-
British Journal of Sports Medicine Jan 2019The purpose of this review was to investigate the relationship between prenatal exercise, and low back (LBP), pelvic girdle (PGP) and lumbopelvic (LBPP) pain. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this review was to investigate the relationship between prenatal exercise, and low back (LBP), pelvic girdle (PGP) and lumbopelvic (LBPP) pain.
DESIGN
Systematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.
DATA SOURCES
Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies of all designs were eligible (except case studies and reviews) if they were published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on the population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of exercise, alone ["exercise-only"] or in combination with other intervention components [eg, dietary; "exercise + co-intervention"]), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and outcome (prevalence and symptom severity of LBP, PGP and LBPP).
RESULTS
The analyses included data from 32 studies (n=52 297 pregnant women). 'Very low' to 'moderate' quality evidence from 13 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed prenatal exercise did not reduce the odds of suffering from LBP, PGP and LBPP either in pregnancy or the postpartum period. However, 'very low' to 'moderate' quality evidence from 15 RCTs identified lower pain severity during pregnancy and the early postpartum period in women who exercised during pregnancy (standardised mean difference -1.03, 95% CI -1.58, -0.48) compared with those who did not exercise. These findings were supported by 'very low' quality evidence from other study designs.
CONCLUSION
Compared with not exercising, prenatal exercise decreased the severity of LBP, PGP or LBPP during and following pregnancy but did not decrease the odds of any of these conditions at any time point.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30337344
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099400 -
Journal of Bodywork and Movement... Oct 2017Low back pain (LBP) is a common complaint during pregnancy. This study examined the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) for LBP in pregnant or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Low back pain (LBP) is a common complaint during pregnancy. This study examined the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) for LBP in pregnant or postpartum women.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials unrestricted by language were reviewed. Outcomes were pain and functional status. Mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD) and overall effect size were calculated.
RESULTS
Of 102 studies, 5 examined OMT for LBP in pregnancy and 3 for postpartum LBP. Moderate-quality evidence suggested OMT had a significant medium-sized effect on decreasing pain (MD, -16.65) and increasing functional status (SMD, -0.50) in pregnant women with LBP. Low-quality evidence suggested OMT had a significant moderate-sized effect on decreasing pain (MD, -38.00) and increasing functional status (SMD, -2.12) in postpartum women with LBP.
CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests OMT produces clinically relevant benefits for pregnant or postpartum women with LBP. Further research may change estimates of effect, and larger, high-quality randomized controlled trials with robust comparison groups are recommended.
Topics: Disability Evaluation; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Manipulation, Osteopathic; Pain Measurement; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnant Women; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29037623
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.05.014 -
Physiotherapy Research International :... Jan 2018Pelvic girdle pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder which affects women during pregnancy and the postpartum period. In previous years, physiotherapists have focused... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pelvic girdle pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder which affects women during pregnancy and the postpartum period. In previous years, physiotherapists have focused on managing pelvic girdle pain through stabilizing exercises.
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to systematically review studies investigating the effectiveness of the stabilizing exercises for pelvic girdle pain during pregnancy and the postpartum period.
METHODS
The following electronic databases were utilized to search for eligible studies: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined a priori. The quality assessment was performed by the two reviewers independently using the PEDro scale (Physiotherapy Evidence-based Database).
RESULTS
Six studies were identified as eligible with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All studies evaluated the pain as an outcome measure. The evidence conflicted between the studies. Two studies showed that stabilizing exercises decrease pain and improve the quality of life for pregnant women when they are carried out on a regular basis. There is some limited evidence that stabilizing exercises decrease pain for postpartum women too.
CONCLUSION
In summary, there is limited evidence for the clinician to conclude on the effectiveness of stabilizing exercises in treating pelvic girdle pain during pregnancy and the postpartum periods.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Physical Therapy Modalities; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Quality of Life
PubMed: 29115735
DOI: 10.1002/pri.1699 -
Musculoskeletal Science & Practice Aug 2020Although pelvic girdle pain postpartum and pregnancy related low back pain postpartum (combined and named PGPP in this study) have a natural favourable course, there is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Although pelvic girdle pain postpartum and pregnancy related low back pain postpartum (combined and named PGPP in this study) have a natural favourable course, there is a subgroup of women who have persistent complaints. The objective of this study was to identify personal-, (pre)pregnancy-, obstetric-, and child related risk factors on PGPP by means of a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Literature searches of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane up to October 2018 were conducted. Prospective cohort studies in English or Dutch describing three or more risk factors for PGPP were included. We assessed articles for inclusion and risk of bias. Studies with high risk of bias were excluded from data extraction. Data was extracted and checked for accuracy confirming to the CHARMS-checklist. Homogeneous variables were pooled.
