| Title |
The relationship between physical activity and low back pain outcomes: a systematic review of observational studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, November 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-010-1616-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Hendrick, S. Milosavljevic, L. Hale, D. A. Hurley, S. McDonough, B. Ryan, G. D. Baxter |
| Abstract |
Although clinical guidelines advocate exercise and activity in the management of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), the link between levels of physical activity and outcomes is unclear. This systematic review investigated the relationships between free living activity levels after onset of low back pain (LBP) and measures of pain, and disability in patients with NSLBP. Cohort and cross-sectional studies were located using OVID, CINAHL, Medline, AMED, Embase, Biomed, PubMed-National Library of Medicine, Proquest and Cochrane Databases, and hand searches of reference lists. Studies were included if a statistical relationship was investigated between measures of free living physical activity (PA) in subjects with LBP and LBP outcome measures. Twelve studies (seven cohort and five cross-sectional) were included. One prospective study reported a statistically significant relationship between increased leisure time activity and improved LBP outcomes, and one cross-sectional study found that lower levels of sporting activity were associated with higher levels of pain and disability. All other studies (n = 10) found no relationship between measures of activity levels and either pain or disability. Heterogeneity of study designs, particularly in terms of activity measurement, made comparisons between studies difficult. These data suggest that the activity levels of patients with NSLBP are neither associated with, nor predictive of, disability or pain levels. Validated activity measurement in prospective research is required to better evaluate the relationships between PA and LBP. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 237 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 7% |
| Researcher | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 62 | 26% |
| Unknown | 57 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 17 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 10% |
| Unknown | 63 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2022.
All research outputs
#7,663,778
of 23,330,477 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#1,031
of 4,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,564
of 101,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,330,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,749 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 101,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.