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

Little 2008.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: RCT (NCT0028108728)
Setting: England, healthcare
Exercise groups: 4
Comparison groups: 4
Participants Number of participants: 579 (E1 = 72, E2 = 72, E3 = 71, E4 = 71, C1 = 72, C2 = 75, C3 = 73, C4 = 73)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (moderate)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): Not reported
Sex (female): Not reported
Interventions Exercise Group 1 (E1): Doctor prescription for aerobic exercises (predominantly walking); type = aerobic; duration = 12 weeks; dose = high; design = not specified; delivery = independent; additional intervention = psychological therapy
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Doctor prescription for aerobic exercises (predominantly walking); type = aerobic; duration = not specified weeks; dose = high; design = not specified; delivery = independent; additional intervention = psychological therapy & manual therapy
Exercise Group 3 (E3): Doctor prescription for aerobic exercises (predominantly walking); type = aerobic; duration = not specified weeks; dose = high; design = not specified; delivery = independent; additional intervention = advice/education & psychological therapy
Exercise Group 4 (E4): Doctor prescription for aerobic exercises (predominantly walking); type = aerobic; duration = not specified weeks; dose = high; design = not specified; delivery = independent; additional intervention = advice/education & psychological therapy
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Usual care/no treatment ("normal care")
Comparison Group 2 (C2): Other conservative treatment (manual therapy)
Comparison Group 3 (C3): Other conservative treatment (physical therapy)
Comparison Group 4 (C4): Other conservative treatment (physical therapy)
Outcomes Core outcomes reported: Pain (Number of Pain Days); function (Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire); HRQoL (36‐Item Short Form Survey); Global Perceived Health or Recovery (Global Perceived Health or Recovery (overall improvement (health transitions))
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 12 weeks (short); 52 weeks (long)
Notes Conflicts of interest: None to declare
Funding source: Medical Research Council (grant number G0001104)
Other: Sufficient data not available for inclusion in meta‐analyses
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk At the baseline appointment, after informed written consent had been obtained, participants were randomised to one of eight groups by the practice nurse.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk At the baseline appointment, after informed written consent had been obtained, participants were randomised to one of eight groups by the practice nurse.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes Low 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 Low risk A total of 579 people were randomised and completed the baseline questionnaires.
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) High risk Not described
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) Low risk Baseline characteristics were similar for all variables (Table 2) except there were fewer women in the Alexander technique groups.
Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) Low risk Not described
Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) Unclear risk Good adherence was defined by the trial management group as attending five out of six massage sessions, five out of six lessons in the other group.
Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) Low risk One session a week for six weeks. Two lessons a week for two weeks then one lesson a week for two weeks. Twenty two lessons over five months