Effectiveness of Pilates exercise in treating people with chronic low back pain: a systematic review of systematic reviews

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Andrea Bialocerkowski¹  Bridget Hill²  Paul Marshall²  Gregory S Kolt²  Cherie Wells² 

[1] Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Qld, 4222, Australia;School of Science and Health, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia

关键词: Systematic review;    Low back pain;    Exercise;    Pilates;   

Others  :  1126250
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-7

 received in 2012-04-26, accepted in 2013-01-16,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Systematic reviews provide clinical practice recommendations that are based on evaluation of primary evidence. When systematic reviews with the same aims have different conclusions, it is difficult to ascertain which review reported the most credible and robust findings.

Methods

This study examined five systematic reviews that have investigated the effectiveness of Pilates exercise in people with chronic low back pain. A four-stage process was used to interpret findings of the reviews. This process included comparison of research questions, included primary studies, and the level and quality of evidence of systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence and the methodological quality of systematic reviews, using the National Health and Medical Research Council hierarchy of evidence, and the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews respectively. Any disagreements were resolved by a third researcher.

Results

A high level of consensus was achieved between the reviewers. Conflicting findings were reported by the five systematic reviews regarding the effectiveness of Pilates in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. Authors of the systematic reviews included primary studies that did not match their questions in relation to treatment or population characteristics. A total of ten primary studies were identified across five systematic reviews. Only two of the primary studies were included in all of the reviews due to different inclusion criteria relating to publication date and status, definition of Pilates, and methodological quality. The level of evidence of reviews was low due to the methodological design of the primary studies. The methodological quality of reviews varied. Those which conducted a meta-analysis obtained higher scores.

Conclusion

There is inconclusive evidence that Pilates is effective in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. This is due to the small number and poor methodological quality of primary studies. The Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews provides a useful method of appraising the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Individual item scores, however, should be examined in addition to total scores, so that significant methodological flaws of systematic reviews are not missed, and results are interpreted appropriately. (348 words)

