ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-utility of the addition of different doses of Pilates to an advice for non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) from a societal perspective. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. SETTING: Physiotherapy clinic in São Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: 296 patients with NSCLBP. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received advice and were randomly allocated to four groups (n=74 per group): booklet group (BG), Pilates once a week (Pilates group 1, PG1), Pilates twice a week (Pilates group 2, PG2) and Pilates three times a week (Pilates group 3, PG3). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were pain and disability at 6-week follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with the BG, all Pilates groups showed significant improvements in pain (PG1, mean difference (MD)=-1.2, 95% CI -2.2 to -0.3; PG2, MD=-2.3, 95% CI -3.2 to -1.4; PG3, MD=-2.1, 95% CI -3.0 to -1.1) and disability (PG1, MD=-1.9, 95% CI -3.6 to -0.1; PG2, MD=-4.7, 95% CI -6.4 to -3.0; PG3, MD=-3.3, 95% CI -5.0 to -1.6). Among the different doses, PG2 showed significant improvements in comparison with PG1 for pain (MD=-1.1, 95% CI -2.0 to -0.1) and disability (MD=-2.8, 95% CI -4.5 to -1.1). The cost-utility analysis showed that PG3 had a 0.78 probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Adding two sessions of Pilates exercises to advice provided better outcomes in pain and disability than advice alone for patients with NSCLBP; non-specific elements such as greater attention or expectation might be part of this effect. The cost-utility analysis showed that Pilates three times a week was the preferred option. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02241538, Completed.
Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy , Low Back Pain/therapy , Adult , Brazil , Chronic Pain/therapy , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disability Evaluation , Exercise Movement Techniques , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a satisfação e motivação para a prática de exercício físico, flexibilidade e dor muscular tardia (DMT) em participantes saudáveis após exercícios de duas modalidades do método Pilates. Para isso, cinquenta participantes saudáveis realizaram uma sessão de exercícios do Pilates moderno e outra do Pilates instável. Foram avaliados os desfechos satisfação e motivação após as sessões, flexibilidade posterior do tronco e membros inferiores (banco de Wells) antes e após cada sessão, e DMT 24, 48 e 72 horas após cada sessão (Escala Numérica de Dor). Os resultados mostraram que não houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre as duas modalidades do Pilates para satisfação e motivação, flexibilidade e DMT 72 horas após a sessão (p>0,05). Para a DMT foi observada diferença estatisticamente significante entre as duas modalidades 24 horas (diferença entre as médias: -0,7; IC a 95%: -1,5 a 0,0) e 48 horas (diferença entre as médias: -0,8; IC a 95%: -1,4 a -0,2) após a sessão, com maior dor no Pilates instável. Como conclusão, as duas modalidades do Pilates apresentaram o mesmo nível de satisfação e motivação e ganho similar de flexibilidade. No entanto, o Pilates instável causou mais DMT após 24 e 48 horas, mas essa diferença não foi clinicamente relevante.
RESUMEN El objetivo de este estudio ha sido comparar la satisfacción y motivación para la práctica de ejercicio físico, flexibilidad y dolor muscular tardío (DMT) en participantes sanos después de ejercicios de dos modalidades del método Pilates. Para ello, cincuenta participantes sanos realizaron una sesión de ejercicios del Pilates moderno y otra del Pilates inestable. Se evaluaron los resultados de satisfacción y motivación después de las sesiones, flexibilidad posterior del tronco y miembros inferiores (banco de Wells) antes y después de cada sesión, y DMT 24, 48 y 72 horas después de cada sesión (Escala Numérica de Dolor). Los resultados mostraron que no hubo diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre las dos modalidades del Pilates para satisfacción y motivación, flexibilidad y DMT 72 horas después de la sesión (p>0.05). Para la DMT se observó diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre las dos modalidades 24 horas (diferencia entre las medias: -0.7, IC a 95%: -1.5 a 0.0) y 48 horas (diferencia entre las medias: -0.8, IC a 95%: -1.4 a -0.2) después de la sesión, con mayor dolor en el Pilates inestable. Como conclusión, las dos modalidades del Pilates presentaron el mismo nivel de satisfacción y motivación y benificio similar de flexibilidad. Sin embargo, el Pilates inestable causó más DMT después de 24 y 48 horas, pero esa diferencia no ha sido clínicamente relevante.
ABSTRACT The aim of our study was to compare the satisfaction and motivation for the practice of exercise, flexibility and delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) in healthy participants after exercises in two types of the Pilates method. For this, 50 healthy participants performed a session of exercises of modern Pilates and other of unstable Pilates. We evaluated the outcomes for satisfaction and motivation after sessions, posterior flexibility of the torso and lower extremities (sit-and-reach box) before and after each session, and DOMS 24, 48 and 72 hours after each session (Numeric Pain Rating Scale). Results showed no statistically significant difference between both types of Pilates for satisfaction and motivation, flexibility and DOMS 72 hours after the session (p>0.05). Regarding the DOMS we observed statistically significant difference between the two types 24 hours (difference between the means: -0.7; 95%CI: -1.5 to 0.0) and 48 hours (difference between means: -0.8; 95%CI: -1.4 to -0.2) after the session, with greater pain in unstable Pilates. As a conclusion, both categories of Pilates showed the same level of satisfaction and motivation and similar flexibility gain. However, unstable Pilates caused more DOMS after 24 and 48 hours, but this difference was not clinically relevant.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Pilates method has been recommended to patients with low back pain, but the evidence on effectiveness is inconclusive. In addition, there is still no evidence for the cost-effectiveness of this method or for the ideal number of sessions to achieve the highest effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study will be to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Pilates method with different weekly frequencies in the treatment of patients with nonspecific low back pain. DESIGN: This is a randomized controlled trial with blinded assessor. SETTING: This study will be conducted at a physical therapy clinic in São Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred ninety-six patients with nonspecific low back pain between the ages of 18 and 80 years will be assessed and randomly allocated to 4 groups (n=74 patients per group). INTERVENTION: All groups will receive an educational booklet. The booklet group will not receive additional exercises. Pilates group 1 will follow a Pilates-based program once a week, Pilates group 2 will follow the same program twice a week, and Pilates group 3 will follow the same program 3 times a week. The intervention will last 6 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: A blinded assessor will evaluate pain, quality-adjusted life-years, general and specific disability, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, and global perceived effect 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after randomization. LIMITATIONS: Therapists and patients will not be blinded. CONCLUSIONS: This will be the first study to investigate different weekly frequencies of treatment sessions for nonspecific low back pain. The results of this study will contribute to a better definition of treatment programs for this population.
