Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34437607›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Wearables-based walking program in addition to usual physiotherapy care for the management of patients with low back pain at medium or high risk of chronicity: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

Hosam Alzahrani, Martin Mackey, Emmanuel Stamatakis, Debra Shirley

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Exercise therapy for treatment of acute non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hosam AlzahraniDepartment of Physical Therapy, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4383-115X
Martin MackeySchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Emmanuel StamatakisCharles Perkins Centre, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7323-3225
Debra ShirleyDiscipline of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUTaif University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough chronic low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability and accounts for large costs, none of the available conventional treatments are clearly more favourable in treating people at increased risk of chronicity.

objectivesTo examine the feasibility and initial efficacy of a wearables-based walking intervention in addition to usual physiotherapy care in people with LBP at risk of chronicity.

methodsTwenty-six adult participants, diagnosed with non-specific LBP with medium or high risk of chronicity, were recruited from physiotherapy private practices. Participants were randomized into usual physiotherapy care (control, n = 14) and usual physiotherapy care plus a wearables-based walking intervention (experimental, n = 12). The intervention duration was 8 weeks. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rate, adherence to the intervention, dropout rate, and serious adverse events reporting rate. Other outcomes included disability and pain (primary); and physical activity level, daily walking steps, depression, pain catastrophizing and fear of movement (secondary). The outcomes were assessed at baseline, post-intervention and 26 weeks post-randomization follow-up.

resultsAdherence of experimental participants with the prescribed walking program was moderate. Four participants dropped out during the intervention, and no serious adverse events were reported. Participants in the experimental group showed significant improvement in pain at 26 weeks (β = -0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.66, -0.10; P = .013), compared with the control group. No between-group differences were found for disability at any time point and pain immediately post-intervention. Experimental participants demonstrated post-intervention improvement in light-intensity (β = 156.71; 95% CI 86.79, 226.64; P < .001), moderate-intensity physical activity (β = 0.46; 95% CI 0.12, 0.80; P = .012), and daily walking steps (β = 7099.13; 95% CI 4522.93, 9675.32; P < .001). Experimental participants demonstrated post-intervention increase in pain catastrophizing (β = 0.52, 95% CI 0.18, 0.86; P = .006). No between-group differences were found for pain catastrophizing at 26 weeks and other secondary outcomes.

conclusionUsual physiotherapy care plus a wearables-based walking intervention program was safe and moderately feasible, and provided significant reduction in pain at 26 weeks as well as increasing the total volume of light- and moderate-intensity physical activity, and daily walking steps immediately post-intervention.

Indexed as

Physical Therapy ModalitiesWearable Electronic DevicesAdultChronic PainFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient ComplianceWalking

Identifiers

PMID34437607
PMCPMC8389429
OpenAlexW3195276131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.