Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 28;2021(9):CD009790. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009790.pub2

Alaranta 1994.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: RCT
Setting: Finland, general population
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 0
Participants Number of participants: 293 (E1 = 141, E2 = 152)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (not specified)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Not specified
Mean age (years): 40
Sex (female): 55%
Interventions Exercise Group 1 (E1): Muscle training; pool exercises; indoor and outdoor activities (as part of a multidisciplinary programme); type = mixed; duration = 3 weeks; dose = high; design = standardised; delivery = group; additional intervention = electrotherapy & manual therapy & back school
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Guided or self‐controlled physical exercises including aerobic, strengthening, and stretching exercises; type = mixed; duration = 3 weeks; dose = high; design = individualised; delivery = independent with follow‐up; additional intervention = psychological therapy & relaxation
Outcomes Core outcomes reported: Function (Million Index); work (sick‐leave days and occupational handicap)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 12 weeks (short); 52 weeks (long)
Notes Conflicts of interest: Financial disclosure/device statement category: 3, 7
Funding source: Not reported
Other: SDs imputed
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Not described
Blinding of care provider (performance bias) Unclear risk Not described
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Not described
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Low risk A total of 98% of patients from the baseline examinations participated in the 12‐month follow‐up.
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) Unclear risk Not described
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.
Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) Unclear risk Not described
Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) Unclear risk Not described
Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.