Trial reportScientific reports2025
Lumbar stabilization exercise with and without real-time ultrasound imaging biofeedback in chronic low back pain patients: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reduced lumbar multifidus (LM) cross-sectional area (CSA) has been linked with non-specific chronic low back pain (NCLBP); hence, lumbar stabilization exercise (LSE) is typically used as treatment. Real-time ultrasound imaging (RUSI) biofeedback can enhance performance and retention in LM activation. This study aimed to compare the effects of LSE with or without RUSI-biofeedback in patients with NCLBP. A single-blind, three-arm, parallel randomized controlled trial involving 90 participants, randomized into LSERUSI-biofeedback, LSEno-biofeedback, or minimal intervention (n = 30 per group) was conducted. All interventions were administered twice weekly for 8 weeks, and outcomes (LM-CSA, pain, disability, and quality of life) were evaluated before and at 8-week and 20-week follow-ups. Compared to LSEno-biofeedback and minimal intervention, LSERUSI-biofeedback demonstrated a greater increase (p < 0.05) in LM-CSA at 8 weeks (mean [95%CI] difference: 0.81 [0–1.62] and 1.79 [0.91–2.65], respectively) and at 20 weeks (1.61 [0.79–2.42] and 2.66 [1.79–2.53], respectively). LSERUSI-biofeedback showed a greater improvement (p < 0.05) in mental health scores at 8 weeks (3.63 [0.32–6.94]) and 20 weeks (7.34 [4.03–10.60]) compared to LSEno-biofeedback. However, LSEno-biofeedback showed a greater physical health scores at 20 weeks (− 4.89 [− 7.92 to − 1.86]) compared to LSERUSI-biofeedback. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were found between LSERUSI-biofeedback and LSEno-biofeedback for pain or disability. The increase in LM-CSA significantly correlated with changes in pain (r = − 0.40 to − 0.50, p < 0.05) and disability (r = − 0.38 to − 0.42, p < 0.05). In conclusion, LSE with or without RUSI-biofeedback improved LM-CSA, pain, disability, and quality of life. However, LSERUSI-biofeedback led to a greater increase in LM-CSA. Such an increase appears to be related to changes in pain and disability. Trial registration: The study was registered in the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (16/01/2018; PACTR201801002980602).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.