Is dynamic balance impaired in people with non-specific low back pain when compared to healthy people? A systematic review.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.23736/S1973-9087.25.08383-2
Fulvio Dal Farra, Federico Arippa, Mauro Arru, Martina Cocco, Elisa Porcu, Federico Solla, Marco Monticone
{"title":"Is dynamic balance impaired in people with non-specific low back pain when compared to healthy people? A systematic review.","authors":"Fulvio Dal Farra, Federico Arippa, Mauro Arru, Martina Cocco, Elisa Porcu, Federico Solla, Marco Monticone","doi":"10.23736/S1973-9087.25.08383-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) represents a frequent health issue in most of the countries; in recent years, there was a growing interest concerning the role of balance and postural stability in individuals with non-specific LBP (NS-LBP). The aim of this systematic review is to provide a synthesis of the evidence on the association between NS-LBP and an impaired dynamic balance.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>The reporting of this study followed the 2020 PRISMA statement. Analytical observational studies, investigating the dynamic balance performance via functional or motor-tasks tests in LBP in comparison to healthy people, were searched in PubMed, Embase and Scopus up to December 2023. Their characteristics were reported in a standardized form, and their methodological quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for cross-sectional studies.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>A qualitative synthesis of the study findings and a discussion of the results are provided. 19 cross-sectional studies were included in this review, with an overall sample size of 894. A meta-analysis was not possible due to high levels of heterogeneity across the studies. None of the included studies were deemed to be of a good methodological quality. Overall, most studies reported differences between NS-LBP and healthy people in terms of dynamic balance, showing worst performances in NS-LBP, both at motor-task tests and at the posturography.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Impaired dynamic balance seems to be correlated to NS-LBP. However, due to the presence of methodological issues in the included studies, further confirmations are needed. Clinicians should take into consideration the importance of a balance assessment in NS-LBP, by implementing proper functional tests. High-quality observational research is recommended, to assess dynamic balance with standardized and uniform modalities, in relation to specific stages of the condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":12044,"journal":{"name":"European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine","volume":"61 1","pages":"72-81"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11920752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.25.08383-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Low back pain (LBP) represents a frequent health issue in most of the countries; in recent years, there was a growing interest concerning the role of balance and postural stability in individuals with non-specific LBP (NS-LBP). The aim of this systematic review is to provide a synthesis of the evidence on the association between NS-LBP and an impaired dynamic balance.

Evidence acquisition: The reporting of this study followed the 2020 PRISMA statement. Analytical observational studies, investigating the dynamic balance performance via functional or motor-tasks tests in LBP in comparison to healthy people, were searched in PubMed, Embase and Scopus up to December 2023. Their characteristics were reported in a standardized form, and their methodological quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for cross-sectional studies.

Evidence synthesis: A qualitative synthesis of the study findings and a discussion of the results are provided. 19 cross-sectional studies were included in this review, with an overall sample size of 894. A meta-analysis was not possible due to high levels of heterogeneity across the studies. None of the included studies were deemed to be of a good methodological quality. Overall, most studies reported differences between NS-LBP and healthy people in terms of dynamic balance, showing worst performances in NS-LBP, both at motor-task tests and at the posturography.

Conclusions: Impaired dynamic balance seems to be correlated to NS-LBP. However, due to the presence of methodological issues in the included studies, further confirmations are needed. Clinicians should take into consideration the importance of a balance assessment in NS-LBP, by implementing proper functional tests. High-quality observational research is recommended, to assess dynamic balance with standardized and uniform modalities, in relation to specific stages of the condition.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与健康人相比,非特异性腰痛患者的动态平衡受损吗?系统回顾。
导言:腰背痛(LBP)是大多数国家经常出现的健康问题;近年来,人们越来越关注平衡和姿势稳定性在非特异性腰背痛(NS-LBP)患者中的作用。本系统性综述旨在对非特异性 LBP 与动态平衡受损之间关系的证据进行综述:本研究的报告遵循 2020 年 PRISMA 声明。截至 2023 年 12 月,在 PubMed、Embase 和 Scopus 中检索了通过功能测试或运动任务测试调查枸杞痛患者与健康人动态平衡表现的分析性观察研究。这些研究的特征均以标准格式进行报告,其方法学质量采用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所的横断面研究批判性评估清单进行评估:对研究结果进行了定性综合,并对结果进行了讨论。本综述共纳入 19 项横断面研究,总样本量为 894 个。由于各研究之间存在高度异质性,因此无法进行荟萃分析。所纳入的研究中没有一项被认为具有良好的方法学质量。总体而言,大多数研究都报告了 NS-LBP 患者与健康人在动态平衡方面的差异,结果显示 NS-LBP 患者在运动任务测试和体位测量中的表现最差:结论:动态平衡受损似乎与 NS-LBP 有关。结论:动态平衡受损似乎与 NS-LBP 相关,但由于纳入的研究存在方法学问题,还需要进一步证实。临床医生应考虑到平衡评估在 NS-LBP 中的重要性,实施适当的功能测试。建议开展高质量的观察性研究,针对病情的特定阶段,采用标准化和统一的方式进行动态平衡评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.40%
发文量
162
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine publishes papers of clinical interest in physical and rehabilitation medicine.
期刊最新文献
Beyond professional boundaries: toward evidence-based, multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Assessment of gait patterns in breast cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study. Physiatrists and/vs. allied health professionals: echoing from Türkiye. Motor imagery training promotes motor learning and brain plasticity without fatigability in people with progressive multiple sclerosis. Development and psychometric evaluation of an integrative Manual Muscle Test for patients with post-stroke hemiplegia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1