Cited by 24Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPregnancy-related medical researchSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

Treatment targets of exercise for persistent non-specific low back pain: a consensus study

Open access
Wood, Lianne, Bishop, Annette, Lewis, Martyn, Smeets, Rob J.E.M, Bronfort, Gert, Hayden, Jill A., Foster, Nadine E.·2021·Physiotherapy

Abstract

Objectives Despite several hundred previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the key treatment targets of exercise for persistent non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) remain unclear. This study aimed to generate consensus about the key treatment targets of exercise interventions for patients with NSLBP.Design Consensus was generated using modified nominal group technique in two, sequential, workshops. The results of a previous systematic review informed the first, national, workshop idea generation and the results of this workshop informed the second, international, workshop. The authors generated a starting list of 30 treatment targets from the systematic review. A pre-specified consensus threshold of 75% was used in the voting stage.Participants Workshop participants included people with experience of using exercise to manage their persistent NSLBP, clinicians who prescribe exercise for persistent NSLBP, and researchers who design and evaluate exercise interventions in RCTs. All participants generated, voted and ranked the treatment targets in each workshop using an online platform.Results A total of 39 participants contributed to the consensus (15 in the national workshop and 24 in the international workshop), comprising two people with NSLBP, six clinicians and 31 researchers/clinicians. A total of 40 exercise treatment targets were generated, and 25 were retained after voting and ranking. The prioritised targets of exercise for persistent NSLBP were: improving function, improving quality of life, reducing pain, meeting patient-specific goals and reducing fear of movement.Conclusions Future RCTs of exercise should specify the targets of their exercise intervention and consider assessing these treatment targets as well as including mediation analyses.

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 · 10.1016/j.physio.2021.03.005

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • The clinical outcomes assessed are consistent with consensus based treatment targets of exercise for people with chronic, non-specific low back pain.

    “These clinical outcomes are also consistent with the consensus based treatment targets of exercise for people with chronic, non-specific LBP: to improve function, improve quality of life, reduce pain, meet patient specific goals, and reduce fear of movement.104”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Saragiotto BT, Maher CG, Yamato TP, Costa LO, Menezes Costa LOC, Ostelo RW, et al. Motor control exercise for chronic non-specific low-back pain. In: Saragiotto BT, edi- tor. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;(1):CD012004. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26742533 [cited 3 August 2017].
  2. World Health Organization. Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health: ICF. Int Classif 2002;1149:1-22. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/ icf/training/icfbeginnersguide.pdf.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wood, L., Bishop, A., Lewis, M., Smeets, R. J. E. M., Bronfort, G., Hayden, J. A., & Foster, N. E.
Affiliations
  • Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB)
  • Arthritis UK (GB)
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
Corresponding author
Wood, Lianne
Venue
Physiotherapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
112
Pages
78-86
ISSN
0031-9406 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3138358269
Cited by
24
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Physiotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • NIHR
  • Keele University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Keywords
non-specific low back pain, exercise intervention, treatment goals, exercise prescription, consensus, analgesia, quality of life, kinesiophobia, functional improvement, mediation analysis
MeSH terms
Back Pain, Exercise Therapy, Humans, Exercise, Low Back Pain

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