Next Article in Journal
Physical Activity versus Psychological Stress: Effects on Salivary Cortisol and Working Memory Performance
Next Article in Special Issue
A Systematic Review of the Role of Prebiotics and Probiotics in Autism Spectrum Disorders
Previous Article in Journal
Gluten Vehicle and Placebo for Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity Assessment
Previous Article in Special Issue
Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine by Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome According to the Roma IV Criteria: A Single-Center Italian Survey
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 55
Issue 5
10.3390/medicina55050118
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Beneficial Effects of Traditional Chinese Exercises for Adults with Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

by
Yanjie Zhang
1,2,
Paul D. Loprinzi
3,
Lin Yang
4,5,
Jing Liu
6,
Shijie Liu
7 and
Liye Zou
1,*
1
Lifestyle (Mind–Body Movement) Research Center, College of Sports Science, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China
2
Health and Exercise Science Laboratory, Institute of Sports Science, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea
3
Department of Health, Exercise Science and Recreation Management School of Applied Sciences, The University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 36877, USA
4
Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB T2S 3G3, Canada
5
Departments of Oncology and Community Health Sciences, Cunning School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada
6
Department of Martial Arts, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China
7
Department of Physical Education, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2019, 55(5), 118; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina55050118
Submission received: 12 March 2019 / Revised: 24 April 2019 / Accepted: 24 April 2019 / Published: 29 April 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Complementary and Integrative Medicine)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Objective: The aim of this meta-analytic review was to quantitatively examine the effects of traditional Chinese exercises (TCE) on pain intensity and back disability in individuals with low back pain (LBP). Methods: Potential articles were retrieved using seven electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Web of Science, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang). The searched period was from inception to 1 March 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of TCE on pain intensity and back disability in LBP patients were included. Pooled effect sizes were calculated using the random-effects models and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Data from eleven RCTs (886 individuals with LBP) meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted for meta-analysis. Compared with the control intervention, TCE induced significant improvements in the visual analogue scale (VAS) (Hedge’s g = −0.64, 95% CI −0.90 to −0.37, p < 0.001), Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) (Hedge’s g = −0.41, 95% CI −0.79 to −0.03, p = 0.03), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (Hedge’s g = −0.96, 95% CI −1.42 to −0.50, p < 0.001), and cognitive function (Hedge’s g = −0.62, 95% CI −0.85 to −0.39, p < 0.001). In a meta-regression analysis, age (β = 0.01, p = 0.02) and total exercise time (β = −0.0002, p = 0.01) were associated with changes in the VAS scores, respectively. Moderator analyses demonstrated that Tai Chi practice (Hedge’s g = −0.87, 95% CI −1.38 to −0.36, p < 0.001) and Qigong (Hedge’s g = −0.54, 95% CI −0.86 to −0.23, p < 0.001) reduced VAS scores. Interventions with a frequency of 1–2 times/week (Hedge’s g = −0.53, 95% CI −0.98 to −0.07, p = 0.02) and 3–4 times/week (Hedge’s g = −0.78, 95% CI −1.15 to −0.42, p < 0.001) were associated with reduced VAS scores, but this significant reduction on this outcome was not observed in the weekly training frequency of ≥5 times (Hedge’s g = −0.54, 95% CI −1.16 to 0.08, p = 0.09). Conclusions: TCE may have beneficial effects for reducing pain intensity for individuals with LBP, regardless of their pain status.

1. Introduction

Low back pain (LBP) usually occurs below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds, across all adult ages, and often includes muscle tension, stiffness, and even sciatica [1]. Since the specific cause of LBP is poorly known, most individuals (approximately 85%) with LBP are marked as having nonspecific LBP (NLBP), which influences an individual’s activity of daily living and is becoming the leading cause of disability globally [2]. The 1-month prevalence of LBP is 23.2% worldwide [3], and the number of people with disability caused by LBP has increased by 54% in the last 30 years [2]. Although researchers and clinicians have used conventional medication and surgery to treat LBP for many years, a large proportion of patients continue to experience LBP without relief of significant pain [4,5].
As a cost-effective therapy, physical activity (i.e., walking, swimming, and resistance training) includes whole-body movements that do not only improve the back muscle strength but also improve body coordination and flexibility to help alleviate LBP [6,7]. Such a strategy results in small to large effect sizes in treating LBP [8,9,10]. For example, a meta-analysis showed that yoga reduced pain and increased physical function in LBP, with moderate to large effect sizes [8]. Furthermore, results from a systematic review concluded that exercise therapy had a small, yet positive effect size on improving LBP [10]. Cho and colleagues found that a 4-week core exercise program reduced LBP [11]. In general, these findings suggest that participating in multimodal interventions appear to relieve LBP.
Tai Chi and Qigong are Chinese health-promoting (lifestyle) exercises (traditional Chinese exercises; TCE), which are widely accepted as a multimodal exercise modality [12,13,14,15]. These are low-cost with mild to moderate exercise intensity and focus on physical–mental connection training [16,17,18]; meditative stage of mind and breathing control must be coordinated with slow body movement [19,20,21,22]. In recent decades, TCE has been effectively developed to treat LBP around the world. For example, Phattharasupharerk et al. found that Qigong exercise could significantly reduce pain intensity and back functional disability for office workers [23]. A recent randomized controlled trial also showed that individuals engaging in Tai Chi for 12 weeks could effectively achieve improvements on LBP [24]. Nevertheless, systematic review on the association between TCE and LBP is scarce. Only Li et al. have reported that Baduanjin Qigong reduced stiffness and facilitated the healing process in individuals with LBP [25].
However, early studies included small sample sizes and failed to provide ample evidence. Besides, no systematic review has been performed to analyze the latest studies on this topic. Therefore, the aim of this review was to examine the effects of TCE on LBP in terms of the visual analogue scale (VAS), Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), which are established assessments of LBP-related functionality.

2. Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

We searched seven electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Web of Science, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang) from their inception to February 2019. The potential studies were retrieved by combining two sets of search terms, as follows: (1) “Tai Chi” or “Tai Chi Chuan” or “Qigong” or “Baduanjin” or “Yijinjing” or “Wuqinxi”; and (2) “Low back pain” or “Back pain”. In addition, additional publications were manually identified by searching the reference lists of related articles.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Only randomized controlled trials published in peer-review journals were included if they met the following inclusion criteria. (1) Participants diagnosed with LBP, with pain symptoms persisting for no less than 3 months. Furthermore, participants with LBP had to report pain that was confined to the lumbar vertebrae without severe organic or psychiatric disease. (2) At least one type of TCE (i.e., Tai Chi or Wuqinxi, Baduanjin, or Liuzijue) was used to treat LBP. (3) The control group was prescribed a non-TCE treatment, which could be classified as active treatment (i.e., strength exercise, back walking, or other physiotherapy) or passive control (i.e., waitlist, no treatment). (4) Pain intensity was the primary outcome measured by the VAS, with higher scores representing greater levels of pain. Secondary outcomes included the RMDQ and ODI, with higher scores indicating greater disability.
The exclusion criteria were: (1) participants had acute or sub-acute LBP, or LBP was caused by specific pathology or nerve root problems; (2) interventions included the combination of TCE with other interventions (i.e., acupuncture, core training); and (3) case-studies, cross-sectional studies, observational studies, or controlled study without randomization, or a review paper.

2.3. Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

One of investigators performed the electronic searches using a pre-created strategy. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by two investigators (Y.Z. and L.Y.Z.) after removing the duplicate and irrelevant publications. Subsequently, the remaining full-texts studies were checked. The third investigator (J.L.) was only invited to provide consensus to resolve any disagreements in the process of data extraction. The following information was extracted from each article: author and year of publication, characteristics of participants, sample size, intervention protocol, and outcome measures.
Methodological assessment was independently conducted by two authors (Y.Z. and Y.L.Z.) using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale [26]. This scale involves an 11-domain assessment: eligibility criteria (unscored), random allocation, concealed allocation, similar measures between groups at baseline, instructor blinding, assessor blinding, participant blinding, more than 85% retention rate, intention-to-treat analysis, between group statistical comparisons, and point estimates of at least one set of outcome data. One point was awarded for each item. From these scores, the studies were considered as excellent (9–10 points), good (6–8 points), fair (4–5 points), and poor (less than 4 points) quality.

2.4. Synthesized Analysis

The extracted outcome data from the original trials was expressed continuously with a comparison of pain-related outcomes between TCE and the control interventions. For each study, the effect size (ES) representing the difference in the outcome data between the two arms was calculated using the Hedge’s g. A random-effect model using inverse variance weights was robust enough to evaluate the ES due to the different study characteristics across the studies included. A positive ES indicated a more effective outcome for the experimental group. The magnitude of ES is usually classified as small (0.2–0.49), moderate (0.50–0.79), and large (≥0.8) [27]. Meanwhile, we examined the heterogeneity of ES using the I2 statistic and Q statistic. The three levels of heterogeneity were I2 < 25% (low heterogeneity), I2 < 50% (moderate heterogeneity), and I2 > 75% (high heterogeneity), respectively [27], of which low I2 indicates homogeneity across the trials and demonstrates the universality of the results. An Egger’s test was performed to examine publication bias, and publication bias was determined from a corresponding p-value less than 0.05.
Additionally, moderator analyses and meta-regression were conducted from categorical and continuous predictors. The categorical predictor consisted of: (1) the baseline pain intensity of participants, where the pain intensity was coded as 1–38 mm, 39–57 mm, and 58–100 mm, representing mild pain, moderate pain, and severe pain, respectively [28]; and (2) the characteristics of the control group and experimental group, where the control groups were categorized as active interventions or passive interventions, and the mode of experimental intervention was classified as Tai Chi exercise or Qigong exercise. The coding of the exercise session time was defined as ≤45 min and >45 min. The duration of exercise was coded as short (≤ 12 weeks) or medium (13–26 weeks). The weekly frequency was coded as low (≤2), medium (3–4), or large (≥5). The continuous predictors included the mean age of the subjects and the total time of TCE exercise. All analyses were conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software.

