Search

Objective. The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate and characterize the scope of care for low back pain that falls under the specific label of manual therapy. Methods. PubMed database, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and SPORTDiscus were searched from journal inception through May 2022 for randomized controlled trials that investigated the treatment of low back pain using manual therapy. Terminology used to define manual therapy was extracted and categorized by using only the words included in the description of the intervention. An expert consultation phase was undertaken to gather feedback. Results. One hundred seventy-six trials met final inclusion criteria, and 169 unique terms labeled as manual therapy for the treatment of low back pain were found. The most frequent terms were mobilization (29.0%), manipulation (16.0%), and thrust (6.4%). Eight percent of trials did not define or specify what type of manual therapy was used in the study. After removing duplicates, 169 unique terms emerged within 18 categories. Conclusions. Manual therapy intervention labels used in low back pain trials are highly variable. With such variation, the heterogeneity of the intervention in trials is likely large, and the likelihood that different trials are comparing the same interventions is low. Researchers should consider being more judicious with the use of the term manual therapy and provide greater detail in titles, methods, and supplementary appendices in order to improve clarity, clinical applicability, and usefulness of future research. Impact. The ability to interpret and apply findings from manual therapy--related research for low back pain is challenging due to the heterogeneity of interventions under this umbrella term. A clear use of terminology and description of interventions by researchers will allow for improved understanding for the role of manual therapy in managing back pain. Keywords: Back Pain, Low Back Pain, Manipulation: Orthopedic, Manipulation: Spinal, Musculoskeletal Manipulations, Orthopedics, Physical Therapists, Spinal Manipulation, Introduction Manual therapy is a commonly recommended intervention in clinical practice guidelines for a variety of musculoskeletal conditions including low back pain (LBP). (1-14) Reported benefits include improved blood flow [...]

Objective. The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic has facilitated the emergence of telerehabilitation, but it is unclear which patients are most likely to respond to physical therapy provided this way. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between individual patient factors and substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation among a cohort of patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). Methods. This is a secondary analysis of data collected during a prospective longitudinal cohort study. Patients with chronic LBP (N = 98) were provided with a standardized physical therapy protocol adapted for telerehabilitation. We examined the relationship between patient factors and substantial clinical benefit with telerehabilitation, defined as a [greater than or equal to]50% improvement in disability at 10 weeks, measured using the Oswestry Disability Index. Results. Sixteen (16.3%) patients reported a substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation. Patients reporting substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation had lower initial pain intensity, lower psychosocial risk per the STarT Back Screening Tool, higher levels of pain self-efficacy, and reported higher therapeutic alliance with their physical therapist compared to other patients. Conclusion. Patients with lower psychosocial risk and higher pain-self efficacy experienced substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation for chronic LBP more often than other patients in our cohort. Therapeutic alliance was higher among patients who experienced a substantial clinical benefit compared to those who did not. Impact. This study indicates that psychosocial factors play an important role in the outcomes of patients receiving telerehabilitation for chronic LBP. Baseline psychosocial screening may serve as a method for identifying patients likely to benefit from this approach. Keywords: Patient-Centered Care, Precision Medicine, Risk Factors, Telemedicine, Introduction During the early phases of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, state and federal policies were modified, allowing many physical therapists in the United States to begin providing care through [...]

Objective. The aim of this study was to explore associations between the utilization of active, passive, and manual therapy interventions for low back pain (LBP) with 1-year escalation-of-care events, including opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, specialty care visits, and hospitalizations. Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of 4827 patients identified via the Military Health System Data Repository who received physical therapist care for LBP in 4 outpatient clinics between January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2018. One-year escalation-of-care events were evaluated based on type of physical therapist interventions (ie, active, passive, or manual therapy) received using adjusted odds ratios. Results. Most patients (89.9%) received active interventions. Patients with 10% higher proportion of visits that included at least 1 passive intervention had a 3% to 6% higher likelihood of 1-year escalation-of-care events. Similarly, with 10% higher proportion of passive to active interventions used during the course of care, there was a 5% to 11% higher likelihood of 1-year escalation-of-care events. When compared to patients who received active interventions only, the likelihood of incurring 1-year escalation-of-care events was 50% to 220% higher for those who received mechanical traction and 2 or more different passive interventions, but lower by 50% for patients who received manual therapy. Conclusion. Greater use of passive interventions for LBP was associated with elevated odds of 1-year escalation-of-care events. In addition, the use of specific passive interventions such as mechanical traction in conjunction with active interventions resulted in suboptimal escalation-of-care events, while the use of manual therapy was associated with more favorable downstream health care outcomes. Impact. Physical therapists should be judicious in the use of passive interventions for the management of LBP as they are associated with greater likelihood of receiving opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, and specialty care visits. Keywords: Electric Stimulation Therapy, Exercise, Hot/Cold Pack, Low Back Pain, Manual Therapy, Needle Therapy, Traction, Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is one of the leading causes of disability in the USA. (1, 2) The prevalence of LBP has continued to increase each year, as has [...]

