Cargando…

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

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

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tataryn, Nicholas, Simas, Vini, Catterall, Tailah, Furness, James, Keogh, Justin W. L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33683497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-021-00306-w
_version_ 1783661957045288960
author Tataryn, Nicholas
Simas, Vini
Catterall, Tailah
Furness, James
Keogh, Justin W. L.
author_facet Tataryn, Nicholas
Simas, Vini
Catterall, Tailah
Furness, James
Keogh, Justin W. L.
author_sort Tataryn, Nicholas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: While chronic exercise training has been demonstrated to be an effective non-pharmacological treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP), there has been a relative lack of evidence or clinical guidelines for whether a posterior chain resistance training programme provides any benefits over general exercise (GE). OBJECTIVES: To determine if chronic posterior chain resistance training (PCRT), defined as exercise programmes of ≥6 weeks duration focused on the thoracic, lumbar and hip extensor musculature, is more effective than GE in improving pain, level of disability, muscular strength and the number of adverse events in recreationally active and sedentary individuals with CLBP. METHODS: Four electronic databases were systematically searched from 25 September 2019 until 30 August 2020. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools checklist for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), articles were critically appraised and compared against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk difference (RD) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Review Manager 5.3. RESULTS: Eight articles were included, with a total of 408 participants (203 PCRT, 205 GE). Both PCRT and GE were effective in improving a number of CLBP-related outcomes, but these effects were often significantly greater in PCRT than GE, especially with greater training durations (i.e. 12–16 weeks compared to 6–8 weeks). Specifically, when compared to GE, PCRT demonstrated a greater reduction in pain (SMD = − 0.61 (95% CI − 1.21 to 0.00), p = 0.05; I(2) = 74%) and level of disability (SMD = − 0.53 (95% CI − 0.97 to − 0.09), p = 0.02; I(2) = 52%), as well as a greater increase in muscle strength (SMD = 0.67 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.13), p = 0.004; I(2) = 0%). No differences in the number of adverse events were reported between PCRT and GE (RD = − 0.02 (95% CI − 0.10 to 0.05), p = 0.57; I(2) = 72%). CONCLUSION: Results of the meta-analysis indicated that 12–16 weeks of PCRT had a statistically significantly greater effect than GE on pain, level of disability and muscular strength, with no significant difference in the number of adverse events for recreationally active and sedentary patients with CLBP. Clinicians should strongly consider utilizing PCRT interventions for 12–16 weeks with patients with CLBP to maximize their improvements in pain, disability and muscle strength. Future research should focus on comparing the efficacy and adverse events associated with specific PCRT exercise training and movement patterns (i.e. deadlift, hip lift) in treating this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020155700.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7940464
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79404642021-03-28 Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Tataryn, Nicholas Simas, Vini Catterall, Tailah Furness, James Keogh, Justin W. L. Sports Med Open Systematic Review BACKGROUND: While chronic exercise training has been demonstrated to be an effective non-pharmacological treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP), there has been a relative lack of evidence or clinical guidelines for whether a posterior chain resistance training programme provides any benefits over general exercise (GE). OBJECTIVES: To determine if chronic posterior chain resistance training (PCRT), defined as exercise programmes of ≥6 weeks duration focused on the thoracic, lumbar and hip extensor musculature, is more effective than GE in improving pain, level of disability, muscular strength and the number of adverse events in recreationally active and sedentary individuals with CLBP. METHODS: Four electronic databases were systematically searched from 25 September 2019 until 30 August 2020. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools checklist for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), articles were critically appraised and compared against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk difference (RD) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Review Manager 5.3. RESULTS: Eight articles were included, with a total of 408 participants (203 PCRT, 205 GE). Both PCRT and GE were effective in improving a number of CLBP-related outcomes, but these effects were often significantly greater in PCRT than GE, especially with greater training durations (i.e. 12–16 weeks compared to 6–8 weeks). Specifically, when compared to GE, PCRT demonstrated a greater reduction in pain (SMD = − 0.61 (95% CI − 1.21 to 0.00), p = 0.05; I(2) = 74%) and level of disability (SMD = − 0.53 (95% CI − 0.97 to − 0.09), p = 0.02; I(2) = 52%), as well as a greater increase in muscle strength (SMD = 0.67 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.13), p = 0.004; I(2) = 0%). No differences in the number of adverse events were reported between PCRT and GE (RD = − 0.02 (95% CI − 0.10 to 0.05), p = 0.57; I(2) = 72%). CONCLUSION: Results of the meta-analysis indicated that 12–16 weeks of PCRT had a statistically significantly greater effect than GE on pain, level of disability and muscular strength, with no significant difference in the number of adverse events for recreationally active and sedentary patients with CLBP. Clinicians should strongly consider utilizing PCRT interventions for 12–16 weeks with patients with CLBP to maximize their improvements in pain, disability and muscle strength. Future research should focus on comparing the efficacy and adverse events associated with specific PCRT exercise training and movement patterns (i.e. deadlift, hip lift) in treating this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020155700. Springer International Publishing 2021-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7940464/ /pubmed/33683497 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-021-00306-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Tataryn, Nicholas
Simas, Vini
Catterall, Tailah
Furness, James
Keogh, Justin W. L.
Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Posterior-Chain Resistance Training Compared to General Exercise and Walking Programmes for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in the General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort posterior-chain resistance training compared to general exercise and walking programmes for the treatment of chronic low back pain in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33683497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-021-00306-w
work_keys_str_mv AT tatarynnicholas posteriorchainresistancetrainingcomparedtogeneralexerciseandwalkingprogrammesforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpaininthegeneralpopulationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT simasvini posteriorchainresistancetrainingcomparedtogeneralexerciseandwalkingprogrammesforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpaininthegeneralpopulationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT catteralltailah posteriorchainresistancetrainingcomparedtogeneralexerciseandwalkingprogrammesforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpaininthegeneralpopulationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT furnessjames posteriorchainresistancetrainingcomparedtogeneralexerciseandwalkingprogrammesforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpaininthegeneralpopulationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT keoghjustinwl posteriorchainresistancetrainingcomparedtogeneralexerciseandwalkingprogrammesforthetreatmentofchroniclowbackpaininthegeneralpopulationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis