Can breathing exercises effectively treat people with chronic non-specific low back pain? A systemic review with meta-analysis.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Angela Yu-Jung Chen, I-Ju Lin, Yi-Tung Chen, Hong-Ji Luo, Yen-Wei Chen, Wendy Tzyy-Jiuan Wang
{"title":"Can breathing exercises effectively treat people with chronic non-specific low back pain? A systemic review with meta-analysis.","authors":"Angela Yu-Jung Chen, I-Ju Lin, Yi-Tung Chen, Hong-Ji Luo, Yen-Wei Chen, Wendy Tzyy-Jiuan Wang","doi":"10.1177/10538127251374357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of breathing exercises on pain, function, pulmonary and muscle parameters, and psychological factors in chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP).Data SourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, and Airiti Library were searched up to September 17, 2024.MethodsA systematic review (CRD42024567159) of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing breathing exercises to interventions without breathing exercises for CNLBP was conducted. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using Cochrane's RoB 2 tool. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. Interventions included diaphragmatic, slow or deep breathing, and forced exhalation techniques, with durations ranging from 2 to 12 weeks. Evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE framework, and subgroup analyses explored potential heterogeneity.ResultsSeventeen studies (633 participants) met inclusion criteria. Breathing exercises reduced pain intensity (SMD -1.11; 95% CI -1.71 to -0.51) and improved functional capacity (e.g., Oswestry Disability Index, SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.25). Positive effects were observed in respiratory function (e.g., forced vital capacity, SMD 0.46; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.74), core muscle activity (e.g., transverse abdominis activation assessed via surface electromyography, SMD 0.82; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.17), and fear-avoidance beliefs (e.g., FABQ-subscales, SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.15). However, heterogeneity was high, five studies had a high risk of bias, and GRADE assessment indicated low to very low evidence certainty.ConclusionBreathing exercises may benefit pain, function, and respiratory and psychological outcomes in CNLBP. Effects appear more pronounced in athletes regarding the reduction of pain. Further high-quality research is needed to support the findings and establish their clinical applicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":15129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"10538127251374357"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10538127251374357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of breathing exercises on pain, function, pulmonary and muscle parameters, and psychological factors in chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP).Data SourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, and Airiti Library were searched up to September 17, 2024.MethodsA systematic review (CRD42024567159) of randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing breathing exercises to interventions without breathing exercises for CNLBP was conducted. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using Cochrane's RoB 2 tool. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. Interventions included diaphragmatic, slow or deep breathing, and forced exhalation techniques, with durations ranging from 2 to 12 weeks. Evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE framework, and subgroup analyses explored potential heterogeneity.ResultsSeventeen studies (633 participants) met inclusion criteria. Breathing exercises reduced pain intensity (SMD -1.11; 95% CI -1.71 to -0.51) and improved functional capacity (e.g., Oswestry Disability Index, SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.25). Positive effects were observed in respiratory function (e.g., forced vital capacity, SMD 0.46; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.74), core muscle activity (e.g., transverse abdominis activation assessed via surface electromyography, SMD 0.82; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.17), and fear-avoidance beliefs (e.g., FABQ-subscales, SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.15). However, heterogeneity was high, five studies had a high risk of bias, and GRADE assessment indicated low to very low evidence certainty.ConclusionBreathing exercises may benefit pain, function, and respiratory and psychological outcomes in CNLBP. Effects appear more pronounced in athletes regarding the reduction of pain. Further high-quality research is needed to support the findings and establish their clinical applicability.

呼吸练习能有效治疗慢性非特异性腰痛吗?荟萃分析的系统评价。
目的探讨呼吸运动对慢性非特异性腰痛(CNLBP)患者疼痛、功能、肺和肌肉参数及心理因素的影响。检索到2024年9月17日,检索到pubmed、MEDLINE、CINAHL、EMBASE、Web of Science、PEDro和Airiti Library。方法对随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统评价(CRD42024567159),比较呼吸练习与不进行呼吸练习干预CNLBP。两位审稿人使用Cochrane的RoB 2工具独立进行研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。采用随机效应模型计算具有95%置信区间(CI)的标准化平均差异(SMDs)。干预措施包括横膈膜呼吸、慢呼吸或深呼吸以及用力呼气技术,持续时间为2至12周。使用GRADE框架评估证据确定性,亚组分析探索潜在的异质性。结果17项研究(633名受试者)符合纳入标准。呼吸练习减少疼痛强度(SMD -1.11; 95% CI -1.71至-0.51)并改善功能能力(例如,Oswestry残疾指数,SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.88至-0.25)。在呼吸功能(例如,用力肺活量,SMD 0.46; 95% CI 0.18至0.74)、核心肌肉活动(例如,通过表面肌电图评估横腹激活,SMD 0.82; 95% CI 0.47至1.17)和恐惧回避信念(例如,fabq -亚量表,SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.97至-0.15)方面观察到积极的影响。然而,异质性较高,5项研究存在高偏倚风险,GRADE评估显示证据确定性低至极低。结论呼吸练习可改善CNLBP患者的疼痛、功能、呼吸和心理结果。在减轻疼痛方面,对运动员的影响更为明显。需要进一步的高质量研究来支持这些发现并建立其临床适用性。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
194
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation is a journal whose main focus is to present relevant information about the interdisciplinary approach to musculoskeletal rehabilitation for clinicians who treat patients with back and musculoskeletal pain complaints. It will provide readers with both 1) a general fund of knowledge on the assessment and management of specific problems and 2) new information considered to be state-of-the-art in the field. The intended audience is multidisciplinary as well as multi-specialty. In each issue clinicians can find information which they can use in their patient setting the very next day.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信