Table 2.
GRADE assessment: supervised exercise compared to non-supervised exercise
Supervised exercise compared to non-supervised exercise for patients after surgery for lumbar disk herniation Patient or population: patients after surgery for lumbar disk herniation Setting: Hospital Intervention: supervised exercise Comparison: non-supervised exercise | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Outcomes | № of participants studies) Follow-up | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Anticipated absolute effects | |
Risk with nonsupervised exercise | Risk difference with supervised exercise | ||||
Pain assessed with: Visual Analogue Scale (cm) Scale from: 0 to 10 follow-up: mean 4 months |
250 (5 RCTs) |
⨁⨁◯◯ Lowa,b |
- | MD 1.14 lower (1.65 lower to 0.62 lower) | |
Disability follow-up: mean 4 months | 175 (4 RCTs) |
⨁⨁◯◯ Lowb,c |
- | - | SMD 0.7 SD Lower (1.14 lower to 0.26 lower) |
Lumbar Mobility assessed with: Schober Test (cm) follow-up: mean 3 months | 68 (2 RCTs) |
⨁⨁◯◯ Lowb,d |
- | MD 0.27 lower (0.7 lower to 0.16 higher) |
CI confidence interval, MD mean difference, SMD standardised mean difference
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
Explanations
a3 of 5 studies are at high risk of bias
bN<400
c2 of 4 studies at high risk of bias
d2 of 3 studies at high risk of bias