| Study characteristics |
| Methods |
Study design: RCT
Setting: India, healthcare
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 0 |
| Participants |
Number of participants: 80 (E1 = 40, E2 = 40)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (moderate)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): 49
Sex (female): 45% |
| Interventions |
Exercise Group 1 (E1): Walking 30 minutes, exercises throughout the day, breathing practice; type = aerobic; duration = 1 weeks; dose = high; design = standardised; delivery = group; additional intervention = advice/education & psychological therapy
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Special yoga (asana) techniques for back pain progressing slowly over 3 days and Pranayama (breathing techniques); type = yoga; duration = 1 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = group; additional intervention = advice/education & psychological therapy |
| Outcomes |
Core outcomes reported: Pain (Numeric Rating Scale)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 1 weeks (short) |
| Notes |
Conflicts of interest: None to declare
Funding source: Swami Vivekananda Yoga Research Foundation
Other: None |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Randomisation: used two sets of 40 numbers spanning integers 1‐80 created by a random number table |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Numbered containers were used to conceal the random allocation before implementation. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
In intervention studies of this kind, subjects clearly identify their own treatment: double blinding was not possible. |
| Blinding of care provider (performance bias) |
High risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Statistician who developed randomisation sequence, clinical psychologist, and researcher who carried out assessments were all blinded. |
| 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 |
The two groups were similar with respect to sociodemographic and medical characteristics (Table 3). |
| Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) |
Low risk |
Residential treatment |
| Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) |
Low risk |
Residential treatment |
| Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
