Study characteristics |
Methods |
Study design: RCT
Setting: Iran, healthcare
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 1 |
Participants |
Number of participants: 53 (E1 = 19, E2 = 18, C1 = 16)
Chronic LBP duration: 29 months (moderate)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): 38
Sex (female): 64% |
Interventions |
Exercise Group 1 (E1): Strengthening, stretching, mobilising, co‐ordination, and stabilising exercises for abdominal, back, pelvic and lower limb muscles; type = mixed; duration = 6 weeks; dose = low; design = partially individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = electrotherapy
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Strengthening, stretching, mobilising, co‐ordination, and stabilising exercises for abdominal, back, pelvic and lower limb muscles; type = mixed; duration = 6 weeks; dose = low; design = partially individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = placebo
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Other conservative treatment (electrotherapy) |
Outcomes |
Core outcomes reported: Pain (Visual Analogue Scale); function (Oswestry Disability Index)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 6 weeks (short); 13 weeks (moderate) |
Notes |
Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: Not reported
Other: None |
Risk of bias |
Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Allocation of participants was concealed. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Allocation of participants was concealed. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Patients received laser therapy or placebo laser therapy on Saturday and Wednesday for 12 sessions. |
Blinding of care provider (performance bias) |
Low risk |
Patients received laser therapy or placebo laser therapy on Saturday and Wednesday for 12 sessions. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
All outcomes were measured on admission to the trial, at week six (after the last session of intervention) and at week 12 by physicians blinded to group. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Sixty‐one patients were randomised into one of the three groups (Figure I). Eight participants withdrew from the trial during the intervention or follow‐up period. |
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
Analyses were performed on an intention‐to‐treat basis. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) |
Low risk |
There was no statistically significant difference between the three groups. |
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. |