Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19609785›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2009

Spinal segmental stabilisation exercises for chronic low back pain: programme adherence and its influence on clinical outcome.

Anne F Mannion, Daniel Helbling, Natascha Pulkovski, Haiko Sprott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Motor control exercise for acute non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  4. Motor control exercise for chronic non-specific low-back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Spine stabilisation exercises in the treatment of chronic low back pain: a good clinical outcome is not associated with improved abdominal muscle function.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2012
    Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Physical Therapists' Opinion of E-Health Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anne F MannionSpine Center Division, Department of Research and Development, Schulthess Klinik, Lengghalde 2, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland. anne.mannion@kws.ch
Daniel Helbling
Natascha Pulkovski
Haiko Sprott

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exercise rehabilitation is one of the few evidence-based treatments for chronic non-specific low back pain (cLBP), but individual success is notoriously variable and may depend on the patient's adherence to the prescribed exercise regime. This prospective study examined factors associated with adherence and the relationship between adherence and outcome after a programme of physiotherapeutic spine stabilisation exercises. A total of 32/37 patients with cLBP completed the study (mean age, 44.0 (SD = 12.3) years; 11/32 (34%) male). Adherence to the 9-week programme was documented as: percent attendance at therapy, percent adherence to daily home exercises (patient diary) and percent commitment to rehabilitation (Sports Injury Rehabilitation Adherence Scale (SIRAS)). The average of these three measures formed a multidimensional adherence index (MAI). Psychological disturbance, fear-avoidance beliefs, catastrophising, exercise self-efficacy and health locus of control were measured by questionnaire; disability in everyday activities was scored with the Roland-Morris disability scale and back pain intensity with a 0-10 graphic rating scale. Overall, adherence to therapy was very good (average MAI score, 85%; median (IQR), 89 (15)%). The only psychological/beliefs variable showing a unique significant association with MAI was exercise self-efficacy (Rho = 0.36, P = 0.045). Pain intensity and self-rated disability decreased significantly after therapy (each P < 0.01). Adherence to home exercises showed a moderate, positive correlation with the reduction in average pain (Rho = 0.54, P = 0.003) and disability (Rho = 0.38, P = 0.036); higher MAI scores were associated with greater reductions in average pain (Rho = 0.48, P = 0.008) and a (n.s.) tendency for greater reductions in disability (Rho = 0.32, P = 0.07) Neither attendance at therapy nor SIRAS were significantly related to any of the outcomes. The benefits of rehabilitation depended to a large extent on the patient's exercise behaviour outside of the formal physiotherapy sessions. Hence, more effort should be invested in finding ways to improve patients' motivation to take responsibility for the success of their own therapy, perhaps by increasing exercise self-efficacy. Whether the "adherence-outcome" interaction was mediated by improvements in function related to the specific exercises, or by a more "global" effect of the programme, remains to be examined.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude to HealthChronic DiseaseDisability EvaluationExercise TherapyFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansIllness BehaviorJoint InstabilityLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePain MeasurementPatient Compliance

Identifiers

PMID19609785
PMCPMC2899434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.