Not all movements are equal: Differences in variability of trunk motor behavior between people with and without low back pain - A Systematic Review
Abu Bakar, F.; Staal, J. B.; van Cingel, R.; Saito, H.; Ostelo, R.; van Dieën, J. H.
Show abstract
BackgroundIn treatment of low-back pain (LBP), motor control exercises have shown to be superior to minimal interventions, but not to any other form of exercise therapy. Knowledge about variability in trunk motor behavior may help to identify patients that may be more likely to benefit from motor control exercises. ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to answer the question: Is variability of trunk motor behavior different between people with and without LBP and if so, do people with LBP show more or less variability? Furthermore, we addressed the question whether the results are dependent on characteristics of the patient group, the task performed and the type of variability measure. MethodsThis study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020180003). Studies were eligible if they (1) included a LBP group and a control group, (2) included adults with non-specific low back pain of any duration and (3) measured kinematic variability, EMG variability and/or kinetic variability. Risk of Bias was evaluated and a descriptive synthesis was performed. ResultsThirty-nine studies were included, thirty-one of which were included in the descriptive synthesis. In most studies and experimental conditions, variability did not significantly differ between groups. When significant differences were found, less variability in patients with LBP was more frequently reported than more variability, especially in gait-related tasks. ConclusionsGiven the considerable risk of bias of the included studies and the clinical characteristics of the participants with low severity scores for pain, disability and psychological measures, there is insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of early versus delayed rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: systematic review and meta-analyses 96%
- The perception of individuals with low back pain regarding reassuring information: insights based on physiotherapists messages 95%
- Cognitive Costs and Gait Parameters During Single- and Dual-Task Conditions: A Comparative Study in Individuals With and Without Non-Specific Neck Pain 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of Focal Muscle Vibrations in Improving Sensorimotor Performance, Mobility and Strength in Spinal Cord Injury Population: A Systematic Review 94%
- Predicting pain and function outcomes in people consulting with shoulder pain: The PANDA-S clinical cohort and qualitative study protocol (ISRCTN 46948079) 94%
- Exploring Risk Factors for Comorbid Depression in Osteoarthritis: A Scoping Review Protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Self-determination theory in physiotherapy practice: A rapid review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews 92%
- Comparing electromyography, accelerometry, and visual inspection to assess the resting motor threshold for transcranial magnetic stimulation 91%
- Improved accuracy of the whole body Center of Mass position through Kalman filtering 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Immediate effect of osteopathic techniques on human resting muscle tone in healthy subjects using myotonometry: A factorial randomized trial 96%
- Perception of yips among professional Japanese golfers: perspectives and challenges 94%
- Characteristics of patients with myofascial pain syndrome of the low back 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Modulation of Corticospinal Excitability and Muscle Synergies During Complex Locomotor Task in Individuals With and Without Cerebral Palsy: A TMS and EMG Study 93%
- Abnormal synergies and associated reactions post-hemiparetic stroke reflect the neuroanatomy of brainstem motor pathways 92%
- Gazing Down Has benefits Unrelated to Visual Input 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.