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

Hansen 1993.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: RCT
Setting: Denmark, mixed
Exercise groups: 1
Comparison groups: 2
Participants Number of participants: 180 (E1 = 60, C1 = 61, C2 = 59)
Chronic LBP duration: 28.6 weeks (moderate)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: No participants
Mean age (years): 41
Sex (female): 32%
Interventions Exercise Group 1 (E1): Intensive dynamic back‐muscle training: extension strengthening; type = strengthening; duration = 4 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = none
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Other conservative treatment (physical therapy)
Comparison Group 2 (C2): Other conservative treatment (physical therapy)
Outcomes Core outcomes reported: Pain (Pain Rating Scale); Global Perceived Health or Recovery (Global Perceived Health or Recovery (overall treatment effect))
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 4 weeks (short); 26 weeks (moderate); 52 weeks (long)
Notes Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: The Danish Rheumatism Association; The Health Insurance Foundation; The Rockwood Foundation
Other: SDs imputed
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of care provider (performance bias) High risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) High risk Support for judgement is not available
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Support for judgement is not available
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) High risk Support for judgement is not available
Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available