{"title":"骨盆底肌肉训练配合物理疗法治疗腰背痛的疗效:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Youngeun Lim, Yerim Do, Seon Heui Lee, Haneul Lee","doi":"10.1177/02692155241287766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training and physical therapy interventions in patients with low back pain.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched for randomised, controlled trials published in English or Korean between database inception and September 2024.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Studies providing pelvic floor muscle training in individuals with low back pain were included. The risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software 5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies were included in this review. Pelvic floor muscle training showed low certainty evidence for improving pain (standardised mean difference = -0.73, 95% CI [-1.10, -0.36]) and reflected a clinically meaningful reduction in pain. The evidence for disability improvement had a low certainty (mean difference = -5.21, 95% CI [-7.15, -3.26]) due to high heterogeneity. Substantial improvements in pain and disability were observed when pelvic floor muscle training was added to standard physical therapy, with low certainty of evidence supporting these findings. Whereas pelvic floor muscle training substantially improved pain compared to other interventions, there was no marked improvement in disability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pelvic floor muscle training is potentially beneficial in addition to physical therapy for reducing low back pain, particularly in pregnancy-related cases. However, the evidence should be interpreted considering the quality and risk of bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1590-1608"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training with physical therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Youngeun Lim, Yerim Do, Seon Heui Lee, Haneul Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692155241287766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training and physical therapy interventions in patients with low back pain.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched for randomised, controlled trials published in English or Korean between database inception and September 2024.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Studies providing pelvic floor muscle training in individuals with low back pain were included. The risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software 5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies were included in this review. Pelvic floor muscle training showed low certainty evidence for improving pain (standardised mean difference = -0.73, 95% CI [-1.10, -0.36]) and reflected a clinically meaningful reduction in pain. The evidence for disability improvement had a low certainty (mean difference = -5.21, 95% CI [-7.15, -3.26]) due to high heterogeneity. Substantial improvements in pain and disability were observed when pelvic floor muscle training was added to standard physical therapy, with low certainty of evidence supporting these findings. Whereas pelvic floor muscle training substantially improved pain compared to other interventions, there was no marked improvement in disability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pelvic floor muscle training is potentially beneficial in addition to physical therapy for reducing low back pain, particularly in pregnancy-related cases. However, the evidence should be interpreted considering the quality and risk of bias.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1590-1608\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241287766\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241287766","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的: 评估骨盆底肌肉训练和理疗干预对腰背痛患者的疗效:评估盆底肌肉训练和物理治疗干预对腰背痛患者的疗效:数据来源:在 Ovid-Medline、Ovid-Embase、Cochrane Library、CINAHL、Web of Science 和 PEDro 数据库中检索了从数据库建立到 2024 年 9 月期间用英语或韩语发表的随机对照试验:综述方法:纳入对腰背痛患者进行盆底肌肉训练的研究。采用 Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 工具和推荐、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)系统来评估证据的质量。使用Review Manager软件5.4进行荟萃分析:本综述共纳入 19 项研究。盆底肌肉训练在改善疼痛(标准化平均差=-0.73,95% CI [-1.10,-0.36])方面的证据确定性较低,反映出疼痛的减轻具有临床意义。由于异质性较高,残疾改善方面的证据确定性较低(平均差 = -5.21,95% CI [-7.15, -3.26])。在标准物理疗法的基础上增加盆底肌肉训练,疼痛和残疾情况均有显著改善,但支持这些结果的证据确定性较低。与其他干预措施相比,盆底肌肉训练能显著改善疼痛,但对残疾的改善并不明显:结论:骨盆底肌肉训练是物理疗法的有益补充,可减轻腰背痛,尤其是与妊娠有关的腰背痛。然而,在解释证据时应考虑其质量和偏倚风险。
Efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training with physical therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Objective: To assess the efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training and physical therapy interventions in patients with low back pain.
Data sources: The Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched for randomised, controlled trials published in English or Korean between database inception and September 2024.
Review methods: Studies providing pelvic floor muscle training in individuals with low back pain were included. The risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software 5.4.
Results: Nineteen studies were included in this review. Pelvic floor muscle training showed low certainty evidence for improving pain (standardised mean difference = -0.73, 95% CI [-1.10, -0.36]) and reflected a clinically meaningful reduction in pain. The evidence for disability improvement had a low certainty (mean difference = -5.21, 95% CI [-7.15, -3.26]) due to high heterogeneity. Substantial improvements in pain and disability were observed when pelvic floor muscle training was added to standard physical therapy, with low certainty of evidence supporting these findings. Whereas pelvic floor muscle training substantially improved pain compared to other interventions, there was no marked improvement in disability.
Conclusion: Pelvic floor muscle training is potentially beneficial in addition to physical therapy for reducing low back pain, particularly in pregnancy-related cases. However, the evidence should be interpreted considering the quality and risk of bias.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)