Barriers and enablers to exercise adherence in people with nonspecific chronic low back pain: a systematic review of qualitative evidence.

ABSTRACT: Exercise is a first-line treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP), reducing pain and disability in the short term. However, exercise benefits decrease over time, with a lack of long-term exercise adherence a potential reason for this. This study aimed to synthesize the perceptions and beliefs of individuals with CLBP and identify their barriers and enablers to exercise adherence. We searched CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases from inception to February 28, 2023, for qualitative studies that explored the factors influencing exercise adherence for people with CLBP. A hybrid approach combining thematic synthesis with the Theoretical Domains Framework was used to analyze data. We assessed methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and the level of confidence of the themes generated using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Studies. Twenty-three papers (n = 21 studies) were included (n = 677 participants). Four main themes affected exercise adherence: (1) exercise, pain, and the body, (2) psychological factors, (3) social factors, and (4) external factors. These themes contained 16 subthemes that were predominantly both barriers and enablers to exercise adherence. The individual's experiences of barriers and enablers were most appropriately represented across a spectrum, where influencing factors could be a barrier or enabler to exercise adherence, and these could be specific to pre-exercise, during-exercise, and post-exercise situations. These findings may be used to improve exercise adherence and ultimately treatment outcomes in people with CLBP.

Are Exercise Interventions in Clinical Trials for Chronic Low Back Pain Dosed Appropriately to Meet the World Health Organization's Physical Activity Guidelines?

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the proportion of exercise interventions tested in clinical trials of people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) that meet the World Health Organization's (WHO) physical activity guidelines. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the 2021 Cochrane review of exercise therapy for CLBP was performed. Data from each study were extracted by 1 reviewer and were checked by a second reviewer. Data extracted related to the frequency, duration and intensity of each exercise intervention, and the proportion of exercise interventions that met the WHO's physical activity guidelines (aerobic, muscle strengthening, or both) were determined. RESULTS: The 249 included trials comprised 426 exercise interventions. Few interventions reported an exercise type and dose consistent with the WHO guidelines (aerobic: 1.6%, muscle strengthening: 5.6%, both: 1.6%). Poor reporting of exercise intensity limited our ability to determine whether interventions met the guidelines. CONCLUSION: Few interventions tested in clinical trials for people with CLBP prescribe an exercise type and dose consistent with the WHO guidelines. Therefore, they do not appear sufficiently dosed to achieve broader health outcomes. Future trials should investigate the effect of WHO guideline-recommended exercise interventions on patient-reported outcomes (pain and disability) as well as health-related outcomes in people with CLBP. IMPACT: This exploratory analysis showed the lack of exercise interventions in the CLBP literature that meet the WHO's physical activity guidelines. With people in chronic pain groups, such as people with CLBP, being at higher risk for noncommunicable disease, it appears this is a key consideration for exercise practitioners when designing interventions for people with CLBP.

Exercise Increases Pain Self-efficacy in Adults With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of exercise on pain self-efficacy in adults with nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from October 20, 2018, to March 23, 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effect of exercise on pain self-efficacy to control, in adults with NSCLBP. DATA SYNTHESIS: We conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) and judged the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. RESULTS: Seventeen trials were included, of which eight (n = 1121 participants; 60.6% female; mean age: 49.6 years) were included in the meta-analysis. Exercise increased pain self-efficacy by 3.02 points (95% confidence interval: 1.72, 4.32) on the 60-point Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. The certainty of evidence was moderate; all trials were at high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: There was moderate-certainty evidence that exercise increased pain self-efficacy in adults with NSCLBP. Future research should investigate if this effect is meaningful, whether it increases with more targeted treatments to enhance pain self-efficacy, and the effects on outcomes for adults with NSCLBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(6):1-8. Epub: 10 May 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11622.

Effects of a single exercise session on pain intensity in adults with chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is prevalent amongst society, making it necessary to find strategies to manage chronic pain. Regular exercise is efficacious; however, pain is a barrier to initiating exercise. A single exercise session is also believed to acutely reduce pain, however, the evidence for this is less robust. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the effect of a single exercise session on pain intensity in adults with chronic pain. METHODS: We searched eight databases and trial registries to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of a single exercise session on pain intensity in adults with chronic pain compared to a non-exercise control. Literature screening, data extraction, risk of bias (Cochrane 2.0) and quality assessment (GRADE) were conducted independently and in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the metafor package in R. RESULTS: We included 17 trials (46 study arms with 664 adults [44% female]). There were no significant differences in pain intensity (mean difference on a 0-10 scale) immediately post-exercise -0.02 (95% CI = -0.06, 0.62; I2 = 77.1%) or up to 45-min post-exercise -0.17 (95% CI = -0.49, 0.16; I2 = 34.2%). All trials were at high risk of bias and the overall confidence in these findings was very low. CONCLUSION: A single exercise session did not reduce pain intensity up to 1-h post-exercise. Notably, increases in pain were not observed either, suggesting that while pain can be a barrier to initiating exercise, clinicians can educate patients on the unlikelihood of exercise acutely increasing pain intensity.

Baseline imbalance and heterogeneity are present in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials examining the effects of exercise and medicines for blood pressure management.

Randomized clinical trials attempt to reduce bias and create similar groups at baseline to infer causal effects. In meta-analyses, baseline imbalance may threaten the validity of the treatment effects. This meta-epidemiological study examined baseline imbalance in comparisons of exercise and antihypertensive medicines. Baseline data for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and age were extracted from a network meta-analysis of 391 randomized trials comparing exercise types and antihypertensive medicines. Fixed-effect meta-analyses were used to determine the presence of baseline imbalance and/or inconsistency. Meta-regression analyses were conducted on sample size, the risk of bias for allocation concealment, and whether data for all randomized participants were presented at baseline. In one exercise comparison, the resistance group was 0.3 years younger than the control group (95% confidence interval 0.6 to 0.1). Substantial inconsistency was observed in other exercise comparisons. Less data were available for medicines, but there were no occurrences of baseline imbalance and only a few instances of inconsistency. Several moderator analyses identified significant associations. We identified baseline imbalance as well as substantial inconsistency in exercise comparisons. Researchers should consider conducting meta-analyses of key prognostic variables at baseline to ensure balance across trials.