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

A total of 319 citations were initially identified from the electronic database (Figure 1). Thirty-nine potential studies were retained after screening the titles and abstracts and removing the duplicate publications (n = 139). Furthermore, 39 relevant studies were evaluated through reading full-texts, and 11 RCT studies [23,24,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37] were included in this meta-analysis.

3.2. Study Characteristics and Quality

Detailed characteristics of the 11 included studies are described in Table 1 and were published in the last decade (from 2011 to 2019). Six studies were published in Chinese-language peer review journals [31,32,34,35,36,37]. All participants (n = 886) with a mean age from 35 to 74 years were suffering from mild (1 study) [37], moderate (6 studies) [23,29,30,31,33,34], and severe (four studies) [24,32,35,36] LBP, respectively. The sample size of each study ranged from 15 to 176. In terms of study design, the TCE program was used to treat LBP in all experimental groups, where four studies were conducted using Tai Chi and seven studies were conducted using Qigong. Either active interventions (i.e., core training) or passive interventions (i.e., waitlist) were employed in the control group. The duration of TCE varied from two weeks to 24 weeks. The weekly frequency of TCE ranged from one to seven times, and each session time lasted 20 to 90 min. With regard to the outcomes, VAS was assessed in 10 studies [23,24,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36], RMDQ was assessed in four studies [23,29,30,35], and five studies [32,34,36,37] evaluated the ODI. Only one study [33] reported on suspected side effects such as dizziness (n = 12) and increased pain (n = 2). The remaining studies did not report any exercise-related side effects.
Details of the quality assessment for each study using the PEDro scale are summarized in Table 2. Overall, the quality of all included studies was good. The randomization sequence was computer generated in all studies, and five studies described the process of concealed allocation with sufficient detail. The majority of studies did not use subject, therapist, and assessor blinding. The less than 15% loss rate, intention-to-treat analysis, and the between-group statistical comparison for more than one outcome were described in all included studies.

3.3. Synthesis of Results

3.3.1. Effect of TCE on Pain Intensity

Pooled analysis of the effect of TCE on pain intensity found significant heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 74.7%). From the 13 trials [23,24,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36], and using a random-effect model, TCE was effective in reducing pain intensity (Hedge’s g = −0.64, 95% CI (confidence interval) −0.90 to −0.37, p < 0.001) (Figure 2). This means that Hedge’s g is considered a moderate ES.

3.3.2. Effects of MBE on RMDQ and ODI

As shown in Table 3, the pooled analysis from four trials [23,29,30,35] showed that TCE was significantly associated with an improvement in the RMDQ (95% CI −0.79 to −0.03). The mean Hedge’s g was −0.41, p = 0.03, which is considered a small ES. Regarding ODI, the aggregate result revealed a significant favorable effect on ODI (95% CI −1.42 to −0.50). The mean Hedge’s g was −0.96, p < 0.001, which is considered a large ES.

3.3.3. Moderator Analysis

Moderator analysis using separate models was employed to examine potential sources of variance. All results are presented in Table 4.
Study design moderators: In terms of the control group, two types of controls (active intervention and passive intervention) were employed in the original studies. Seven studies employed an active intervention (i.e., stretching, core training). The type of control group did contribute to statistically significant differences for the ES estimate (Q = 4.50, p = 0.03). TCE had a significant improvement on VAS (Hedge’s g = −0.40, 95% CI −0.64 to −0.15, p = 0.001; Hedge’s g = −0.99, 95% CI −1.48 to −0.50, p < 0.01) compared with active interventions and passive interventions, respectively. Notably, allocation concealment produced a significant difference on the VAS (Q = 8.73, p = 0.01). Using an appropriate allocation concealment had a small and significant ES on VAS (Hedge’s g = −0.34, 95% CI −0.57 to −0.12, p < 0.01). In contrast, a large and significant ES on VAS was found in favor of non-allocation concealment (Hedge’s g = −1.04, 95% CI −1.45 to −0.64, p < 0.01). In addition, when the baseline pain intensity was evaluated as a categorical moderator, there was no significant difference in the ES (Q = 0.40, p = 0.53): moderate pain intensity (Hedge’s g = −0.57, 95% CI −0.90 to −0.25, p < 0.01) and severe pain intensity (Hedge’s g = −0.77, 95% CI −1.28 to −0.26, p < 0.01).
TCE moderators: For interventions in the experimental group, TCE included Tai Chi (eight arms) and Qigong (three arms) in our current meta-analysis. The statistically significant difference of the ES evaluated was not observed (Q = 1.15, p = 0.28) in the type of experimental group (between TC exercise and Qigong exercise), of which we further observed the effect of TC (Hedge’s g = −0.87, 95% CI −1.38 to −0.36) or Qigong (Hedge’s g = −0.54, 95% CI −0.86 to −0.23) on the VAS. Similarly, the frequency of TCE intervention did not produce a statistically significant difference across the three levels (Q = 0.90, p = 0.64). There was no statistically significant difference for exercise session time (Q = 0.10, p = 0.75). A moderate and significant reduction in the ES was attributed to the exercise session time (≤45 min, Hedge’s g = −0.64, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.82, p < 0.01) when compared with longer duration exercise (>45 min), which contributed to a small ES (Hedge’s g = −0.73, 95% CI −1.26 to −0.19, p < 0.01).

