a large body of evidence confirming that this goal can be accomplished for a majority of patients with chronic low back pain. The second goal of exercise is to reduce the intensity of back pain. Most studies of exercise have noted overall reduction in back pain intensity that ranges from 10% to 50% after exercise treatment. The third goal of exercise is to reduce back pain-related disability through a process of desensitization of fears and concerns, altering pain attitudes and beliefs and improving affect. The mechanisms through which exercise can accomplish this goal have been the subject of substantial research. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise is safe for individuals with back pain, because it does not increase the risk of future back injuries or work absence. Substantial evidence exists supporting the use of exercise as a therapeutic tool to improve impairments in back flexibility and strength. Most studies have observed improvements in global pain ratings after exercise programs, and many have observed that exercise can lessen the behavioral, cognitive, affect and disability aspects of back pain syndromes.     

Active treatment programs for patients with chronic low back pain: a prospective,randomized, observer-blinded study

Summary Several new studies have indicated that an active approach to patients with chronic disabling low back pain (LBP) seems effective. Some of these studies emphasize the importance of dealing with the patient's total situation in comprehensive multidisciplinary programs — the bio-psycho-social model. However, these programs are expensive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rehabilitation outcome from three different active programs in terms of: (1) return-to-work rate, (2) days of sick leave, (3) health-care contacts, (4) pain and disability scores, and (5) staying physically active. The subjects included 132 patients randomized to the study, of whom 123 started one of the treatment programs. They had all had at least 6 months of chronic LBP. The patients were randomized into one of three programs: group 1 — a full-time, intensive 3-week multidisciplinary program, including active physical and ergonomic training and psychological pain management, followed by 1 day weekly for the subsequent 3 weeks; group 2 — active physical training, twice a week for 6 weeks, for a total of 24h; group 3 — psychological pain management combined with active physical training, twice a week for 6 weeks, also for a total of 24h. The results presented here are based on data collected 4 months following treatment, which shows an 86% response rate. The initial examination and the follow-up evaluation were performed by a blinded observer. The results show that 4 months after treatment, the intensive multidisciplinary program is superior to the less intensive programs in terms of return-to-work rate, health-care contacts, pain and disability scores, and staying physically active. In conclusion, it seems that although the multidisciplinary program is initially expensive compared to the less intensive programs, the savings in sick pay, early retirement pensions, and health care contacts make it economically worthwhile. Long-term follow-up will show whether this effect continues.     

Evaluation of specific stabilizing exercise in the treatment of low back pain and lumbar disk disease in outpatient rehabilitation

AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcome of outpatient rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and lumbar disk disease with a specific stabilizing exercise of the M. multifidus and M. transversus abdominis. METHOD: 99 outpatients admitted to a rehabilitation unit were included in a prospective randomized controlled interventional trial. The interventional group consisted of 50 patients (34 male, 16 female; mean age 41.1 +/- 9.1, range; 21 - 54 years), 49 patients (31 male, 18 female; mean age 37.9 +/- 9.5, range; 19 - 55 years) were in the control group. Outcomes were assessed at the beginning and the end of the treatment and at a three month follow-up with the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire FFbH-R, the pain scale SES and a numeric rating scale. RESULTS: In both groups there was a significant functional improvement as measured with the Oswestry Score and the FFbH-R. The interventional group showed better values at the end of the treatment. Pain as well could be reduced significantly by the treatment, but no differences were noted between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Outpatient rehabilitation improved functional capacity and pain in both groups. Advantages could be seen in the interventional group concerning functional status. The specific stabilizing exercise approach appears to be effective in conservative treatment programs of low back pain and lumbar disk disease.     

Physiotherapy movement based classification approaches to low back pain: comparison of subgroups through review and developer/expert survey

Background

Physical activity and exercise therapy are among the accepted clinical rehabilitation guidelines and are recommended self-management strategies for chronic low back pain. However, many back pain sufferers do not adhere to their physiotherapist??s recommendations. Poor patient adherence may decrease the effectiveness of advice and home-based rehabilitation exercises. According to self-determination theory, support from health care practitioners can promote patients?? autonomous motivation and greater long-term behavioral persistence (e.g., adherence to physiotherapists?? recommendations). The aim of this trial is to assess the effect of an intervention designed to increase physiotherapists?? autonomy-supportive communication on low back pain patients?? adherence to physical activity and exercise therapy recommendations.