Objective. The aim of this research was to examine the scope of evidence for the influence of a nonmedical initial provider on health care utilization and outcomes in people with low back pain (LBP). Methods. Using scoping review methodology, we conducted an electronic search of 4 databases from inception to June 2021. Studies investigating the management of patients with a new onset of LBP by a nonmedical initial health care provider were identified. Pairs of reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text studies. We extracted health care utilization and patient outcomes and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Two reviewers descriptively analyzed the data and categorized findings by outcome measure. Results. A total of 26,462 citations were screened, and 11 studies were eligible. Studies were primarily retrospective cohort designs using claims-based data. Four studies had a low risk of bias. Five health care outcomes were identified: medication, imaging, care seeking, cost of care, and health care procedures. Patient outcomes included patient satisfaction and functional recovery. Compared with patients initiating care with medical providers, those initiating care with a nonmedical provider showed associations with reduced opioid prescribing and imaging ordering rates but increased rates of care seeking. Results for cost of care, health care procedures, and patient outcomes were inconsistent. Conclusions. Prioritizing nonmedical providers at the first point of care may decrease the use of low-value care, such as opioid prescribing and imaging referral, but may lead to an increased number of health care visits in the care of people with LBP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings. Impact. This scoping review provides preliminary evidence that nonmedical practitioners, as initial providers, may help reduce opioid prescription and selective imaging in people with LBP. The trend observed in this scoping review has important implications for pathways of care and the role of nonmedical providers, such as physical therapists, within primary health care systems. Lay Summary. This scoping review provides preliminary evidence that nonmedical practitioners, as initial providers, might help reduce opioid prescription and selective imaging in people with LBP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings. Keywords: Direct Access, Initial Provider, Low Back Pain, Primary Health Care, Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is the number 1 cause of years lived with disability worldwide. (1) The personal, institutional, and societal-level health impacts of LBP contribute to substantial economic [...]

Objective. The aim of this study was to explore patients' expectations before and experiences after physical therapy for low back pain. Methods. Qualitative in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients attending physical therapy were performed before, immediately after, and 6 months after treatment. Data were analyzed from a hermeneutical perspective with decontextualization, recontextualization, and identification of themes. Results. Patients' pretreatment expectations to physical therapy focused around exercises and a body-oriented diagnosis. After treatment, reassurance, active listening with explanations, and personally adapted strategies for self-managing pain and regaining control over everyday activity were expressed as decisive for a meaningful therapeutic alliance. Conclusion. Expectations before treatment focused on exercises and diagnosis. Empathetic and personally adapted education aimed at empowerment was experienced as a meaningful aspect of the therapeutic alliance after treatment. The therapeutic alliance provided a basis to integrate knowledge on the complexity of pain. Impact. Our findings indicate that patients emphasize physical therapists' interactional and pedagogical skills as meaningful aspects of the therapeutic alliance, which has implications for clinical practice and training physical therapist students. Keywords: Behavioral Therapy, Longitudinal Studies, Low Back Pain, Qualitative, Therapeutic Alliance, Introduction Low back pain is an increasing public health problem associated with decreased physical function, an unhealthy lifestyle, and reduced participation in work and other areas of social participation. (1) [...]

