SynthesisPloS one2026
Effects of breathing exercise and thoracic techniques on pain and disability in low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness of thoracic-focused interventions, including breathing exercises and thoracic manual techniques (mobilization, high-velocity low-amplitude manipulation, and release techniques), on pain and disability in patients with low back pain (LBP).
methodsPubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, ProQuest, Ovid, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar were searched without language restrictions. Clinical trials with control groups on pain and disability in low back pain patients focusing on the efficacy of breathing exercises or thoracic technique were included. In total, 31 studies contributed to the meta-analysis for pain and 24 for disability.
resultsPooled analyses using Morris' dppc demonstrated a statistically significant, small effect for pain reduction (dppc = -0.35, 95% CI = -0.46 to -0.23) and a large effect for disability improvement (dppc = -0.71, 95% CI = -0.86 to -0.57) when compared with control groups. Thoracic manual techniques showed larger effects on both pain and disability compare to breathing exercises. However, substantial statistical heterogeneity (I² > 85%) persisted in most analyses.
conclusionBreathing and thoracic manual techniques may be effective in reducing disability and, to a lesser extent, pain in patients with LBP, but the overall certainty of evidence is low. However, the quality of the evidence is low. Variability in treatment protocols, study quality, blinding, and outcome measures likely contributed to inconsistencies. Further high-quality trials with standardized protocols are needed to confirm these findings and inform clinical practice.
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.