Methods/Design

This study will be a single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial. Outpatient physiotherapy centers (N =12) in Dublin, Ireland (population?=?1.25 million) will be randomly assigned using a computer-generated algorithm to either the experimental or control arm. Physiotherapists in the experimental arm (two hospitals and four primary care clinics) will attend eight hours of communication skills training. Training will include handouts, workbooks, video examples, role-play, and discussion designed to teach physiotherapists how to communicate in a manner that promotes autonomous patient motivation. Physiotherapists in the waitlist control arm (two hospitals and four primary care clinics) will not receive this training. Participants (N?=?292) with chronic low back pain will complete assessments at baseline, as well as 1?week, 4?weeks, 12?weeks, and 24?weeks after their first physiotherapy appointment. Primary outcomes will include adherence to physiotherapy recommendations, as well as low back pain, function, and well-being. Participants will be blinded to treatment allocation, as they will not be told if their physiotherapist has received the communication skills training. Outcome assessors will also be blinded. We will use linear mixed modeling to test between arm differences both in the mean levels and the rates of change of the outcome variables. We will employ structural equation modeling to examine the process of change, including hypothesized mediation effects.

Discussion

This trial will be the first to test the effect of a self-determination theory-based communication skills training program for physiotherapists on their low back pain patients?? adherence to rehabilitation recommendations.

Trial Registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN63723433     

Postpartum low-back pain.

To determine the prevalence of back pain and its development over the first postpartum period, 817 women who had been followed through pregnancy were studied a minimum of 12 months after delivery. More than 67% of the women experienced back pain directly after delivery, whereas 37% said they had back pain at the follow-up examination. Most of the women who had recovered became pain-free within 6 months. Factors that correlated to persistent postpartum back pain were the presence of back pain before pregnancy, the presence of back pain during pregnancy, physically heavy work, and multipregnancy. Of these four factors, physically heavy work was found to have the strongest association with persistent back pain at 12 months.     

Is there a role for exercise in the treatment of patients with low back pain?

A paucity of information exists concerning the exact role of exercise in the management of low back pain. Few controlled clinical studies exist, and the selection of an exercise program is often relegated to traditional or empiric regimens. Aerobic conditioning exercises appear to offer the greatest benefit for all types of patients with back problems, although the value of these exercises is often overstated. Indirect evidence can be found for strengthening exercises that treat physical incapacity. No information is available to substantiate effects on pain relief. Comprehensive electromyographic studies, biomechanical analyses, and controlled clinical studies are needed to validate the role of exercises in the treatment of patients with back pain.     

Long-term effects of specific stabilizing exercises for first-episode low back pain

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial with 1-year and 3-year telephone questionnaire follow-ups. OBJECTIVE: To report a specific exercise intervention's long-term effects on recurrence rates in acute, first-episode low back pain patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The pain and disability associated with an initial episode of acute low back pain (LBP) is known to resolve spontaneously in the short-term in the majority of cases. However, the recurrence rate is high, and recurrent disabling episodes remain one of the most costly problems in LBP. A deficit in the multifidus muscle has been identified in acute LBP patients, and does not resolve spontaneously on resolution of painful symptoms and resumption of normal activity. Any relation between this deficit and recurrence rate was investigated in the long-term. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with acute, first-episode LBP were medically managed and randomly allocated to either a control group or specific exercise group. Medical management included advice and use of medications. Intervention consisted of exercises aimed at rehabilitating the multifidus in cocontraction with the transversus abdominis muscle. One year and three years after treatment, telephone questionnaires were conducted with patients. RESULTS: Questionnaire results revealed that patients from the specific exercise group experienced fewer recurrences of LBP than patients from the control group. One year after treatment, specific exercise group recurrence was 30%, and control group recurrence was 84% (P < 0.001). Two to three years after treatment, specific exercise group recurrence was 35%, and control group recurrence was 75% (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Long-term results suggest that specific exercise therapy in addition to medical management and resumption of normal activity may be more effective in reducing low back pain recurrences than medical management and normal activity alone.     

Effectiveness of mat Pilates or equipment-based Pilates in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a protocol of a randomised controlled trial

Background

Chronic low back pain is an expensive and difficult condition to treat. One of the interventions widely used by physiotherapists in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain is exercise therapy based upon the Pilates principles. Pilates exercises can be performed with or without specific equipment. These two types of Pilates exercises have never been compared on a high-quality randomised controlled trial.

