title: Unloaded movement facilitation exercise compared to no exercise or alternative therapy on outcomes for people with nonspecific chronic low back pain: a systematic review.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of unloaded movement facilitation exercises on outcomes for people with nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP).
  
  
  METHODS
  This systematic review was conducted according to Cochrane Back Review Group and Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUORUM) guidelines. Exercise effects were reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Six high-quality randomized controlled trials were included. For NSCLBP effects favored McKenzie therapy over intensive trunk strengthening for pain: SMD: short-term: 0.35 (0.10, 0.59); long-term 0.36 (0.12, 0.61) and short-term function: SMD: 0.45 (0.20, 0.70) and were comparable for medium-term function: SMD: 0.15 (-0.90, 0.40). Effects of favored McKenzie therapy were comparable to specific spinal stabilization exercises for short-term pain: SMD: 0.63 (-0.11, 1.38) and function: SMD: 0.47 (-0.27, 1.20). Pooled effects favored McKenzie therapy over other exercises for short-term pain (pooled SMD: 0.38 (0.14, 0.61)) and were comparable for short-term function: SMD: 0.10 (-0.20, 0.40). Yoga compared to trunk strengthening produced comparable effects for pain: (SMD: short-term: 0.13 (-0.46, 0.71); medium-term 0.51 (-0.08, 1.11)) and function SMD: short-term: 0.51 (-0.08, 1.10); medium-term 0.38 (-0.22, 0.97)). Compared to education, effects of yoga were large for medium-term pain and function (pooled SMDs: 0.92 (0.47, 1.37); 0.95 (0.50, 1.40)). Effects favored unloaded movement facilitation exercises of McKenzie compared to other or no exercise and were comparable for yoga.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For NSCLBP, there is strong evidence that unloaded movement facilitation exercise, compared to no exercise, improves pain and function. Compared to other types of exercise, including effort-intensive strengthening and time-intensive stabilization exercise, the effects are comparable. This challenges the role of strengthening for NSCLBP.
authors.affiliation: School of Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. elgarphysio@bigpond.com <elgarphysio@bigpond.com>
authors.forename: Susan C
authors.initials: SC
authors.lastname: Slade
authors.forename: Jennifer L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Keating
mesh_terms: D005081:Exercise Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D017116:Low Back Pain / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000503:physiopathology; D009068:Movement; D010043:Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; D010353:Patient Education as Topic; D012146:Rest; D012648:Self Care; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D015013:Yoga