Comparative Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Therapies for Pregnancy-Related Low Back and Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 1.6 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Reviews Pub Date : 2026-08-12 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.52965/001c.165086
Ayesha Alnashwan
{"title":"Comparative Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Therapies for Pregnancy-Related Low Back and Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Ayesha Alnashwan","doi":"10.52965/001c.165086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pregnancy-associated low back and pelvic pain is a common musculoskeletal condition associated with substantial pain, impaired mobility, and functional limitation during pregnancy. Pharmacologic pain management is constrained by maternal and fetal safety considerations, increasing reliance on conservative musculoskeletal interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from database inception through February 2026. Eligible studies included pregnant women with pregnancy-associated low back pain, pelvic girdle pain, or mixed lumbopelvic pain syndromes receiving conservative musculoskeletal interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability assessed using validated instruments. Random-effects meta-analysis using standardized mean differences with Hedges g correction and 95% confidence intervals was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six randomized controlled trials met inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis, of which four studies involving 254 participants contributed directly extractable data for the primary quantitative meta-analyses. Conservative musculoskeletal interventions were associated with significant reductions in pain intensity (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.53; P < 0.001; I² = 34%) and functional disability (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.37; P < 0.001; I² = 66%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated numerically larger pain effects for device-assisted interventions, followed by acupuncture-based and manual or manipulative approaches, although subgroup differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.26). One trial was judged at high risk of bias, while the remaining studies were classified as having some concerns.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Conservative musculoskeletal interventions were associated with improvements in pain intensity and functional disability among women with pregnancy-associated low back and pelvic pain. However, limited trial numbers, methodological heterogeneity, and risk of bias constrain treatment-specific conclusions. Larger, adequately powered, methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to inform higher-confidence clinical recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":19669,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Reviews","volume":"18 ","pages":"165086"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13475796/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.165086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pregnancy-associated low back and pelvic pain is a common musculoskeletal condition associated with substantial pain, impaired mobility, and functional limitation during pregnancy. Pharmacologic pain management is constrained by maternal and fetal safety considerations, increasing reliance on conservative musculoskeletal interventions.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from database inception through February 2026. Eligible studies included pregnant women with pregnancy-associated low back pain, pelvic girdle pain, or mixed lumbopelvic pain syndromes receiving conservative musculoskeletal interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional disability assessed using validated instruments. Random-effects meta-analysis using standardized mean differences with Hedges g correction and 95% confidence intervals was performed.

Results: Six randomized controlled trials met inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis, of which four studies involving 254 participants contributed directly extractable data for the primary quantitative meta-analyses. Conservative musculoskeletal interventions were associated with significant reductions in pain intensity (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.53; P < 0.001; I² = 34%) and functional disability (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.37; P < 0.001; I² = 66%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated numerically larger pain effects for device-assisted interventions, followed by acupuncture-based and manual or manipulative approaches, although subgroup differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.26). One trial was judged at high risk of bias, while the remaining studies were classified as having some concerns.

Conclusions: Conservative musculoskeletal interventions were associated with improvements in pain intensity and functional disability among women with pregnancy-associated low back and pelvic pain. However, limited trial numbers, methodological heterogeneity, and risk of bias constrain treatment-specific conclusions. Larger, adequately powered, methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to inform higher-confidence clinical recommendations.

非药物治疗妊娠相关腰背痛和骨盆疼痛的比较效果:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:妊娠相关的腰和骨盆疼痛是一种常见的肌肉骨骼疾病,与妊娠期间的剧烈疼痛、活动能力受损和功能限制有关。药物疼痛管理受到母体和胎儿安全考虑的限制,越来越依赖于保守的肌肉骨骼干预。方法:根据PRISMA 2020对随机对照试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。检索了PubMed/MEDLINE、Scopus和Web of Science从数据库建立到2026年2月。符合条件的研究包括有妊娠相关腰痛、骨盆带痛或混合性腰骨盆痛综合征的孕妇,接受保守的肌肉骨骼干预。主要结局是使用经过验证的仪器评估疼痛强度和功能残疾。随机效应荟萃分析采用标准化平均差异,采用Hedges g校正和95%置信区间。结果:6项随机对照试验符合定性综合的纳入标准,其中4项涉及254名受试者的研究为主要的定量荟萃分析提供了直接可提取的数据。保守的肌肉骨骼干预与疼痛强度(SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.18至-0.53;P < 0.001; I²= 34%)和功能障碍(SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.31至-0.37;P < 0.001; I²= 66%)的显著降低相关。亚组分析显示,器械辅助干预对疼痛的影响在数值上更大,其次是基于针灸的方法和手动或操作方法,尽管亚组差异无统计学意义(P = 0.26)。一项试验被判定为高风险偏倚,而其余的研究则被归类为存在一些问题。结论:保守的肌肉骨骼干预与妊娠相关腰背痛和骨盆疼痛妇女疼痛强度和功能障碍的改善有关。然而,有限的试验数量、方法学异质性和偏倚风险限制了治疗特异性结论。需要更大规模、更有力、方法学严谨的随机对照试验来提供更高可信度的临床建议。
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
Orthopedic Reviews
Orthopedic Reviews ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
122
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Reviews is an Open Access, online-only, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles concerned with any aspect of orthopedics, as well as diagnosis and treatment, trauma, surgical procedures, arthroscopy, sports medicine, rehabilitation, pediatric and geriatric orthopedics. All bone-related molecular and cell biology, genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology papers are also welcome. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, reviews and case reports of general interest.
×
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
小红书