| Study characteristics |
| Methods |
Study design: RCT
Setting: Greece, not specified
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 1 |
| Participants |
Number of participants: 86 (E1 = 28, E2 = 28, C1 = 30)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (moderate)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): 42
Sex (female): 100% |
| Interventions |
Exercise Group 1 (E1): Alternating trunk flexion‐extension isometric contractions against resistance for 10 seconds, with no motion intended, 3 sets of 15 repetitions; type = core strengthening; duration = 4 weeks; dose = low; design = partially individualised; delivery = group; additional intervention = none
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Alternating concentric and eccentric contractions (5 seconds) for truck flexion and flexion‐extension exercises, 3 sets of 15 repetitions; type = core strengthening; duration = 4 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = group; additional intervention = none
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Usual care/no treatment (control group: no intervention) |
| Outcomes |
Core outcomes reported: Pain (Borg Rate of Perceived Pain Scale); function (Oswestry Disability Index)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 4 weeks (short); 8 weeks (short); 13 weeks (moderate) |
| Notes |
Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: Not reported
Other: SDs imputed |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
The randomisation method was not adequately specified. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
High risk |
Not described |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Not described |
| Blinding of care provider (performance bias) |
High risk |
Not described |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Not described |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Unclear risk |
Of the 108 subjects, a total of 86 subjects completed all training and testing measurements (Table 1). |
| Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) |
High risk |
ITT not used |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
| Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) |
Low risk |
The groups were homogeneous and showed nonsignificant differences in basic characteristics (Table 1). |
| Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
None of the subjects received additional physical therapy interventions during the study period. |
| 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. |