Methods/design

This randomised controlled trial with a blinded assessor will evaluate eighty six patients of both genders with chronic low back pain, aged between 18 and 60 years, from one Brazilian private physiotherapy clinic. The patients will be randomly allocated into two groups: Mat Group will perform the exercises on the ground while the Equipment-based Group will perform the Pilates method exercises on the following equipment: Cadillac, Reformer, Ladder Barrel, and Step Chair. The general and specific disability of the patient, kinesiophobia, pain intensity and global perceived effect will be evaluated by a blinded assessor before randomisation and at six weeks and six months after randomisation. In addition, the expectation of the participants and their confidence with the treatment will be evaluated before randomisation and after the first treatment session, respectively.

Discussion

This will be the first study aiming to compare the effectiveness of Mat and Equipment-based Pilates exercises in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. The results may help health-care professionals in clinical decision-making and could potentially reduce the treatment costs of this condition.

Trial registration

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials RBR-7tyg5j     

Observed outcomes associated with a quota-based exercise approach on measures of kinesiophobia in patients with chronic low back pain

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective series of consecutive cases. OBJECTIVES: To observe if kinesiophobia was altered through an education- and quota-based exercise physical therapy program, and to observe the relationship of kinesiophobia with other measures related to chronic low back pain. BACKGROUND: The role of kinesiophobia in worsening the chronic low back pain predicament has been documented in numerous studies. However, less is known of the effect of an exerciseonly-based physical therapy program's ability to alter kinesiophobia and improve functional abilities in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: Eighty-two patients with at least 3 months of low back pain, and a moderate level of disability (Oswestry score greater than or equal to 20) were willing to participate in this study. Sixty-eight of these patients completed treatment. For 68 compliant patients, females comprised 56%, the mean age was 43 years, the mean duration of symptoms was 28 months, and the primary anatomic diagnosis was disc degeneration (70%). Patients underwent a course of non-pain-contingent, quota-based physical therapy to address impairments in flexibility, strength, and lifting capacity. These were quantified prior to and following treatment using validated methods. Before and after treatment, patients completed the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Questionnaire, and a 0-to-10 visual analog scale for back and lower extremity pain. A 12-month follow-up was conducted using mailed questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean number of physical therapy visits was 14. Clinically and statistically significant (P<.001) improvement in flexibility, strength, and lifting ability were observed. Statistically significant (P<.001) improvement in back pain, disability, and measures of kinesiophobia were also noted at discharge and maintained at 12-month follow-up. At discharge, Oswestry scores correlated with TSK (r = .59, P<.001), FABQ-Activities (r = .55, P<.001), and FABQ-Work (r = .50, P<.001) scores. CONCLUSION: In this study we observed that kinesiophobia decreased during an intensive physical therapy program in which exercises were performed in a quota-based manner. Following the successful performance of non-pain-contingent, quota-based exercise, patients' fears of injury lessened, and this may have had a positive influence on disability.     

Multidisciplinary orthopedic rehabilitation program in patients with chronic back pain and need for changing job situation -- long-term effects of a multimodal, multidisciplinary program with activation and job development

BACKGROUND: According to a recent review by Hüppe and Raspe effects of multidisciplinary treatment programs for patients with chronic low back pain in Germany seem to be rather weak and not to have persisting effects. Factors which could counteract possible benefits of treatment are, among others, psychic and job-related stresses and strains persisting after treatment. A multidisciplinary, in-patient treatment program for patients with chronic low back pain, therefore, was amended by multidisciplinary diagnosis and assignment and measures to support vocational solutions. METHOD: To evaluate the effects of the multidisciplinary program in comparison to a control group with the usual care, a prospective longitudinal study was conducted. 307 patients were assigned to the multidisciplinary in-patient treatment program, whereas 176 patients with comparable complaints had the standard rehabilitation program. Besides the full sample, we analyzed a subgroup of patients with chronic low back pain. RESULTS: We found positive moderate and strong effects in the intervention group concerning function, pain, psychic strains as well as the number of sick days and return to work rates 10 months after discharge. Effects in the intervention group exceeded the effects achieved in the control group. Beside the full sample, we analyzed a subgroup of patients with chronic low back pain, who received an intense activating group treatment. Also in this subgroup we found moderate and strong effects of treatment superior to those in the control group for function, psychic strains and sick days. CONCLUSION: We attribute these persisting and superior effects in the treatment group to an efficient treatment of occupational and psychic problems as well as to more homogeneous treatment groups attained by a multidisciplinary diagnosis and team-based assignment. They also show the significance of in-patient-treatment which is effective, when -- based on multidisciplinary diagnosis -- differential treatment groups can be formed.