Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31638962›Full record

SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2019

Gluteus medius muscle function in people with and without low back pain: a systematic review.

Sean Sadler, Samuel Cassidy, Benjamin Peterson, Martin Spink, Vivienne Chuter

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05460286 (Comparing the Effects of Chiropractic Manipulation and Spinal Decompression Device Treatment on Lower Extremity Muscle Strength and Balance in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

NCT05460286 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Comparing the Effects of Chiropractic Manipulation and Spinal Decompression Device Treatment on Lower Extremity Muscle Strength and Balance in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorMustafa AĞRAŞRan2020 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsChronic Low-back PainArmsChiropractic Manipulation, Spinal Decompression Device Treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Sean SadlerDiscipline of Podiatry, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia. sean.sadler@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7546-5836
Samuel CassidyDiscipline of Podiatry, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia.
Benjamin PetersonDiscipline of Podiatry, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia.
Martin SpinkDiscipline of Podiatry, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia.
Vivienne ChuterDiscipline of Podiatry, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGlobally, low back pain (LBP) is one of the greatest causes of disability. In people with LBP, dysfunction of muscles such as the gluteus medius have been demonstrated to increase spinal loading and reduce spinal stability. Differences in gluteus medius function have been reported in those with LBP compared to those without, although this has only been reported in individual studies. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if adults with a history, or current LBP, demonstrate differences in measures of gluteus medius function when compared to adults without LBP.

methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, PubMED, Pro Quest Database, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception until December 2018 for published journal articles and conference abstracts. No language restrictions were applied. Only case-control studies with participants 18 years and over were included. Participants could have had any type and duration of LBP. Studies could have assessed gluteus medius function with any quantifiable clinical assessment or measurement tool, with the participant non-weight bearing or weight bearing, and during static or dynamic activity. Quality appraisal and data extraction were independently performed by two authors.

resultsThe 24 included articles involved 1088 participants with LBP and 998 without LBP. The gluteus medius muscle in participants with LBP tended to demonstrate reduced strength and more trigger points compared to the gluteus medius muscle of those without LBP. The level of activity, fatigability, time to activate, time to peak activation, cross sectional area, and muscle thickness showed unclear results. Meta-analysis was not performed due to the heterogeneity of included studies.

conclusionClinically, the findings from this systematic review should be considered when assessing and managing patients with LBP. Future studies that clearly define the type and duration of LBP, and prospectively assess gluteus medius muscle function in those with and without LBP are needed.

trial registrationPROSPERO ( CRD42017076773 ).

Indexed as

ButtocksHumansLow Back PainMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthElectromyographyGluteus mediusLow back painSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31638962
PMCPMC6805550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.