3.3.4. Meta-Regression

Regarding the effects of TCE on VAS, both age (β = 0.01036, p = 0.02) and total exercise time (β = −0.00020, p = 0.01) influenced the ES, implying that the effect of TCE on the VAS decreased with advancing age, and was still significantly effective compared with other interventions, additionally, practicing TCE for a longer time may significantly reduce VAS. However, we found no significant relationship between pain intensity at the baseline and TCE (β = −0.00016, p = 0.99).

3.3.5. Publication Bias

The publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test. The results showed a p-value of 0.11, greater than 0.05, which reflected no publication bias (from a statistical significance perspective) for this present meta-analysis. Due to the small number of trials included, publication bias of other outcomes was not performed.

4. Discussion

This current meta-analysis is the first, to our knowledge, to evaluate the effect of TCE on LBP patients. Our findings suggest that TCE is an effective therapy and may influence VAS, RMDQ, and ODI. Improvement in pain intensity was consistently observed in two types of TCE, and no adverse events occurred among the included studies. The efficacy of TCE may be attributed, in part, to combining substantial components of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommendations [38] such as muscle strength, flexibility, and stretching training.
Pain intensity refers to how much an individual is hurt by their LBP and can be quantified to estimate the magnitude of severity. Two scales, VAS and NRS, are most commonly used to evaluate pain intensity using a numeric scale (0–100 mm) in LBP [39]. Results from this meta-analysis indicate that TCE can significantly reduce the VAS scores for LBP patients. The ES for VAS was of a moderate effect (0.64). With respect to MRDQ and ODI, both measurement tools are recommended by an internal expert panel to assess the LBP disability [39]. The MRDQ is usually employed to examine the limited range of physical function (i.e., walking, sitting, bending over, dressing, and so on). The pooled result from four trials revealed that after practicing TCE, LBP patients significantly improved their MRDQ scores. The calculated ES was 0.41, which is considered a small effect. After practicing TCE, patients achieved significant improvements in their performance in ODI.
As heterogeneity across studies is common in meta-analyses [40], it is not surprising that there was considerable heterogeneity on the effect of TCE on the VAS. Meta-regression showed that age and total exercise time were moderators of the effect of TCE on VAS, which implies that the effect of TCE on pain intensity decreased with age, but long-term exercise may significantly reduce pain intensity. In addition, the study design characteristics were also explored as potential moderating variables. First, pain intensity at the baseline did not change the results of the meta-analysis. Part of this may be that practicing TCE, like other exercise forms, can relieve patient pain through the use of various poses and movements that enhance back stabilizer muscles [41]. Second, regarding the type of control group, significant ES was observed for either the active or passive controls. This implies that other interventions (i.e., core training, stretching, usual care) were less effective than TCE in reducing pain intensity, but at least the active intervention (i.e., core training, stretching) was more effective than passive controls (i.e., usual care, waitlist). For allocation concealment, seven trials using adequate allocation concealment were considered to be of good methodological quality (Table 2). Moderator analysis suggested that a significant difference in the VAS between allocation concealment and non-allocation concealment was observed. This suggests that studies using insufficient allocation concealment achieved a large ES in our meta-analysis. It is possible that researchers may unconsciously or consciously influence the allocation when participants are assigned to the intervention groups, which may have exaggerated the intervention effects, as some individuals may be more likely to respond favorably to TCE.
Furthermore, exercise moderators involving TCE modality, frequency, and exercise session time are crucial to investigate the effects of TCE prescription on changes in pain intensity. Similar efficacies in improving pain intensity were observed in both Tai Chi and Qigong modalities. The moderator analysis indicated that each session time for ≤45 min or >45 min and frequency (one to four times) could significantly contribute to moderate ESs on pain intensity. However, our current meta-analysis showed that although the ES was 0.57, practicing TCE more than four times per week did not significantly benefit pain intensity (p = 0.10). The reason for this finding is not fully understood. Considering the duration of TCE was mostly short-term, duration-based moderator analyses were not performed. Although the mechanism of TCE for LBP is still unclear, some possible mechanisms may be explained according to the characteristics of TCE. TCE not only focuses on the regulation of internal energy, but also on the improvement of physical function through meditation and breathing, posture control as well as strength and flexibility training [42]. First, meditation and rhythmic breathing, as the foundation of mind–body exercise, can effectively elevate vitality and its flow in the body to reduce pain and stiffness [43]. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated that reduced muscular pain for adults with chronic diseases could be attributed to mindfulness-based training [44]. Moreover, a prior study suggested that practicing Tai Chi for three months could significantly reduce LBP in adults aged 50 years and older [24]. These findings suggest that TCE can contribute to reducing pain intensity for individuals suffering from LBP. Second, TCE incorporates muscular strength, stabilization, static, and dynamic balance to reduce pain, and these principles are very similar to other exercises (i.e., as core stabilization programs) in modulating pain intensity and physical function [29,45]. In particular, practitioners need to transfer momentum of the upper body and low limbs by integrating slow coordinating postures, and utilize lower extremity strength and balance when they practice TCE. It is likely that TCE can synergistically enhance the lumbar muscle and decrease back pain through improving the lumbar extensor muscles and complementary core-hip muscles. Additionally, one of the characteristics of TCE is flexibility, and improved lumbar flexibility is associated with reduced LBP [46]. While practicing TCE, postural training can improve flexibility depending on the stimulation of muscles during static and dynamic movements. Furthermore, holistic TCE can improve the back range of motion through posture control, lumbar muscular flexibility, core strengthening, and breathing. Thus, TCE appears to contribute to the improvement of pain intensity and back disability and there are various potential multilevel mechanisms to explain this effect.
This meta-analysis has several limitations. First, although we used seven electronic databases to identify potential studies, it is likely that some studies were not retrieved because they were not indexed in these databases. Second, studies using a sole intervention (Tai Chi or Qigong) in the experiment group were included. Several studies combining TCE and other interventions (i.e., acupuncture, strength training) were excluded because the aim of this present meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of TCE on LBP without considering other factors. Third, most studies did not use a blinding strategy (i.e., participant blinding, assessor blinding), which could have produced subjective expectation bias and exaggerated the research results; however, this was not a limitation of our meta-analysis, but rather, a general limitation of the studies conducted on this topic. Finally, the duration of TCE was mostly short-term (less than 12 weeks) among the included studies, and thus, it is unclear whether the long-term practice of TCE is beneficial for LBP patients.

