Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37715644›Full record

SynthesisClinical rehabilitation2024

Exercise treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and intervention component analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Christine Comer, Esther Williamson, Suzanne McIlroy, Cynthia Srikesavan, Sally Dalton, G J Melendez-Torres, Sarah E Lamb

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The long-term clinical course of non-surgically treated lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christine ComerLeeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9847-9408
Esther WilliamsonNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, UK.
Suzanne McIlroyPhysiotherapy Department, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Cynthia SrikesavanNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, UK.
Sally DaltonLibrary Services, University of Leeds, UK.
G J Melendez-TorresFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Sarah E LambFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
University of Exeter · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyse the components used in exercise interventions for people with symptoms of neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis and identify components associated with successful interventions. DATA SOURCES: Eligible papers published up to April 2023 from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and trial registry websites. REVIEW

methodsLiterature searches were performed by an Information Specialist. We searched for randomised trials evaluating exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication symptoms (the primary symptom of lumbar spinal stenosis). Two authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool Version 2 and the TIDieR checklist for intervention reporting. Details of intervention components were extracted, tabulated, and synthesised using an intervention component analysis approach.

resultsWe found thirteen trials reporting 23 exercise interventions delivered to 1440 participants. These featured 60 different components. Most exercise interventions included supervision and flexion-based exercises. Balance exercises were rarely included. Exercise components featured more frequently in successful interventions included stretches, strength or trunk muscle exercises, fitness exercises, especially cycling, and psychologically informed approaches. Interpretation is limited by low study numbers and heterogeneity. No conclusions could be drawn about exercise supervision or dose. DISCUSSION: Exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication typically feature multiple components. Common features such as supervision, lumbar flexion, and aerobic fitness exercises and also less common features such as stretches, strengthening exercises, and psychologically informed approaches warrant consideration for inclusion when designing and optimising exercise interventions for people with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Indexed as

Spinal StenosisExerciseExercise TherapyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicexercise programmelow back painmusculoskeletal disordersolder adultssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37715644
PMCPMC10829420
OpenAlexW4386803267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.