RESULTS
Twelve full text studies were assessed. Seven studies were excluded due to high risk of bias. Data was extracted from five studies. Multivariate analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in included risk factors as well as outcome measures on risk factor per study. Pooled univariate significant risk factors on PGPP were: a history of low back pain, pre-pregnancy body mass index >25, pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy, depression in pregnancy, and a heavy workload in pregnancy. No significant obstetric and child related risk factors were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Risk factors on PGPP have been identified. Since multivariate analysis was not possible the outcome should be treated with care, because interaction between risk factors could not be analysed.
Topics: Child; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32560862
DOI: 10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102154 -
Physiotherapy Mar 2023Low back (LBP) and pelvic girdle pain (PGP) during pregnancy are related to high direct and indirect costs. It is important to clarify evidence regarding interventions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Low back (LBP) and pelvic girdle pain (PGP) during pregnancy are related to high direct and indirect costs. It is important to clarify evidence regarding interventions to manage and prevent these conditions.
OBJECTIVE
Investigate the efficacy and acceptability of the interventions to prevent LBP and PGP during pregnancy.
DATA SOURCES
Searches were conducted up to January 6th, 2021 in the MEDLINE, PEDro, Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, AMED, Embase and PsycInfo databases STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) Pregnant women without LBP and/or PGP; (2) any prevention strategy on incidence of LBP and PGP and sick leave; (3) comparison to control; (4) quasi and randomised controlled trial.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Two reviewers performed screening, data extraction and methodological quality assessments. Meta-analysis was performed and Relative Risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.
RESULTS
Six randomised controlled trials involving 2231 participants were included in the review. Evidence of moderate quality was found that "stand-alone" exercise is acceptable to pregnant women with lumbopelvic pain (LBPP) (RR 0.60 [95%CI 0.42-0.84]) and prevents episodes of LBP (RR 0.92 [95%CI 0.85-0.99]) in the long-term. Moderate to very-low quality evidence was found detailing the lack of efficacy of other interventions in the prevention of these problems in the short and long-term.
LIMITATIONS
Small number of trials included.
CONCLUSIONS
Efficacy of prevention strategies for episodes of LBPP and the use of sick leave during pregnancy is not supported by evidence of high quality. Current evidence suggests that exercise is acceptable and promising for the prevention of LBP in the long-term. However, further high-quality trials with larger samples are needed. CONTRIBUTION ON PAPER.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Low Back Pain; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Sick Leave; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36288631
DOI: 10.1016/j.physio.2022.09.004 -
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Nov 2015To explore the effect of physiotherapeutic interventions on pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To explore the effect of physiotherapeutic interventions on pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Data sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, CINAHL, AMED, and SCOPUS databases were searched up to December 2014 for studies written in English, French, German or Scandinavian languages that evaluated physiotherapeutic modalities for preventing and treating pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain.
RESULTS
For lumbopelvic pain during pregnancy, the evidence was strong for positive effects of acupuncture and pelvic belts. The evidence was low for exercise in general and for specific stabilizing exercises. The evidence was very limited for efficacy of water gymnastics, progressive muscle relaxation, a specific pelvic tilt exercise, osteopathic manual therapy, craniosacral therapy, electrotherapy and yoga. For postpartum lumbopelvic pain, the evidence was very limited for clinic-based treatment concepts, including specific stabilizing exercises, and for self-management interventions for women with severe disabilities. No specific adverse events were reported for any intervention. No meta-analysis could be performed because of study heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
The levels of evidence were strong for a positive effect of acupuncture and pelvic belts, but weak for an effect of specific exercises. Caution should prevail in choosing other interventions for pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Female; Humans; Low Back Pain; Patient Education as Topic; Pelvic Pain; Physical Therapy Modalities; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Puerperal Disorders; Self Care
PubMed: 26018758
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12681 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Dec 2019To systematically assess the evidence of Craniosacral Therapy (CST) for the treatment of chronic pain. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the evidence of Craniosacral Therapy (CST) for the treatment of chronic pain.
METHODS
PubMed, Central, Scopus, PsycInfo and Cinahl were searched up to August 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of CST in chronic pain patients were eligible. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for pain intensity and functional disability (primary outcomes) using Hedges' correction for small samples. Secondary outcomes included physical/mental quality of life, global improvement, and safety. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs of 681 patients with neck and back pain, migraine, headache, fibromyalgia, epicondylitis, and pelvic girdle pain were included. CST showed greater post intervention effects on: pain intensity (SMD = -0.32, 95%CI = [- 0.61,-0.02]) and disability (SMD = -0.58, 95%CI = [- 0.92,-0.24]) compared to treatment as usual; on pain intensity (SMD = -0.63, 95%CI = [- 0.90,-0.37]) and disability (SMD = -0.54, 95%CI = [- 0.81,-0.28]) compared to manual/non-manual sham; and on pain intensity (SMD = -0.53, 95%CI = [- 0.89,-0.16]) and disability (SMD = -0.58, 95%CI = [- 0.95,-0.21]) compared to active manual treatments. At six months, CST showed greater effects on pain intensity (SMD = -0.59, 95%CI = [- 0.99,-0.19]) and disability (SMD = -0.53, 95%CI = [- 0.87,-0.19]) versus sham. Secondary outcomes were all significantly more improved in CST patients than in other groups, except for six-month mental quality of life versus sham. Sensitivity analyses revealed robust effects of CST against most risk of bias domains. Five of the 10 RCTs reported safety data. No serious adverse events occurred. Minor adverse events were equally distributed between the groups.
