Review question
To evaluate the effectiveness of motor control exercise (MCE) for patients with acute non-specific low back pain (LBP).
Background
LBP is a common disorder that is often associated with pain and disability. One common intervention for patients with LBP is exercise therapy, and MCE is widely used for these patients. However, its effectiveness for patients with acute LBP remains unclear.
Search date
Evidence is current to April 2015.
Study characteristics
We included in this review three trials evaluating acute or subacute pain in patients with LBP (n = 197 participants). Most participants were middle-aged and were recruited from primary or tertiary care centres. Duration of treatment programmes ranged from four weeks to six weeks.
Key results
MCE showed no benefit over spinal manipulative therapy, other forms of exercise or medical treatment for reducing pain or disability among patients with acute and subacute LBP. Whether MCE can prevent recurrences of LBP remains unclear.
Quality of the evidence
Results of this review include evidence of very low to moderate quality. We downgraded all comparisons for imprecision due to small study sample sizes.
We identified only three small trials that also evaluated different comparisons; therefore, no firm conclusions can be drawn on the effectiveness of MCE for acute LBP. Evidence of very low to moderate quality indicates that MCE showed no benefit over spinal manipulative therapy, other forms of exercise or medical treatment in decreasing pain and disability among patients with acute and subacute low back pain. Whether MCE can prevent recurrences of LBP remains uncertain.
Motor control exercise (MCE) is used by healthcare professionals worldwide as a common treatment for low back pain (LBP). However, the effectiveness of this intervention for acute LBP remains unclear.
To evaluate the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), four other databases and two trial registers from their inception to April 2015, tracked citations and searched reference lists. We placed no limitations on language nor on publication status.
We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP. We considered trials comparing MCE versus no treatment, versus another type of treatment or added as a supplement to other interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. Secondary outcomes were function, quality of life and recurrence.
Two review authors screened for potentially eligible studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. A third independent review author resolved disagreements. We examined MCE in the following comparisons: (1) MCE versus spinal manipulative therapy; (2) MCE versus other exercises; and (3) MCE as a supplement to medical management. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the quality of evidence. For missing or unclear information, we contacted study authors. We considered the following follow-up intervals: short term (less than three months after randomisation); intermediate term (at least three months but within 12 months after randomisation); and long term (12 months or longer after randomisation).
We included three trials in this review (n = 197 participants). Study sample sizes ranged from 33 to 123 participants. Low-quality evidence indicates no clinically important differences between MCE and spinal manipulative therapy for pain at short term and for disability at short term and long term. Low-quality evidence also suggests no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for pain at short or intermediate term and for disability at intermediate term or long term follow-up. Moderate-quality evidence shows no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for disability at short term follow-up. Finally, very low-quality evidence indicates that addition of MCE to medical management does not provide clinically important improvement for pain or disability at short term follow-up. For recurrence at one year, very low-quality evidence suggests that MCE and medical management decrease the risk of recurrence by 64% compared with medical management alone.