Objective. The purpose of this study was to define and select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators, accepted by stakeholders on usability and perceived added value as a quality improvement tool, and to formulate recommendations for the next implementation step. Methods. In phase 1, 15 potential quality indicators were defined for patient-reported outcome measures and associated domains, namely the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) for pain intensity, the Patient Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS) for physical activity, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale for physical functioning, and the Global Perceived Effect--Dutch Version for perceived effect. Their comparability and discriminatory characteristics were described using cohort data. In phase 2, a core set of quality indicators was selected based on consensus among stakeholders in focus group meetings. Results. In total, 65,815 completed treatment episodes for patients with nonspecific low back pain were provided by 1009 physical therapists from 219 physical therapist practices. The discriminability between physical therapists of all potential 15 quality indicators was adequate, with intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.08 and 0.30. Stakeholders selected a final core set of 6 quality indicators: 2 process indicators (the routine measurement of NPRS and the PSFS) and 4 outcome indicators (pretreatment and posttreatment change scores for the NPRS, PSFS, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, and the minimal clinically important difference of the Global Perceived Effect--Dutch Version). Conclusion. This study described and selected a core set of outcome-based quality indicators for physical therapy in patients with nonspecific low back pain. The set was accepted by stakeholders for having added value for daily practice in physical therapy primary care and was found useful for quality improvement initiatives. Further studies need to focus on improvement of using the core set of outcome-based quality indicators as a quality monitoring and evaluation instrument. Impact. Patient-reported outcome-based quality indicators developed from routinely collected clinical data are promising for use in quality improvement in daily practice. Keywords: Nonspecific Low Back Pain, Physical Therapy, PROMs, Quality Indicators, Introduction Quality indicators based on health outcomes can be used as an implementation tool to improve quality of care by monitoring and evaluating treatment trajectories with patient-reported outcomes (.1-4 )Quality [...]

2023 APR 8 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Obesity, Fitness & Wellness Week -- Research findings on opioids are discussed in a new report. According to [...]

2023 FEB 11 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Obesity, Fitness & Wellness Week -- Investigators discuss new findings in chronic back pain. According to news reporting [...]

Objective. Research supports the relevance of the therapeutic alliance (TA) between patients and physical therapists on outcomes, but the impact of TA during routine physical therapist practice has not been quantified. The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationship between TA assessed during a physical therapy episode of care for patients with low back pain and functional outcome at the conclusion of care. The secondary objective was to examine psychometric properties of the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised (WAI-SR) form, a patient-reported TA measure. Methods. This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 676 patients (mean [SD] age = 55.6 [16.1] y; 55.9% female) receiving physical therapy for low back pain in 45 outpatient clinics from 1 health system in the United States. Participating clinics routinely collect patient-reported data at initial, interim, and final visits. The lumbar computer-adapted test (LCAT) was used to evaluate functional outcome. The TA was assessed from the patient's perspective at interim assessments using the WAI-SR, bivariate correlations were examined, and regression models were examined if interim WAI-SR scores explained outcome variance beyond a previously validated multivariate prediction model. Internal consistency and ceiling effects for the WAI-SR were examined. Results. Interim WAI-SR scores were not correlated with patient characteristics or initial LCAT, but they were correlated with final LCAT and LCAT change from initial to final assessment. WAI-SR total score (adjusted [R.sup.2] = 0.36), and Task (adjusted [R.sup.2] = 0.38) and Goal subscales (adjusted [R.sup.2] = 0.35) explained additional variance in outcome beyond the base model (adjusted [R.sup.2] = 0.33). Internal consistency was higher for WAI-SR total score ([alpha] = .88) than for subscales ([alpha] = .76-.82). Substantial ceiling effects were observed for all WAI-SR scores (27.2%-63.6%). Conclusion. Findings support the importance of TA in physical therapist practice. Measurement challenges were identified, most notably ceiling effects. Impact. This study supports the impact of the patient-physical therapist alliance on functional outcome. Results extend similar findings from controlled studies into a typical physical therapist practice setting. Better understanding of the role of contextual factors including the therapeutic alliance might be key to improving the magnitude of treatment effect for discrete physical therapist interventions and enhancing clinical outcomes of physical therapy episodes of care. Keywords: Low Back Pain, Therapeutic Alliance, Contextual Factors, Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent condition and the leading cause of disablement worldwide. (1) Studies show 20% to 30% of those with LBP who seek health [...]