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Wells et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]National Health and Medical Research Council: NHMRC levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council; 2009.
• [2]Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine: Levels of Evidence. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1025 webcite; 2009
• [3]Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000097. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000097 webcite
• [4]Evans D: Hierarchy of evidence: A framework for the ranking of evidence evaluating nursing interventions. J Clin Nurs 2003, 12:77-84.
• [5]Smith V, Devan D, Begley CM, Clarke M: Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:15. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]La Touche R, Escalante K, Linares MT: Treating non-specific chronic low back pain through the Pilates Method. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2008, 12:364-370.
• [7]Lim ECW, Poh RLC, Low AY, Wong WP: Effects of Pilates-based exercises on pain and disability in individuals with persistent non specific low back pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011, 41:70-80.
• [8]Pereira LM, Obara K, Dias JM, Menacho MO, Guariglia DA, Schiavoni D, Pereira HM, Cardoso JR: Comparing the Pilates method with no exercise or lumbar stabilisation for pain and functionality in patients with chronic low back pain: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil 2012, 26:10-20.
• [9]Posadzki P, Lizis P, Hagner-Derengowska M: Pilates for low back pain: A systematic review. Complement Ther Clin Pract 2011, 17:85-89.
• [10]Aladro-Gonzalvo AR, Araya-Vargas GA, Machado-Diaz M, Salazar-Rojas W: Pilates-based exercise for persistent, non specific low back pain and associated functional disability: A meta-analysis with meta-regression. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2012.08.003
• [11]Wells C, Bialocerkowski A, Kolt GS: Definition of Pilates: A systematic review. Complement Ther Med 2012, 20:253-262.
• [12]Endleman I, Critchley DJ: Transversus abdominis and obliquus internus activity during pilates exercises: measurement with ultrasound scanning. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008, 89:2205-2212.
• [13]Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Maher CG, Refshauge K, Herbert R, Hodges PW: Changes in recruitment of transversus abdominis correlate with disability in people with chronic low back pain. Br J Sports Med 2010, 44:1166-72.
• [14]Wallwork T, Stanton W, Freke M, Hides J: The effect of chronic low back pain on size and contraction of the lumbar multifidus muscle. Man Ther 2009, 14:496-500.
• [15]Kung J, Chiappelli F, Cajulis OO, Avezova R, Kossan G: From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: Validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance. Open Dent J 2010, 4:84-91.
• [16]Collins J, Fauser B, Bart CJM: Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews. Human Reprod Update 2005, 11:103-104.
• [17]Cook D, Mulrow C, Haynes R: Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med 1997, 126:376-380.
• [18]Schlesselman JJ, Collins JA: Evaluating systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Semin Reprod Med 2003, 21:95-105.
• [19]Charlton JE: Core Curriculum for Professional Education in Pain. 3rd edition. Seattle: International Association of the Study of Pain (IASP) Press; 2005.
• [20]Steiner WA, Ryser L, Huber EO, Uebelhart D, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G: Use of the ICF model as a clinical problem-solving tool in physical therapy and rehabilitation medicine. Phys Ther 2002, 82:1098-1107.
• [21]Shea B, Grimshaw J, Wells G, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM: Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007, 7:10. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjanson E, Grimshaw J, Henry DA, Boers M: AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:1013-1020.
• [23]Baker WL, White CM, Cappelleri JC, Kluger J, Coleman C: Understanding heterogeneity in meta-analysis: The role of meta-regression. Int J Clin Practice 2009, 63:1426-1434.
• [24]Anderson B: Randomised clinical trial comparing active versus passive approaches to the treatment of recurrent and chronic low back pain. University of Miami; 2005. PhD thesis
• [25]Rydeard R, Leger A, Smith D: Pilates-based therapeutic exercise: Effect on subjects with nonspecific chronic low back pain and functional disability: A randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2006, 36:472-484.
• [26]da Fonseca JL, Magini M, de Freitas TH: Laboratory Gait Analysis in Patients with Low Back Pain Before and After a Pilates Intervention. J Sport Rehabil 2009, 18:269-282.
• [27]Donzelli S, Di Domenica F, Cova AM, Galletti R, Giunta N: Two different techniques in the rehabilitation treatment of low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Europa Medicophysica 2006, 42:205-210.
• [28]Gagnon LH: Efficacy of Pilates exercises as therapeutic intervention in treating patients with low back pain. University of Tennessee; 2005. PhD thesis
• [29]MacIntyre L: The effect of Pilates on patients’ chronic low back pain: A pilot study. Master of Science in Physiotherapy thesis. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand; 2006. Thesis
• [30]Vad VB, Bhat AL, Tarabichi Y: The role of back rx exercise program in diskogenic low back pain: A prospective randomized trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007, 88:577-582.
• [31]Gladwell V, Head S, Haggar M, Beneke R: Does a program of Pilates improve chronic non-specific low back pain? J Sport Rehabil 2006, 15:338-350.
• [32]O’Brien N, Hanlon N, Meldrum D: Randomised controlled trial comparing physiotherapy and Pilates in the treatment of ordinary low back pain[abstract]. Phys Ther Rev 2006, 11:224-225.
• [33]Roach K, Carreras K, Lee A, Reed L, Zimmerman G: Development and reliability of the Miami Back Index. JOSPT 2001, 31:97.
• [34]Chapman JR, Norvell DC, Hermsmeyer JT, Bransford RJ, DeVine J, McGirt MJ, Lee MJ: Evaluating common outcomes for measuring treatment success for chronic low back pain. Spine 2011, 36(Suppl):S54-68.
• [35]Quinn J: Influence of Pilates-based mat exercise on chronic lower back pain. Boca Raton, Florida: Florida Atlantic University; 2005. PhD thesis
• [36]Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, van Tulder M: Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine 2009, 34:1929-1941.
• [37]Viera AJ, Garrett JM: Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005, 37:360-363.
• [38]Maher C: Effective physical treatment for chronic low back pain. Orthop Clin North Am 2004, 35:57-64.
• [39]Krismer M, van Tulder M: Strategies for prevention and management of musculoskeletal conditions. Low back pain (non-specific). Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2007, 21:77-91.
• [40]Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, MacDonald S, Delva D, Birtwhistle R, Lam M, Seguin R: Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: The struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003, 3:28. BioMed Central Full Text
• [41]Davidson M, Keating JL: A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: Reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 2002, 82:8-24.
• [42]Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M: Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomised trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007. Issue 2. Art No.: MR000010
• [43]Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan A-W, Cronin E, Decullier E, Easterbrook PJ, Von Elm E, Gamble C, Ghersi D, Ioannidis JPA, Simes J, Williamson PR: Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias. PLoS One 2008, 3:e3081.
• [44]van Tulder MW, Suttorp M, Morton S, Bouter LM, Shekella P: Empirical evidence of an association between internal validity and effect size in randomized controlled trials of low-back pain. Spine 2009, 34:1685-1692.
• [45]Sterne JAC, Gavaghan D, Egger M: Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: Power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2000, 53:1119-1129.
• [46]Thomson SG, Higgins JP: How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat Med 2002, 21:15591573.
• [47]Lambert PC, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR: A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002, 55:86-94.
• [48]Egger M, Bartlett C, Holenstein F, Sterne J: How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess 2003, 7:1-76.
• [49]Khad KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G: Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med 2003, 96:118-121.
• [50]Slavin RE: Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. Clin Epidemiol 1995, 48:9-18.
• [51]Tobin MJ, Jabran A: Meta-analysis under the spotlight: Focused on a meta-analysis of ventilator weaning. Crit Care Med 2008, 36:1-7.
• [52]Noordzij M, Hooft L, Dekker FW, Zoccali C, Jager KJ: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: When they are useful and when to be careful. Kidney Int 2009, 76:1130-1136.
• [53]Walker E, Hernandez AV, Kattan MW: Meta-analysis: Its strengths and limitations. Cleve Clin J Med 2008, 75:431-440.