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

Shen 2009.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: RCT
Setting: China, healthcare
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 1
Participants Number of participants: 45 (E1 = 15, E2 = 15, C1 = 15)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (not specified)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Not specified
Mean age (years): 46
Sex (female): 0%
Interventions Exercise Group 1 (E1): McKenzie therapy; type = McKenzie; duration = 4 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = advice/education & electrotherapy
Exercise Group 2 (E2): McKenzie therapy; type = McKenzie; duration = 4 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = advice/education & electrotherapy
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Other conservative treatment (physical therapy)
Outcomes Core outcomes reported: Pain (Visual Analogue Scale); function (Japanese Orthopedic Association Score)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 4 weeks (short)
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) Low risk Sealed, opaque envelopes
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Sealed, opaque envelopes
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 Low risk No dropouts
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) Low risk No dropouts
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement was not available.
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.