Objective. Lumbar radiculopathy (LR) is a pain syndrome caused by compression/irritation of the lumbar nerve root(s). Traction is a well-known and commonly used conservative treatment for LR, although its effectiveness is disputed. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the effects of different types of traction added to or compared with conservative treatments on pain and disability. Methods. Data were obtained from CENTRAL, PUBMED, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and PEDro from their inception to April 2020. All randomized controlled trials on adults with LR, using mechanical traction, and without any restriction regarding publication time or language were considered. Two reviewers selected the studies, evaluated the quality assessment, and extracted the results. Meta-analysis used a random-effects model. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and 5 were meta-analyzed. Results. Meta-analyses of results from low-quality studies indicated that supine mechanical traction added to physical therapist treatments had significant effects on pain (g = -0.58 [95% confidence interval = - 0.87 to -0.29]) and disability (g = -0.78 [95% confidence interval = -1.45 to -0.11]). Analyses of results from high-quality studies of prone mechanical traction added to physical therapist intervention for pain and disability were not significant. These results were also evident at short-term follow-up (up to 3 months after intervention). Conclusion. The literature suggests that, for pain and disability in LR, there is short-term effectiveness of supine mechanical traction when added to physical therapist intervention. Impact. This systematic review may be relevant for clinical practice due to its external validity because the treatments and the outcome measures are very similar to those commonly used in a clinical context. Keywords: Traction, Sciatica, Radiating Pain, Low Back Pain, Randomized Controlled Trials, Introduction The term lumbar radiculopathy (LR) describes a pain syndrome caused by compression and/or irritation of lumbar nerve roots by intervertebral disk degeneration or herniation, degenerative arthritis, lumbar stenosis, and [...]

Objective. Low back pain accounts for nearly 4 million emergency department (ED) visits annually and is a significant source of disability. Physical therapy has been suggested as a potentially effective nonopioid treatment for low back pain; however, no studies to our knowledge have yet evaluated the emerging resource of ED-initiated physical therapy. The study objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes in patients receiving ED-initiated physical therapy and patients receiving usual care for acute low back pain. Methods. This was a prospective observational study of ED patients receiving either physical therapy or usual care for acute low back pain from May 1, 2018, to May 24, 2019, at a single academic ED (>91,000 annual visits). The primary outcome was pain-related functioning, assessed with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference (PROMIS-PI) scores. The secondary outcome was use of high-risk medications (opioids, benzodiazepines, and skeletal muscle relaxants). Outcomes were compared over 3 months using adjusted linear mixed and generalized estimating equation models. Results. For 101 participants (43 receiving ED-initiated physical therapy and 58 receiving usual care), the median age was 40.5 years and 59% were women. Baseline outcome scores in the ED-initiated physical therapy group were higherthan those in the usual care group (ODI = 51.1 vs 36.0; PROMIS-PI = 67.6 vs 62.7). Patients receiving ED-initiated physical therapy had greater improvements in both ODI and PROMIS-PI scores at the 3-month follow-up (ODI = -14.4 [95% CI = -23.0 to -5.7]; PROMIS-PI = -5.1 [95% CI = -9.9 to -0.4]) and lower use of high-risk medications (odds ratio = 0.05 [95% CI = 0.01 to 0.58]). Conclusion. In this single-center observational study, ED-initiated physical therapy for acute low back pain was associated with improvements in functioning and lower use of high-risk medications compared with usual care; the causality of these relationships remains to be explored. Impact. ED-initiated physical therapy is a promising therapy for acute low back pain that may reduce reliance on high-risk medications while improving patient-reported outcomes. Lay Summary. Emergency department-initiated physical therapy for low back pain was associated with greater improvement in functioning and lower use of high-risk medications over 3 months. Keywords: Acute Care, Analgesics, Back Pain, Emergency Care, Acute Pain, Introduction Background Low back pain afflicts almost one-half of all Americans annually and accounts for nearly 4 million emergency department (ED) visits per year. (1,2) A small proportion of these [...]

Background. Back School and McKenzie methods are popular active treatment approaches that include both exercises and information for patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Objective. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Back School and McKenzie methods in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Design. The study was a prospectively registered, 2-arm randomized controlled trial with a blinded assessor. Setting. The study was conducted in the outpatient physical therapy clinic in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Patients. The study participants were 148 patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Interventions. The 4-week treatment program (one session/week) was based on the Back School (delivered to the group) or McKenzie (delivered individually) principles. The participants also were instructed to perform a daily set of home exercises. Measurements. Clinical outcomes were assessed at follow-up appointments at 1, 3, and 6 months after randomization. Primary outcome measures were pain intensity (measured by the 0-10 pain numerical rating scale) and disability (measured by the 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) 1 month after randomization. Secondary outcome measures were pain intensity and disability at 3 and 6 months after randomization, quality of life (measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF instrument) at 1, 3, and 6 months after randomization, and trunk flexion range of motion measured by an inclinometer at 1 month after randomization. The data were collected by a blinded assessor. Results. Participants allocated to the McKenzie group had greater improvements in disability at 1 month (mean effect=2.37 points, 95% confidence interval=0.76 to 3.99) but not for pain (mean effect=0.66 points, 95% confidence interval = -0.29 to 1.62). No between-group differences were observed for all secondary outcome measures. Limitations. It was not possible to monitor the home exercise program. Therapists and participants were not blinded. Conclusions. The McKenzie method (a more resource-intensive intervention) was slightly more effective than the Back School method for disability, but not for pain intensity immediately after treatment in participants with chronic low back pain., Chronic nonspecific low back pain (ie, low back pain of at least 12 weeks' duration and without a specific cause) (1,2) is one of the most common health conditions worldwide. [...]

Background. Manual therapists typically advocate the need for a detailed clinical examination to decide which vertebral level should be manipulated in patients with low back pain. However, it is unclear whether spinal manipulation needs to be specific to a vertebral level. Objective. The purpose of this study was to analyze the immediate effects of a single, region-specific spinal manipulation defined during the clinical examination versus a single non-region-specific spinal manipulation (applied on an upper thoracic vertebra) in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain for the outcome measures of pain intensity and pressure pain threshold at the time of the assessment. Design. This was a 2-arm, prospectively registered, randomized controlled trial with a blinded assessor. Setting. The study was conducted in an outpatient physical therapy clinic in Brazil. Patients. The study participants were 148 patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (with pain duration of at least 12 weeks). Randomization. The randomization schedule was generated by an independent statistician and was concealed by using consecutively numbered, sealed, opaque envelopes. Interventions. A single high-velocity manipulation was administered to the upper thoracic region of the participants allocated to the non-region-specific manipulation group and to the painful lumbar levels of the participants allocated to the region-specific manipulation group. Measurements. Pain intensity was measured by a 0 to 10 numeric pain rating scale. Pressure pain threshold was measured using a pressure algometer. Limitations. It was not possible to blind the therapist and participants. Results. A total of 148 patients participated in the study (74 in each group). There was no loss to follow-up. Both groups improved in terms of immediate decrease of pain intensity; however, no between-group differences were observed. The between-group difference for pain intensity and pressure pain threshold were 0.50 points (95% confidence interval=-0.10 to 1.10) and -1.78 points (95% confidence interval=-6.40 to 2.82), respectively. No adverse reactions were observed. Conclusion. The immediate changes in pain intensity and pressure pain threshold after a single high-velocity manipulation do not differ by region-specific versus non-region-specific manipulation techniques in patients with chronic low back pain., Low back pain is a significant health condition worldwide (1,2) due to its impact on work disability, absenteeism, and costs. (3) A systematic review on the global prevalence of low [...]

highlights the findings and application of Cochrane reviews and other evidence pertinent to the practice of physical therapy. The Cochrane Library is a respected source of reliable evidence related to health care. Cochrane systematic reviews explore the evidence for and against the effectiveness and appropriateness of interventions--medications, surgery, education, nutrition, exercise--and the evidence for and against the use of diagnostic tests for specific conditions. Cochrane reviews are designed to facilitate the decisions of clinicians, patients, and others in health care by providing a careful review and interpretation of research studies published in the scientific literature) Each article in this PTJ series summarizes a Cochrane review or other scientific evidence on a single topic and presents clinical scenarios based on real patients or programs to illustrate how the results of the review can be used to directly inform clinical decisions. This article focuses on the case of a 33-year-old man who was seen for physical therapy 6 weeks after lumbar microdiskectomy. Can an active rehabilitation program increase function and decrease pain?, Low back pain (LBP) may be associated with lumbar intervertebral disk herniation. A subset of patients with diskogenic LBP may have radicular symptoms that include buttock and leg pain and [...]

