| Study characteristics |
| Methods |
Study design: RCT (NCT01567566)
Setting: Canada, mixed
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 0 |
| Participants |
Number of participants: 80 (E1 = 40, E2 = 40)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (long)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): 37
Sex (female): 52% |
| Interventions |
Exercise Group 1 (E1): Lumbopelvic motor control (core and pelvic strengthening exercises) with biofeedback, open and closed kinetic chain hip strengthening exercises; home exercises; type = core strengthening; duration = 6 weeks; dose = high; design = partially individualised; delivery = not specified; additional intervention = advice/education
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Lumbopelvic motor control (core and pelvic strengthening exercises) with biofeedback, home exercises, home exercise log; type = core strengthening; duration = 6 weeks; dose = high; design = partially individualised; delivery = not specified; additional intervention = advice/education |
| Outcomes |
Core outcomes reported: Pain (Visual Analogue Scale); function (Oswestry Disability Index)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 6 weeks (short) |
| Notes |
Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: Workers Compensation Board Alberta’s Research Grant
Other: Information modified for author contact; SDs imputed |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Simple randomisation using a computer‐generated table of random numbers |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Opaque envelopes |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Assumed not possible |
| Blinding of care provider (performance bias) |
High risk |
Not clear ‐ trial reported "single blinded" |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Assumed not possible |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Four/40 and 5/40 participants were lost to follow‐up, with good reasons given. |
| Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
| Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) |
Low risk |
The randomisation was successful in creating equivalent groups at baseline. |
| Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) |
Low risk |
Participants were asked to refrain from seeking any other types of rehabilitation treatments, yoga, or Pilates during the trial. |
| Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) |
Low risk |
Adherence to the programme was similar in both groups and was considered excellent. |
| Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