5. Conclusions

The results of the current meta-analysis demonstrate that TCE may have a positive effect on modulating pain intensity, MDRQ, and ODI for people with LBP. To better understand the effects of TCE on LBP patients, rigorous study designs are necessary. Future studies should be consistent with the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) statement.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

This research did not receive any funding from agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  1. Koes, B.W.; Van, T.; Thomas, S. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. J. Orthop. Trauma 2006, 332, 1430–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Croft, P.; Ferreira, M.; Kongsted, A.; Anema, J.R.; Chou, R.; Ferreira, P.H.; Koes, B.W.; Woolf, A.; Menezes Costa, L.; Louw, Q. What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention. Lancet 2018, 391, 2356–2367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Hoy, D.; Bain, C.; Williams, G.; March, L.; Brooks, P.; Blyth, F.; Woolf, A.; Vos, T.; Buchbinder, R. A systematic review of the global prevalence of low back pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2012, 64, 2028–2037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Maher, C.G.; Pereira, L.S.M.; Stevens, M.L.; Steffens, D.; Hancock, M.J.; Oliveira, V.C.; Chapple, M.; Teixeira-Salmela, L.F. Prevention of low back pain. JAMA Intern. Med. 2016, 176, 199. [Google Scholar]
  5. Maher, C.; Underwood, M.; Buchbinder, R. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet 2017, 389, 736–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Van-Middelkoop, M.; Rubinstein, S.M.; Verhagen, A.P.; Ostelo, R.W.; Koes, B.W.; Van-Tulder, M.W. Exercise therapy for chronic nonspecific low-back pain. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Rheumatol. 2010, 24, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Hayden, J.A.; Tulder, M.W.; Tomlinson, G. Systematic review: Strategies for using exercise therapy to improve outcomes in chronic low back pain. Anna. Inter. Med. 2005, 9, 776–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Holtzman, S.; Rt, B. Yoga for chronic low back pain: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pain Res. Manag. 2013, 18, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Smeets, R.J.E.M.; Machado, L.A.C.; Ferreira, P.H.; Kamper, S.J.; Ferreira, M.L. Can we explain heterogeneity among randomized clinical trials of exercise for chronic back pain? A meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials. Phys. Ther. 2010, 90, 1383–1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Searle, A.; Spink, M.; Ho, A.; Chuter, V. Exercise interventions for the treatment of chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Clin. Rehabil. 2015, 29, 1155–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cho, H.; Kim, E.; Kim, J. Effects of the CORE exercise program on pain and active range of motion in patients with chronic low back pain. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2014, 26, 1237–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Zou, L.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Tian, X.; Xiao, T.; Liu, X.; Yeung, A.S.; Liu, J.; Wang, X.; Yang, Q. The effects of Tai Chi Chuan versus core stability training on lower-limb neuromuscular function in aging individuals with non-specific chronic lower back pain. Medicina 2019, 55, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zou, L.; Wang, C.; Chen, K.; Shu, Y.; Chen, X.; Luo, L.; Zhao, X. The effect of Taichi practice on attenuating bone mineral density loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Zou, L.; Yeung, A.; Quan, X.; Hui, S.C.; Hu, X.; Chan, J.S.M.; Wang, C.; Boyden, S.D.; Sun, L.; Wang, H. Mindfulness-based Baduanjin exercise for depression and anxiety in people with physical or mental illnesses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zou, L.; Wang, C.; Chen, X.; Wang, H. Baduanjin exercise for stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Zou, L.; Yeung, A.; Zeng, N.; Wang, C.; Sun, L.; Thomas, G.A.; Wang, H. Effects of mind-body exercises for mood and functional capabilities in patients with stroke: An analytical review of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zou, L.; Yeung, A.; Li, C.; Chiou, S.Y.; Zeng, N.; Tzeng, H.M.; Wang, L.; Ren, Z.; Dean, T.; Thomas, G.A. Effects of mind–body movements on balance function in stroke survivors: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zou, L.; Yeung, A.; Li, C.; Wei, G.X.; Chen, K.W.; Kinser, P.A.; Chan, J.S.M.; Ren, Z. Effects of meditative movements on major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Med. 2018, 7, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zou, L.; Wang, C.; Tian, Z.; Wang, H.; Shu, Y. Effect of Yang-Style Tai Chi on gait parameters and musculoskeletal flexibility in healthy Chinese older women. Sports 2017, 5, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, S.J.; Ren, Z.; Wang, L.; Wei, G.X.; Zou, L. Mind–body (Baduanjin) exercise prescription for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Zou, L.; Sasaki, J.E.; Wei, G.-X.; Huang, T.; Yeung, A.S.; Neto, O.B.; Chen, K.W.; Hui, S.-C. Effects of mind–body exercises (Tai Chi/Yoga) on heart rate variability parameters and perceived stress: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Med. 2018, 7, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zou, L.; Loprinzi, P.D.; Yeung, A.S.; Zeng, N.; Huang, T. The beneficial effects of mind-body exercises for people with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019. S0003-9993(19)30239-30244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Phattharasupharerk, S.; Purepong, N.; Eksakulkla, S.; Siriphorn, A. Effects of Qigong practice in office workers with chronic non-specific low back pain: A randomized control trial. J. Bodywork Move. Ther. 2018, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liu, J.; Yeung, A.; Xiao, T.; Tian, X.; Kong, Z.; Zou, L.; Wang, X. Chen-Style Tai Chi for individuals (aged 50 years old or above) with chronic non-specific low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Li, H.; Di, G.; Liu, S.; Zhang, W.; Si, J.; Wang, J.; Si, J.; Zhai, J. Baduanjin exercise for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Complement. Ther. Med. 2019, 43, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Maher, C.; Sherrington, C.; Herbert, R.; Moseley, A.; Elkins, M. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys. Ther. 2003, 83, 713–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Borenstein, M.; Hedges, L.V.; Higgin, J.T.; Rothstein, H.R. Introduction to Meta-Analysis; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  28. Boonstra, A.M.; Preuper, H.R.S.; Balk, G.A.; Stewart, R.E. Cut-off points for mild, moderate, and severe pain on the visual analogue scale for pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Pain 2014, 155, 2545–2550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hall, A.M.; Maher, C.G.; Lam, P.; Ferreira, M.; Latimer, J. Tai Chi exercise for treatment of pain and disability in people with persistent low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res. 2011, 63, 1576–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Blödt, S.; Pach, D.; Kaster, T.; Lüdtke, R.; Icke, K.; Reisshauer, A.; Witt, C.M. Qigong versus exercise therapy for chronic low back pain in adults—A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Eur. J. Pain 2015, 19, 123–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fang, L.; Yan, J.; Cao, Y.; Zhang, G. The efect of Wuqinxi Exercise on mechanics characteristic of abdominal and back muscles and pain in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Shanghai J. Tradit. Chin. Med. 2015, 49, 49–53. [Google Scholar]
  32. Ning, X.; Wu, L.; Wang, T.; He, X.; Yu, Y. Clinical study on five mimic—Animal boxing combined with core muscular strength exercise for the treatment of nonspecific low back pain. J. Tradit. Chin. Orthop. Traumatol. 2015, 27, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  33. Teut, M.; Knilli, J.; Daus, D.; Roll, S.; Witt, C.M. Qigong or yoga versus no intervention in older adults with chronic low back pain—A randomized controlled trial. J. Pain 2016, 17, 796–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wu, L. The clinical research of chronic non-specific low back pain which based on the theory of muscle imbalance. Chengdu Tradit. Chin. Univ. 2016, 5, 1–44. [Google Scholar]
  35. Deng, P. Preliminary study on the improvement of traditional exercise on relieving pain of patients with low back pain and dysfunction. Phys. Educ. Rev. 2016, 35, 89–91. [Google Scholar]
  36. Gao, F.; Yuan, S.; Liu, N.; Zheng, S. Effect observation of Baduanjin training on chronic nonspecific low back pain. Rehabil. Med. 2018, 28, 13–17. [Google Scholar]
  37. Liu, J.; Zhao, W.; Yuan, Y. Effects of Tai Chi on the event-related potential of patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. Chin. J. Sport. Med. 2018, 37, 826–832. [Google Scholar]
  38. Chodzko-Zajko, W.J.; Proctor, D.N.; Fiatarone Singh, M.A.; Minson, C.T.; Nigg, C.R.; Salem, G.J.; Skinner, J.S. Exercise and physical activity for older adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2009, 41, 1510–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ostelo, R.W.J.G.; de Vet, H.C.W. Clinically important outcomes in low back pain. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Rheumatol. 2005, 19, 593–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Munafò, M.R.; Flint, J. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies. Ann. Lab. Med. 2015, 35, 283–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Akuthota, V.; Ferreiro, A.; Moore, T.; Fredericson, M. Core stability exercise principles. Curr. Sports Med. Rep. 2008, 7, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Zou, L.; Wang, H.; Xiao, Z.; Fang, Q.; Zhang, M.; Li, T.; Du, G.; Liu, Y. Tai Chi for health benefits in patients with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, 45–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Carvalho, B.; Dalby, P.; Belfer, I.; Bergese, S.D. Mechanism of pain relief through Tai Chi and Qigong. J. Pain Reli. 2013, 2, 115. [Google Scholar]
  44. Zou, L.; Yeung, A.; Quan, X.; Boyden, S.D.; Wang, H. A systematic review and meta-analysis of mindfulness-based (Baduanjin) exercise for alleviating musculoskeletal pain and improving sleep quality in people with chronic diseases. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gordon, R.; Bloxham, S. A systematic review of the effects of exercise and physical activity on non-specific chronic low back pain. Healthcare 2016, 4, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Masharawi, Y.; Nadaf, N. The effect of non-weight bearing group-exercising on females with non-specific chronic low back pain: A randomized single blind controlled pilot study. J. Back Musculoskelet. Rehabil. 2013, 26, 353–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Medicina 55 00118 g001 550
Figure 1. Flowchart of the study selection.
Figure 1. Flowchart of the study selection.
Medicina 55 00118 g001
Medicina 55 00118 g002 550
Figure 2. Effect of traditional Chinese exercises (TCE) on the visual analogue scale (VAS).
Figure 2. Effect of traditional Chinese exercises (TCE) on the visual analogue scale (VAS).
Medicina 55 00118 g002
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of randomized controlled trials in the meta-analysis.
Table 1. Characteristics of randomized controlled trials in the meta-analysis.
StudyParticipantsInterventionsOutcomes MeasuredSafety
Publication YearStatusSample sizeAge (years)ExperimentControlDurationPrimary and/orAdverse
(PI)(female, male)secondary outcomeeffect
Phattharasupharerket al., (2018) [23]LBP (50)7235.21 × 60 min/week + daily practice QigongWaitlist6 weeksPain intensity (VAS),No
E = 36; C = 36Low back pain disability (RMDQ)
Liu et al., (2019) [24]LBP (57)43743 × 60 min/weekC1: Core training12 weeksPain intensity (VAS)No
E = 15; C1 = 15;
C2 = 13		Tai ChiC2: no intervention
Hall et al., (2011) [29]LBP (50)160442 × 40 min/weekWait-list10 weeksPain intensity (NRS),No
E = 80; C = 80Tai ChiLow back pain disability (RMDQ)
Blödt et al., (2015) [30]LBP (56)12746.71 × 90 min/week,1 × 60 min/week12 weeksPain intensity (VAS),Dizziness (n = 12)
E = 64; C = 63QigongStrengtheningLow back pain disability (RMDQIncreased pain (n = 2)
Ning et al., (2015) [31]LBP (58)5241.43 × 30 min/week,3 × 30 min/week12 weeksPain intensity (VAS),No
E = 26; C = 26WuqinxiCore trainingLow back pain disability (ODI)
Fang et al., (2015) [32]LBP (52)6353.43–4 × 45 min/week,3–4 × 45 min/week,24 weeksPain intensity (VAS)No
E = 32; C = 31WuqinxiMcKenzie training
Deng (2016) [33]LBP (70)1550.42 × 20 min/day1 × 20 min/day2 weeksPain intensity (VAS),No
E = 8; C = 7YijinjingAcupunctureLow back pain disability (MRMQ)
Teut et al., (2016) [34]LBP (51)176731 × 90 min/week,C1: 2 × 45 min/week12 weeksPain intensity (VAS)No
E = 58; C1 = 61;
C2 = 57		QigongYoga; C2: Waitlist
Wu 2016 [35]LBP 5378393 × 30–35 min/week,C1: 3 × 30–40 min/week (SB)12 weeksPain intensity (VAS),No
E = 26; C1 = 26;
C2 = 26		WuqinxiC2: 3 × 30–40 min/week (CT)Low back pain disability (ODI)
Gao et al., (2018) [36]LBP (76)60362 × 30 min/day,Usual care8 weeksPain intensity (VAS),No
E = 30; C = 30BaduanjinLow back pain disability (ODI)
Liu et al., (2018) [37]LBP (31)40573 × 60 min/weekC1: Core training12 weeksLow back pain disability (ODI)No
E = 14; C1 = 13; C2 = 13Tai ChiC2: no intervention
Note: PI = pain intensity; LBP = low back pain; E = Experiment; C = Control; RMDQ = Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire; VAS = Visual Analog Scale; SB = Swallowing balance; CT = core training.
Table
Table 2. Methodological quality of the included studies (PEDro assessment).
Table 2. Methodological quality of the included studies (PEDro assessment).
StudyScoreMethodological QualityPEDro Item Number
1234567891011
Phattharasupharerk et al. 2018 [23]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓
Liu et al. 2019 [24]7Good✓✓ ✓ ✓✓✓✓
Hall et al. 2011 [29]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓
Blödt et al. 2015 [30]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓
Ning et al. 2015 [31]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓
Fang et al. 2015 [32]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓✓
Deng 2016 [33]7Good✓✓ ✓ ✓✓✓✓
Teut et al. 2016 [34]8Good✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓✓
Wu 2016 [35]8Good✓✓ ✓ ✓✓✓✓✓
Gao et al. 2018 [36]7Good✓✓ ✓ ✓✓✓✓
Liu et al. 2018 [37]7Good✓✓ ✓ ✓✓✓✓
Studies were classified as having excellent (9–10), good (6–8), fair (4–5), or poor (<4).
Scale of item score: ✓, present. The Physiotherapy Evidence Databa (PEDro) scale criteria are: (1) eligibility criteria; (2) random allocation; (3) concealed allocation; (4) similarity at baseline on key measures; (5) subject blinding; (6) therapist blinding; (7) assessor blinding; (8) more than 85% follow-up of at least 1 key outcome; (9) intention-to-treat analysis; (10) between-group statistical comparison for at least 1 key outcome; and (11) point estimates and measures of variability provided for at least 1 key outcome.
Table
Table 3. The results for the effects of TCE vs. the control intervention.
Table 3. The results for the effects of TCE vs. the control intervention.
OutcomesNumber of TrialsMeta-AnalysisHeterogeneity
Hedges’g95% CIp-ValueI2 %Q-Valuedf(Q)
RMDQ4−0.41−0.79 to −0.03 0.0366.1%8.863
ODI5−0.96−1.42 to −0.500.0067.5%12.324
Table
Table 4. Moderator analysis for TCE versus the control group.
Table 4. Moderator analysis for TCE versus the control group.
Categorical ModeratorOutcomeLevelNo. of Studies/
Comparisons		Hedges’ g95% Confidence IntervalI2, %Test for Between-Group
Heterogeneity
Q-Valuedf(Q)p-Value
Study design moderators
Control TypeVASActive8−0.40−0.64 to −0.1545.2 %4.5010.03
Passive5−0.99−1.48 to −0.5082.3%
Allocation ConcealmentVASYes7−0.34−0.57 to −0.1265.2%8.7310.01
No6−1.04−1.45 to −0.6449.7%
Baseline pain intensityVASModerate8−0.57−0.90 to −0.2579.2%0.4010.53
Severe5−0.77−1.28 to −0.2666.7%
Exercise moderators
Exercise TypeVASTC9−0.87−1.38 to −0.3669.9%1.1510.28
Qigong4−0.54−0.86 to −0.2375.9%
FrequencyVAS1–25−0.53−0.98 to −0.0786.8%
3–46−0.78−1.15 to −0.4257.3%0.9020.64
≥52−0.54−1.16 to 0.0839.6%
Exercise session timeVAS≤457−0.64−0.82 to −0.460%0.1010.75
>456−0.73−1.26 to −0.1987.6%
Continuous ModeratorOutcomeNo. of Studies/
Comparisons		 β 95% Confidence IntervalQ-Valuedf(Q)p-Value
AgeVAS130.010360.00163 to 0.019095.4110.02
Total exercise of timeVAS13−0.00020−0.00036 to −0.000056.7910.01
Pain intensity of participantsVAS13−0.00016−0.01902 to 0.018710.0110.99

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, Y.; Loprinzi, P.D.; Yang, L.; Liu, J.; Liu, S.; Zou, L. The Beneficial Effects of Traditional Chinese Exercises for Adults with Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Medicina 2019, 55, 118. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina55050118

AMA Style

Zhang Y, Loprinzi PD, Yang L, Liu J, Liu S, Zou L. The Beneficial Effects of Traditional Chinese Exercises for Adults with Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Medicina. 2019; 55(5):118. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina55050118

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Yanjie, Paul D. Loprinzi, Lin Yang, Jing Liu, Shijie Liu, and Liye Zou. 2019. "The Beneficial Effects of Traditional Chinese Exercises for Adults with Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials" Medicina 55, no. 5: 118. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/medicina55050118

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop