Effects of pilates on patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a systematic review.
Hui-Ting Lin, Wei-Ching Hung, Jia-Ling Hung and 3 others
PMID 27821970WHAT IT FOUND
For chronic non-specific low back pain, Pilates reduced pain more than minimal intervention, but not more than other exercise; only some gains reached clinically important difference.
Key findings
01In 5 trials, Pilates showed statistically significant pain relief differences compared with minimal intervention after 4-12 weeks, but only 2 reached clinically important pain relief.
02Two trials compared Pilates with other exercise; one showed statistically better pain and function after 8 weeks than stationary cycling, but neither reached clinically important difference.
03One trial compared mat Pilates with equipment-based Pilates; at 6 weeks they were similar, but at 24 weeks equipment-based showed greater improvement in functional ability and kinesiophobia.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review did not combine studies in a meta-analysis because treatments and outcomes varied widely. Only eight randomized trials were included. Only English articles were included, even though the search had no language restriction. Unpublished studies were not searched, so some publication bias is possible. In the included trials, participants and therapists were not blinded. Some trials had insufficient raw numeric data to calculate between-group differences.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude Pilates is better than all exercise. The review found benefit over minimal intervention, but not over other exercise, and clinically important gains were inconsistent.