DISCUSSION
In patients with chronic pain, this meta-analysis suggests significant and robust effects of CST on pain and function lasting up to six months. More RCTs strictly following CONSORT are needed to further corroborate the effects and safety of CST on chronic pain.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION AT PROSPERO
CRD42018111975.
Topics: Chronic Pain; Humans; Manipulation, Osteopathic; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31892357
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-3017-y -
Cureus Jul 2023Pregnant women frequently complain of low back discomfort associated with their pregnancies. On their quality of life, it could have a detrimental effect.... (Review)
Review
Pregnant women frequently complain of low back discomfort associated with their pregnancies. On their quality of life, it could have a detrimental effect. Pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP) and pelvic girdle pain (PGP) are associated with substantial direct and indirect expenditures. Evidence addressing strategies to treat and prevent these illnesses needs to be clarified. This review aimed to examine the connection between exercise, LBP, and PGP. To find relevant studies (in the English language) that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a systematic search of peer-reviewed literature was carried out using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, the Web of Science, Pub Med, and ClinicalTrials.Gov. The publishing window was limited to the previous 10 years (2012-2022). Utilizing Review Manager version 5.4 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen), the results were examined. JADAD ratings were used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. To analyze the endpoints, the mean, standard mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined. We chose 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included 1885 pregnant individuals with pelvic girdle and/or lower back discomfort. The combined data showed that the exercise group had lower VAS scores than the control group. The final result, however, did not significantly differ. Most of the studies had high JADAD scores, ranging from 3 to 5 points. Lower back pain and/or pelvic girdle discomfort during pregnancy are not influenced by exercise; however, women who are provided with a regular exercise program appear to manage the condition effectively with improved functional status.
PubMed: 37593303
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42010 -
International Urogynecology Journal May 2021Many observational studies have suggested the existence of a link between urinary incontinence (UI) and lumbopelvic pain. The aim of our study is to evaluate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Many observational studies have suggested the existence of a link between urinary incontinence (UI) and lumbopelvic pain. The aim of our study is to evaluate the association between UI and back pain (BP) or pelvic girdle pain (PGP) in the adult population.
METHODS
This systematic review with meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO under the number 2019:CRD42019120047. Literature was sought in the Medline, Embase, and PEDro databases. The search was limited to English, Spanish, and French records, and was conducted from inception until November 2019. Observational studies evaluating the association between UI and BP/PGP were selected by two independent reviewers. Quality assessment was performed using the "Critical Review Form for quantitative studies" (McMaster University).
RESULTS
From the 2,055 retrieved articles, 18 were selected. Both qualitative (n = 18) and quantitative analysis (n = 7) were performed. Fifteen out of 18 studies (83%) found a positive association between UI and BP or PGP for at least one type of incontinence. Pooled estimates were OR 1.61, 1.53, and 1.51 for stress, urgency, and mixed urinary incontinence respectively. A similar degree of association between women and men was found. Subjects with stress and mixed incontinence showed greater likelihoods of mild pain compared with severe pain, although severe pain was more frequently associated with urgency incontinence than mild pain.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results support the association between UI and BP/PGP, which seems to be independent of gender-based differences. The strength of this association depends on pain or incontinence subtypes. Clinicians should be aware of the relationship in their clinical practice.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Urinary Incontinence; Urinary Incontinence, Stress; Urinary Incontinence, Urge
PubMed: 33620534
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-020-04670-1 -
European Spine Journal : Official... Sep 2012The present systematic review assessed the level of evidence for the association between relaxin levels and pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain (PPGP) during pregnancy. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The present systematic review assessed the level of evidence for the association between relaxin levels and pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain (PPGP) during pregnancy.
METHODS
PRISMA guidelines were followed to conduct this systematic review. Electronic search was carried out using six different databases. Observational cohorts, cross-sectional or case-control studies focused on the association between relaxin levels and PPGP during pregnancy were included. Studies selection was conducted by two reviewers who screened firstly for titles, then for abstracts and finally for full articles. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the quality of evidence by the guidelines proposed by the Cochrane back review group.
RESULTS
731 references were identified. Six articles met the inclusion criteria and were considered for this systematic review. The main reason for the studies exclusion was PPGP related to gynaecological reasons. Five studies were case-control and one study was a prospective cohort. Four studies were ranked as high while two were ranked as low quality. Among the high quality studies, three found no association between PPGP and relaxin levels.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on these findings, the level of evidence for the association between PPGP and relaxin levels was found to be low. PPGP assessment and controlling for risk factors were found to increase bias leaving uncertainty in interpretation of these findings and a need for further research.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pelvic Girdle Pain; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Relaxin
PubMed: 22310881
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2162-x