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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Korakakis, Vasileios, O’Sullivan, Kieran, Kotsifaki, Argyro, Sotiralis, Yiannis, Giakas, Giannis
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