Cited by 207Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyPregnancy-related medical research

Exercises for prevention of recurrences of low-back pain

Open access
Choi, Brian KL, Verbeek, Jos H, Tam, Wilson Wai-San, Jiang, Johnny Y·2010·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Back pain is a common disorder that has a tendency to recur. It is unclear if exercises, either as part of treatment or as a post-treatment programme, can reduce back pain recurrences. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness of exercises for preventing new episodes of low-back pain or low-back pain-associated disability. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL up to July 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: participants who had experienced back pain before, an intervention that consisted of exercises without additional specific treatment and outcomes that measured recurrence of back pain or time to recurrence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently judged if references met the inclusion criteria. The same review authors independently extracted data and judged the risk of bias of the studies. Studies were divided into post-treatment intervention programmes and treatment studies. Study results were pooled with meta-analyses if participants, interventions, controls and outcomes were judged to be sufficiently homogenous. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 articles reporting on nine studies with nine interventions. Four studies with 407 participants evaluated post-treatment programmes and five studies with 1113 participants evaluated exercise as a treatment modality. Four studies had a low risk of bias, one study a high risk and the remainder an unclear risk of bias.We found moderate quality evidence that post-treatment exercises were more effective than no intervention for reducing the rate of recurrences at one year (Rate Ratio 0.50; 95% Confidence Interval 0.34 to 0.73). There was moderate quality evidence that the number of recurrences was significantly reduced in two studies (Mean Difference -0.35; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.10) at one-half to two years follow-up. There was very low quality evidence that the days on sick leave were reduced by post-treatment exercises (Mean Difference -4.37; 95% CI -7.74 to -0.99) at one-half to two years follow-up.We found conflicting evidence for the effectiveness of exercise treatment in reducing the number of recurrences or the recurrence rate. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate quality evidence that post-treatment exercise programmes can prevent recurrences of back pain but conflicting evidence was found for treatment exercise. Studies into the validity of measurement of recurrences and the effectiveness of post-treatment exercise are needed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd006555.pub2

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  2. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.2 for Windows. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2003.
  3. Strauss S, Guthrie F, Nicolisi F. Prevalence of pain complaints in a general population: an Australian study. Australian Association Musculoskeletal Medicine Bulletin 1993;9:54–61. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Choi, B. K., Verbeek, J. H., Tam, W. W.-S., & Jiang, J. Y.
Affiliations
  • Ministry of Health (SG)
  • Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FI)
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-01-20
Volume
2011
Issue
2
Pages
CD006555-CD006555
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W3023541904
Cited by
207
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 9
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
Keywords
low back pain, exercise therapy, back pain prevention, sick leave, disability
MeSH terms
Exercise Therapy, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Low Back Pain, Secondary Prevention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review