Background. Exercise benefits patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain; however, the most effective type of exercise remains unknown. Objective. This study compared outcomes after motor control exercises, sling exercises, and general exercises for low back pain. Design. This was a randomized controlled trial with a 1-year follow-up. Setting. The study was conducted in a primary care setting in Norway. Patients. The participants were patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (n=109). Interventions. The interventions in this study were low-load motor control exercises, high-load sling exercises, or general exercises, all delivered by experienced physical therapists, once a week for 8 weeks. Measurements. The primary outcome measure was pain reported on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale after treatment and at a 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcome measures were self-reported activity limitation (assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index), clinically examined function (assessed with the Fingertip-to-Floor Test), and fear-avoidance beliefs after intervention. Results. The postintervention assessment showed no significant differences among groups with respect to pain (overall group difference) or any of the outcome measures. Mean (95% confidence interval) group differences for pain reduction after treatment and after 1 year were 0.3 (-0.7 to 1.3) and 0.4 (-0.7 to 1.4) for motor control exercises versus sling exercises, 0.7 (-0.6 to 2.0) and 0.3 (-0.8 to 1.4) for sling exercises versus general exercises, and 1.0 (-0.1 to 2.0) and 0.7 (-0.3 to 1.7) for motor control exercises versus general exercises. Limitations. The nature of the interventions made blinding impossible. Conclusions. This study gave no evidence that 8 treatments with individually instructed motor control exercises or sling exercises were superior to general exercises for chronic low back pain., Nonspecific low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem in industrialized societies, with lifetime prevalence between 60% and 85%. (1) Reviews point to beneficial effects of supervised exercises [...]

Background. Graded activity and graded exposure are increasingly being used in the management of persistent low back pain; however, their effectiveness remains poorly understood. Purpose. The aim of this study was to systematically review randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of graded activity or graded exposure for persistent (>6 weeks in duration or recurrent) low back pain. Data Sources. Trials were electronically searched and rated for quality by use of the PEDro scale (values of 0-10). Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials of graded activity or graded exposure that included pain, disability, global perceived effect, or work status outcomes were included in the study. Data Extraction. Outcomes were converted to a scale from 0 to 100. Trials were pooled with software used for preparing and maintaining Cochrane reviews. Results are presented as weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Data Synthesis. Fifteen trials with 1,684 patients were included. The trials had a median quality score of 6 (range=3-9). Pooled effects from 6 trials comparing graded activity with a minimal intervention or no treatment favored graded activity, with 4 contrasts being statistically significant: mean values (95% confidence intervals) for pain in the short term, pain in the intermediate term, disability in the short term, and disability in the intermediate term were -6.2 (-9.4 to -3.0), -5.5 (-9.9 to -1.0), -6.5 (-10.1 to -3.0), and -3.9 (-7.4 to -0.4), respectively. None of the pooled effects from 6 trials comparing graded activity with another from of exercise, from t trials comparing graded activity with graded exposure, and from 2 trials comparing graded exposure with a waiting list were statistically significant. Limitations. Limitations of this review include the low quality of the studies, primarily those that evaluated graded exposure: the use of various types of outcome measures: and differences in the implementation of the interventions, adding to the heterogeneity of the studies. Conclusions. The available evidence suggests that graded activity in the short term and intermediate term is slightly more effective than a minimal intervention but not more effective than other forms of exercise for persistent low back pain. The limited evidence suggests that graded exposure is as effective as minimal treatment or graded activity for persistent low back pain., Many patients with low back pain (LBP) have concerns that are inadequately explained with a traditional biomedical model. Contemporary approaches have recognized the multifactorial etiology of LBP and the necessity [...]

Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and with fibromyalgia experience significantly more pain and show more extensive, common patterns of neuronal activation in pain-related cortical areas than healthy controls, [...]