Journal of bodywork and movement therapies · 2022
Exploring the role of respiratory intervention as an effective adjunct tool in the management of chronic low back pain: A scoping systematic review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Usman Arshi, Tanwar Tarushi, Veqar Zubia
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) are usually prescribed manual therapy and exercise programs. Respiratory exercise interventions are also recommended by some researchers for CLBP. However, the evidence for the relative effectiveness of these treatments is limited, and the question of which sort of intervention is most suited remains unanswered.
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of respiratory interventions in CLBP.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed using databases: PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021233739).
RESULTS: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Out of these, one was of poor, three were of fair, and three were of good qualities. A total of 293 subjects were included in seven studies, the mean age of subjects ranged from 21 to 53 years. The largest effect size was reported for pain (d = 1.5) and maximum inspiratory pressure (d = 1.38). No detrimental effects were reported for any of the intervention programs.
CONCLUSIONS: Since most of the research has been done on pain and MIP, and both of these parameters have revealed significant changes with large effect size, therefore it can be concluded that respiratory interventions improve pain and MIP in CLBP. Owing to the limited number of studies available, a definitive outcome could not be documented for other parameters. Thus, further research is needed to provide a more robust piece of evidence and understanding.
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of respiratory interventions in CLBP.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed using databases: PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021233739).
RESULTS: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Out of these, one was of poor, three were of fair, and three were of good qualities. A total of 293 subjects were included in seven studies, the mean age of subjects ranged from 21 to 53 years. The largest effect size was reported for pain (d = 1.5) and maximum inspiratory pressure (d = 1.38). No detrimental effects were reported for any of the intervention programs.
CONCLUSIONS: Since most of the research has been done on pain and MIP, and both of these parameters have revealed significant changes with large effect size, therefore it can be concluded that respiratory interventions improve pain and MIP in CLBP. Owing to the limited number of studies available, a definitive outcome could not be documented for other parameters. Thus, further research is needed to provide a more robust piece of evidence and understanding.