ArticleCureus2026
Effectiveness of Posterior Chain Resistance Exercises and Spinal Stabilization Exercises on Pain, Strength, and Disability in Runners With Non-specific Low Back Pain.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is a common musculoskeletal condition among recreational runners and may negatively affect pain, trunk muscle strength, and functional ability. Repetitive mechanical loading during running can contribute to lumbopelvic dysfunction and reduced spinal stability. Although spinal stabilization exercises are widely used in rehabilitation, the additional benefits of posterior chain resistance exercises remain unclear. Objectives This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of posterior chain resistance exercises combined with spinal stabilization exercises on pain, strength, and disability in recreational runners with NSLBP and to compare their effects with spinal stabilization exercises alone. Methods Thirty-six male recreational runners aged 18-25 years with NSLBP were recruited and randomly allocated into two groups (n=18 each). Group A received posterior chain resistance exercises combined with spinal stabilization exercises, while Group B received spinal stabilization exercises alone. Interventions were administered every three days for six weeks. Pain was assessed using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), trunk muscle strength using a pressure biofeedback unit (PBU), and disability using the Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI). Outcome measures were recorded before and after the intervention period. Results Significant improvements in pain, strength, and disability were observed within both groups following six weeks of intervention (p≤0.001). In Group A, pain scores decreased from 6.22±0.73 to 2.72±0.66, strength improved from 41.88±1.72 to 43.88±2.15, and disability scores decreased from 22.44±2.70 to 19.22±3.07. In Group B, pain scores decreased from 6.11±0.75 to 3.27±0.75, strength improved from 41.83±2.01 to 42.94±2.18, and disability scores decreased from 22.00±2.35 to 18.88±2.49 (p≤0.001). Between-group analysis demonstrated significantly greater pain reduction in Group A compared with Group B (p=0.025). No significant differences were found between groups for strength (p=0.206) or disability (p=0.723). Conclusion Both interventions were effective in improving pain, strength, and disability in recreational runners with NSLBP. However, the addition of posterior chain resistance exercises resulted in greater pain reduction than spinal stabilization exercises alone, suggesting that it may be a valuable component of rehabilitation programs for recreational runners with NSLBP.
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.