Cargando…
Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Altered spinal postures and altered motor control observed among people with non-specific low back pain have been associated with abnormal processing of sensory inputs. Evidence indicates that patients with non-specific low back pain have impaired lumbo-pelvic proprioceptive acuity compa...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8075231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33901255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250673 |
_version_ | 1783684502806069248 |
---|---|
author | Korakakis, Vasileios O’Sullivan, Kieran Kotsifaki, Argyro Sotiralis, Yiannis Giakas, Giannis |
author_facet | Korakakis, Vasileios O’Sullivan, Kieran Kotsifaki, Argyro Sotiralis, Yiannis Giakas, Giannis |
author_sort | Korakakis, Vasileios |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Altered spinal postures and altered motor control observed among people with non-specific low back pain have been associated with abnormal processing of sensory inputs. Evidence indicates that patients with non-specific low back pain have impaired lumbo-pelvic proprioceptive acuity compared to asymptomatic individuals. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review seated lumbo-pelvic proprioception among people with non-specific low back pain. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched to identify studies comparing lumbo-pelvic proprioception using active repositioning accuracy in sitting posture in individuals with and without non-specific low back pain. Study quality was assessed by using a modified Downs and Black’s checklist. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted tool for cross-sectional design and case–control studies. We performed meta-analysis using a random effects model. Meta-analyses included subgroup analyses according to disability level, directional subgrouping pattern, and availability of vision during testing. We rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: 16 studies met the eligibility criteria. Pooled meta-analyses were possible for absolute error, variable error, and constant error, measured in sagittal and transverse planes. There is very low and low certainty evidence of greater absolute and variable repositioning error in seated tasks among non-specific low back pain patients overall compared to asymptomatic individuals (sagittal plane). Subgroup analyses indicate moderate certainty evidence of greater absolute and variable error in seated tasks among directional subgroups of adults with non-specific low back pain, along with weaker evidence (low-very low certainty) of greater constant error. DISCUSSION: Lumbo-pelvic proprioception is impaired among people with non-specific low back pain. However, the low certainty of evidence, the small magnitude of error observed and the calculated “noise” of proprioception measures, suggest that any observed differences in lumbo-pelvic proprioception may be of limited clinical utility. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42018107671 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8075231 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80752312021-05-05 Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis Korakakis, Vasileios O’Sullivan, Kieran Kotsifaki, Argyro Sotiralis, Yiannis Giakas, Giannis PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Altered spinal postures and altered motor control observed among people with non-specific low back pain have been associated with abnormal processing of sensory inputs. Evidence indicates that patients with non-specific low back pain have impaired lumbo-pelvic proprioceptive acuity compared to asymptomatic individuals. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review seated lumbo-pelvic proprioception among people with non-specific low back pain. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched to identify studies comparing lumbo-pelvic proprioception using active repositioning accuracy in sitting posture in individuals with and without non-specific low back pain. Study quality was assessed by using a modified Downs and Black’s checklist. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted tool for cross-sectional design and case–control studies. We performed meta-analysis using a random effects model. Meta-analyses included subgroup analyses according to disability level, directional subgrouping pattern, and availability of vision during testing. We rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: 16 studies met the eligibility criteria. Pooled meta-analyses were possible for absolute error, variable error, and constant error, measured in sagittal and transverse planes. There is very low and low certainty evidence of greater absolute and variable repositioning error in seated tasks among non-specific low back pain patients overall compared to asymptomatic individuals (sagittal plane). Subgroup analyses indicate moderate certainty evidence of greater absolute and variable error in seated tasks among directional subgroups of adults with non-specific low back pain, along with weaker evidence (low-very low certainty) of greater constant error. DISCUSSION: Lumbo-pelvic proprioception is impaired among people with non-specific low back pain. However, the low certainty of evidence, the small magnitude of error observed and the calculated “noise” of proprioception measures, suggest that any observed differences in lumbo-pelvic proprioception may be of limited clinical utility. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42018107671 Public Library of Science 2021-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8075231/ /pubmed/33901255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250673 Text en © 2021 Korakakis et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Korakakis, Vasileios O’Sullivan, Kieran Kotsifaki, Argyro Sotiralis, Yiannis Giakas, Giannis Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–But the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | lumbo-pelvic proprioception in sitting is impaired in subgroups of low back pain–but the clinical utility of the differences is unclear. a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8075231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33901255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250673 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT korakakisvasileios lumbopelvicproprioceptioninsittingisimpairedinsubgroupsoflowbackpainbuttheclinicalutilityofthedifferencesisunclearasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT osullivankieran lumbopelvicproprioceptioninsittingisimpairedinsubgroupsoflowbackpainbuttheclinicalutilityofthedifferencesisunclearasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kotsifakiargyro lumbopelvicproprioceptioninsittingisimpairedinsubgroupsoflowbackpainbuttheclinicalutilityofthedifferencesisunclearasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sotiralisyiannis lumbopelvicproprioceptioninsittingisimpairedinsubgroupsoflowbackpainbuttheclinicalutilityofthedifferencesisunclearasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT giakasgiannis lumbopelvicproprioceptioninsittingisimpairedinsubgroupsoflowbackpainbuttheclinicalutilityofthedifferencesisunclearasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |