Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) in children and adolescents has increased in recent years, and the evidence of the physiotherapy interventions in back care needs to be updated. Our main goal was to quantify the effects of preventive physiotherapy interventions on improving behavior and knowledge related to back care and prevention of NSLBP in children and adolescents. Based on two previous meta-analyses, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PEDro, Web of Science, LILACS, IBECS, PsycINFO, and IME databases and several journals were searched. Two researchers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the studies using the RoB2 tool. Data were described according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 24 studies (28 reports) were included. In the posttest, the behavior variable obtained an overall effect size of d+ = 1.48 (95%CI: 0.40 to 2.56), and the knowledge variable obtained an effect size of d+ = 1.41 (95%CI: 1.05 to 1.76). Physiotherapy has demonstrated beneficial impacts on behavior and knowledge concerning back care and to prevent NSLBP in children and adolescents. Interventions focusing on postural hygiene and exercise should be preferred, especially those that are shorter in number of weeks, more intense, and incorporate as many intervention hours as possible.

Chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP) is a highly prevalent musculoskeletal condition that has a great socioeconomic impact on health systems. Instead of focusing on mechanical causes and direct workload in the development of CNSLBP, genetics, psychosocial environment, lifestyle and quality of life are coming to the forefront in its approach. The main objective was to analyze whether interventions aimed at modifying lifestyle can be effective in improving pain intensity and functional disability in CNSLBP. A search in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and SportDiscus databases was performed. Both a univariate and a multivariate network meta-analysis were applied with the difference pre/post-treatment. A total of 20 studies were included for qualitative analysis, of which 16 were randomized clinical trials with a moderate-high methodological quality and were part of the quantitative analysis. The interventions that had the greatest effect in reducing pain intensity were cognitive therapy combined with functional exercise programs, lumbar stabilization exercise and resistance exercise; meanwhile, for functional disability, they were functional exercise programs, aerobic exercise and standard care. In conclusion, a multimodal intervention aimed at changing one\'s lifestyle that encompasses cognitive, behavioral, and physical aspects seems to be highly effective in improving pain intensity and functional disability caused by CNSLBP; however, it is not yet known if these improvements are maintained in the long term.

This study systematically searched and sorted out randomized controlled trial(RCT) of acupuncture-moxibustion treatment for non-specific low back pain by scoping review, so as to demonstrate the current state of the research evidence and provide a reference point for future clinical research and healthcare decision-making. Eight commonly used Chinese and English databases were searched, and the search time was from the establishment of the databases to July 7, 2023, so as to analyze the characteristics of the current status of the current research through visualization methods. A total of 50 studies were included, including 23 studies in Chinese and 27 studies in English. The overall number of studies showed an increasing trend. The percentage of studies published in Chinese non-core journals was 42.0%. The disease subtypes of interest were mainly chronic non-specific low back pain, accounting for 68.0% of the studies. The sample sizes of the studies were mainly concentrated in the range of 50-100 cases. A total of 15 types of interventions were categorized, with acupuncture interventions being the most studied. Duration of treatment did not exceed one month in 80.0% of the studies. Only 8.0% of the studies used minimal clinical important difference(MCID) as a basis for judgment. The follow-up period was set within 3 months in 28.0% of the studies, and 82.0% of the studies concluded that acupuncture-moxibustion was effective in the treatment of non-specific lower back pain. Adverse events were reported in 20.0% of the studies. The risk of bias in the included studies was dominated by low risk of bias and uncertain risk of bias, with fewer studies focusing on high risks of bias. In most of the studies, acupuncture-moxibustion was significantly more effective than the control group. The research on acupuncture-moxibustion treatment for non-specific low back pain is developing rapidly, but there are still insufficient studies on psychological state, safety, and other indicators, and there are still some studies with uncertain risks of bias, which is not conducive to the generalization and application of the findings. Therefore, future studies should improve and refine these shortcomings.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacologic intervention do not always achieve benefits in the treatment of acute/subacute non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). We assessed efficacy and safety of acupuncture for acute/subacute NSLBP as alternative treatment.
RESULTS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Epistemonikos, CNKI, Wan Fang Database, VIP database, CBMLD, CSTJ, clinical trials, EUCTR, World WHO ICTRP, and ChiCTR for randomized controlled trials, cross-over studies, and cohort studies of NSLBP treated by acupuncture versus oral medication from inception to 23th April 2022. A total of 6 784 records were identified, and 14 studies were included 1 263 participants in this review. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that acupuncture therapy was slightly more effective than oral medication in improving pain (P < 0.00001, I2 = 92%, MD = -1.17, 95% CI [-1.61, -0.72]). According to the results of the meta-analysis, acupuncture therapy exhibited a significant advantage over oral medication with a substantial effect (P < 0.00001, I2 = 90%, SMD = -1.42, 95% CI [-2.22, -0.62]). Based on the results of the meta-analysis, acupuncture therapy was associated with a 12% improvement rate compared to oral medication in patients with acute/subacute NSLBP (P < 0.0001, I2 = 54%, RR = 1.11, 95% CI [1.05, 1.18]). Acupuncture is more effective and safer than oral medication in treating acute/subacute NSLBP. This systematic review is poised to offer valuable guidance to clinicians treating acute/subacute NSLBP and potentially benefit the afflicted patients.
BACKGROUND: This review was registered in PROSPERO ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero ) with registration number CRD42021278346.

OBJECTIVE: To tackle non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) among patients and find the most effective solution and to quantitatively synthesize the overall effect of motor control training (MCT) compared with Pilates, McKenzie method, and physical therapy (PT) in pain and physical function.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of four types of intervention (MCT, Pilates, McKenzie method, and PT) for LBP were collected by searching PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Scopus databases from the establishment of the database to September 30, 2023. The risk of bias was evaluated for included studies using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0). Taking pain and physical function in the experimental and control groups as outcome indicators, subgroup analysis was performed according to the intervention method to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: A total of 25 RCTs, including 1253 patients, were included. Meta-analysis showed that MCT effectively relieved pain [SMD = -0.65, 95% CI (- 1.00, - 0.29), p < 0.01] and improved physical function [SMD = -0.76, 95% CI (- 1.22, - 0.31), p < 0.01] comparing with other 3 types of intervention. Subgroup analysis suggested that MCT could alleviate pain [SMD = -0.92, 95% CI (- 1.34, - 0.50), p < 0.01] and improve physical function [SMD = -1.15, 95% CI (- 1.72, - 0.57), p < 0.01] compared with PT, but it had no statistical significance compared with Pilates [pain: SMD = 0.13, 95% CI (- 0.56, 0.83), p = 0.71; physical function: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI (- 0.72, 0.91), p = 0.81] and the McKenzie method [pain: SMD = -0.03, 95% CI (- 0.75, 0.68), p = 0.93; physical function: SMD = -0.03, 95% CI (- 1.00, 0.94), p = 0.95].
CONCLUSIONS: MCT can effectively relieve pain and improve physical function in patients with NSLBP. It is more effective compared with PT for LBP, while no differences were detected between MCT and Pilates, as well as McKenzie method. Therefore, MCT, Pilates, and the McKenzie method should be encouraged as exercise interventions for NSLBP rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific low back pain is a common and clinically significant condition with substantial socioeconomic implications. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy has shown benefits in pain reduction and improvement of physical function in patients with pain-associated disorders like osteoarthritis. However, studies had heterogeneous settings. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of PEMF on pain and function on patients with non-specific low back pain.
METHODS: A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PEDro was performed (from inception until 15/5/2023). Outcome measures assessed pain and function.
RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials with 420 participants (n = 420) were included. The studies compared PEMF vs. placebo-PEMF, PEMF and conventional physical therapy vs. conventional physical therapy alone, PEMF and conventional physical therapy vs. placebo-PEMF and conventional physical therapy, PEMF vs. high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) vs. conventional physical therapy, and osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) and PEMF vs. PEMF alone vs. placebo-PEMF vs. OMT alone. Five of the nine included studies showed statistically significant pain reduction and improvement in physical function in comparison to their control groups (p < 0.05). There was substantial heterogeneity among the groups of the study, with a wide range of duration (10-30 min), treatments per week (2-7/week), applied frequencies (3-50 Hz), and intensities (2mT-150mT). No serious adverse event had been reported in any study. The included studies showed solid methodological quality, with an overall score of 7.2 points according to the PEDro scale.
CONCLUSIONS: PEMF therapy seems to be a safe and beneficial treatment option for non-specific low back pain, particularly if used as an addition to conventional physical therapy modalities. Future research should focus on standardized settings including assessment methods, treatment regimens, frequencies, and intensities.
UNASSIGNED: HINTERGRUND: Der unspezifische unterer Rückenschmerz (Kreuzschmerz, „low back pain“, LBP) ist häufig und klinisch sowie sozioökonomisch höchst relevant. Die pulsierende Magnetfeldtherapie („pulsed electromagnetic field therapy“, PEMF) hat sich bei muskuloskeletalen Schmerzsyndromen (u. a. Kniearthrose) in bis dato sehr heterogenen Studiensettings als wirksam erwiesen. Ziel der vorliegenden systematischen Literaturübersicht war die Darstellung der Effekte von PEMF auf die Parameter Schmerz und Funktion bei Patienten mit unspezifischem LBP.
METHODS: Dazu wurde eine systematische Literatursuche in wissenschaftlichen Datenbanken (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library und PEDro) von deren Gründung bis zum 15. Mai 2023 durchgeführt. Es wurden ausschließlich randomisierte kontrollierte klinische Studien eingeschlossen, in denen die Wirkung der PEMF auf die Schmerzintensität und die körperliche Funktion untersucht wurde.
UNASSIGNED: Es wurden insgesamt 9 randomisierte kontrollierte Studien mit 420 Teilnehmern (n = 420) gefunden. In den Studien erfolgte der Vergleich von PEMF vs. Placebo-PEMF, PEMF und konventionelle physikalische Therapie vs. alleinige konventionelle physikalische Therapie, PEMF und konventionelle physikalische Therapie vs. Placebo-PEMF und konventionelle physikalische Therapie, PEMF vs. High-Intensity-Laser-Therapie (HILT) vs. konventionelle physikalische Therapie und schließlich der Vergleich von osteopathischer Manipulationsbehandlung (OMT) und PEMF vs. alleinige PEMF vs. Placebo-PEMF vs. alleinige OMT. In 5 der 9 inkludierten Studien wurden statistisch signifikante Ergebnisse in der Schmerzreduktion und eine Steigerung der physischen Funktion im Vergleich zur Kontrollgruppe (p < 0,05) erzielt. Die eingeschlossenen Studien zeigten eine ausgeprägte Heterogenität in den Therapieregimen (Dauer 10–30 min, Häufigkeit 2‑ bis 7‑mal pro Woche) und den applizierten Frequenzen (3–50 Hz) und Intensitäten (2–150 mT). In keiner der Studien wurde eine ernsthafte Nebenwirkung durch PEMF beschrieben. Der durchschnittliche Wert der methodologischen Qualität betrug 7,2 durch die PEDro-Skala.
UNASSIGNED: PEMF scheint eine nebenwirkungsarme und effektive Therapie in der Behandlung von unspezifischen Rückenschmerzen zu sein. Vor allem als additive Therapie zu konventionellen physikalischen Maßnahmen konnte eine gute Wirksamkeit gezeigt werden. Weitere wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen sind notwendig, um die Wirksamkeit der PEMF bei unspezifischen Rückenschmerzen zu belegen. Ebenfalls sollte eine Standardisierung der Therapieregime, Frequenzen und Intensitäten angestrebt werden.

This systematic review aimed to investigate immune-inflammatory and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis biomarkers in individuals with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) compared to healthy control. The search was performed in five databases until 4 November 2021. Two reviewers independently conducted screenings, data extraction, risk of bias, and methodological quality assessment of 14 unique studies. All studies reported the source of the fluid analyzed: nine studies used serum, two used plasma, one used serum and plasma, and two studies used salivary cortisol. We found preliminary and limited evidence (only one study for each biomarker) of increased levels in growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), interleukin-23 (IL-23), transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β), and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor 1 (sTNF-R1) in NSLBP. Inconsistent and limited evidence was identified for interleukin-10 (IL-10). Although C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) levels appear to increase in NSLBP, only one study per each biomarker reported statistically significant differences. Interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), interleukin-17 (IL-17), interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) showed no significant differences. Regarding cortisol, one study showed a significant increase and another a significant decrease. More robust evidence between GDF-15, IL-23, TGF-β, and sTNF-R1 with NSLBP is needed. Moreover, contrary to the findings reported in previous studies, when comparing results exclusively with healthy control, insufficient robust evidence for IL-6, TNF-α, and CRP was found in NSLBP. In addition, cortisol response (HPA-related biomarker) showed a dysregulated functioning in NSLBP, with incongruent evidence regarding its directionality. Therefore, our effort is to find adjusted evidence to conclude which immune-inflammatory and HPA axis biomarkers are altered in NSLBP and how much their levels are affected.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020176153, identifier CRD42020176153.

A systematic review was conducted to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of education programs to prevent and treat low back pain (LBP) in the Hispanic cultural setting. Electronic and manual searches identified 1148 unique references. Nine randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included in this review. Methodological quality assessment and data extraction followed the recommendations from the Cochrane Back Pain Review Group. Education programs which were assessed focused on active management (3 studies), postural hygiene (7), exercise (4) and pain neurophysiology (1). Comparators were no intervention, usual care, exercise, other types of education, and different combinations of these procedures. Five RCTs had a low risk of bias. Results show that: (a) education programs in the school setting can transmit potentially useful knowledge for LBP prevention and (b) education programs for patients with LBP improve the outcomes of usual care, especially in terms of disability. Education on pain neurophysiology improves the results of education on exercise, and education on active management is more effective than \"sham\" education and education on postural hygiene. Future studies should assess the comparative or summatory effects of education on exercise, education on pain neurophysiology and education on active management, as well as explore their efficiency.

Low back pain is a widespread and poorly understood condition that is frequently diagnosed as non-specific low back pain. We were intrigued by the presence of painful sacroiliac nodules in patients with this condition. We conducted a historical review to elucidate this relationship. This chronicled review summarizes the overlooked literature from different countries, especially from around the 1950s, regarding the diagnosis and management of these painful nodules. Biopsies have confirmed the adipose nature of these nodules and revealed distinct pathological signs, including oedema and fascial fatty herniation. Studies have suggested both intra-nodule local anaesthetic injection and surgery as successful treatments for managing pain on a short- or long-term basis. Recent ultrasound studies have confirmed these findings. The various terms used for these nodules over time are specifically described. We conclude that it may be necessary to reconsider the role of fatty tissue in the aetiology and treatment of low back pain in today\'s mainstream medicine. This could lead to advances in understanding unexplained musculoskeletal pain disorders beyond low back pain. Meanwhile, despite the remaining questions, the treatments identified in these studies can help physicians manage patients\' unresolved pain. We recommend that future research use this review as a foundation for further study.

To assess the effectiveness of acupuncture for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) through systematic review of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
Studies were identified in electronic databases from their inception to February 2018, and were grouped according to the control interventions. The outcomes of interest were pain intensity and disability. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) checklist. The review was reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
25 trials (n=7587 participants) were identified and included in a meta-analysis. The results showed that acupuncture was more effective at inducing pain relief than: no treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.69, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.38); sham acupuncture in the immediate term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.18), short term (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.17), and intermediate term (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.28 to -0.05); and usual care in the short term (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.33) and intermediate term (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.10). Also, adjunctive acupuncture with usual care was more effective than usual care alone at all time points studied. With regard to functional improvement, the analysis showed a significant difference between acupuncture and no treatment (SMD -0.94, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.30), whereas the other control therapies could not be assessed.
We draw a cautious conclusion that acupuncture appears to be effective for NSLBP and that acupuncture may be an important supplement to usual care in the management of NSLBP.