***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Study Design . A prospect i ve r and omized controlled trial . Objectives . To examine the effectiveness of combined manipulative treatment , stabilizing exercises , and physician consultation compared with physician consultation alone for chronic low back pain . Summary of Background Data . Strong evidence exists that manual therapy provides more effective short-term pain relief than does placebo treatment in the management of chronic low back pain . The evidence for long-term effect is lacking . Methods . Two hundred four chronic low back pain patients , whose Oswestry disability index was at least 16 % , were r and omly assigned to either a manipulative-treatment group or a consultation group . All were clinical ly examined , informed about their back pain , provided with an educational booklet , and were given specific instructions based on the clinical evaluation . The treatment included four sessions of manipulation and stabilizing exercises aim ing to correct the lumbopelvic rhythm . Question naires inquired about pain intensity , self-rated disability , mental depression , health-related quality of life , health care costs , and production costs . Results . At the baseline , the groups were comparable , except for the percentage of employees ( P = 0.01 ) . At the 5- and 12-month follow-ups , the manipulative-treatment group showed more significant reductions in pain intensity ( P < 0.001 ) and in self-rated disability ( P = 0.002 ) than the consultation group . However , we detected no significant difference between the groups in health-related quality of life or in costs . Conclusions . The manipulative treatment with stabilizing exercises was more effective in reducing pain intensity and disability than the physician consultation alone . The present study showed that short , specific treatment programs with proper patient information may alter the course of chronic low back pain STUDY DESIGN A r and omized controlled comparative trial with an 8-month follow-up period was conducted . OBJECTIVE To compare the effect of the McKenzie treatment method with that of intensive dynamic strengthening training in patients with subacute or chronic low back pain . SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA R and omized studies indicate that the efficacy of the McKenzie method in the treatment of patients with acute or subacute low back pain is debatable . Currently , no r and omized studies examining the effects of this method for patients with chronic low back pain have been published . METHODS For this study , 260 consecutive patients with low back pain and at least 8 weeks duration of symptoms ( 85 % of the patients had more than 3 months duration of symptoms ) were r and omized into two groups : Group A was treated with the McKenzie method ( n = 132 ) , and Group B was treated with intensive dynamic strengthening training ( n = 128 ) . The treatment period for both groups was 8 weeks at an outpatient clinic , followed by 2 months of self-training at home . Treatment results were recorded at the end of the treatment period at the clinic , then 2 and 8 months after . In both groups , 30 % of the patients were lost to follow-up evaluation . An intention-to-treat analysis of the main effect variables , disability , and pain was performed for all the patients included in the study . A supplementary analysis of the 180 patients who completed the full treatment program also was undertaken . RESULTS Intention-to-treat analysis showed a tendency toward a difference in reduction of disability in favor of the McKenzie group at the 2-month follow-up assessment ( P = 0.04 ) , but no differences at the end of treatment and at the 8-month follow-up evaluation . No differences in reduction of pain were observed at any time between the groups . The supplementary analysis of the patients who had completed the full intervention showed a tendency toward a difference in favor of the McKenzie method in reduction of pain at the end of treatment ( P = 0.02 ) . This difference reached statistical significance at the 2-month follow-up assessment ( P = 0.01 ) , but no difference was found after 8 months . The supplementary analysis showed no differences between the groups with regard to reduction of disability . CONCLUSION The McKenzie method and intensive dynamic strengthening training seem to be equally effective in the treatment of patients with subacute or chronic low back pain Study Design . A r and omized controlled trial with a 6-month follow-up period was conducted . Objective . To compare lumbar extension exercise and whole-body vibration exercise for chronic lower back pain . Summary of Background Data . Chronic lower back pain involves muscular as well as connective and neural systems . Different types of physiotherapy are applied for its treatment . Industrial vibration is regarded as a risk factor . Recently , vibration exercise has been developed as a new type of physiotherapy . It is thought to activate muscles via reflexes . Methods . In this study , 60 patients with chronic lower back pain devoid of “ specific ” spine diseases , who had a mean age of 51.7 years and a pain history of 13.1 years , practice d either isodynamic lumbar extension or vibration exercise for 3 months . Outcome measures were lumbar extension torque , pain sensation ( visual analog scale ) , and pain-related disability ( pain disability index ) . Results . A significant and comparable reduction in pain sensation and pain-related disability was observed in both groups . Lumbar extension torque increased significantly in the vibration exercise group ( 30.1 Nm/kg ) , but significantly more in the lumbar extension group ( + 59.2 Nm/kg ; SEM 10.2;P < 0.05 ) . No correlation was found between gain in lumbar torque and pain relief or pain-related disability ( P > 0.2 ) . Conclusions . The current data indicate that poor lumbar muscle force probably is not the exclusive cause of chronic lower back pain . Different types of exercise therapy tend to yield comparable results . Interestingly , well-controlled vibration may be the cure rather than the cause of lower back pain BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The prescriptive validity of a treatment-oriented extension-mobilization category for patients with low back syndrome ( LBS ) was examined . SUBJECTS Of a total of 39 patients with LBS referred for physical therapy , 24 patients ( 14 male , 10 female ) , aged 14 to 50 years ( means = 31.3 , SD = 11.6 ) , were classified as having signs and symptoms indicating treatment with an extension-mobilization approach .  The remaining subjects were dismissed from the study . Patients in the extension-mobilization category were r and omly assigned to either an experimental ( treatment ) group ( n = 14 ) or a comparison group ( n = 10 ) . METHODS The experimental and comparison group subjects were treated with either mobilization and extension ( a treatment matched to the category ) or a flexion exercise regimen ( an unmatched treatment ) . Outcome was assessed with a modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Question naire administered initially and at 3 and 5 days after initiation of treatment . Data were analyzed with a 2 x 3 ( treatment group x treatment period ) analysis of variance . RESULTS The subjects ' rate of improvement , as indicated by the Oswestry question naire scores , was dependent on the treatment group to which they were assigned . Subjects treated with extension and mobilization positively responded at a faster rate than did those treated with a flexion-oriented program . CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION This study illustrates that a priori classification of selected patients with LBS into a treatment category of extension and mobilization and subsequently treating the patients accordingly with specified interventions can be an effective approach to conservative management of selected patients BACKGROUND Chiropractic manipulation and strenuous exercise therapy have been shown effective in the treatment of nonspecific back pain .  Bone- setting , the predecessor of modern manual therapies , still survives in some parts of Finl and and was compared with a light exercise therapy and non-manipulative , pragmatic physiotherapy in a year-long r and omized controlled trial on patients with long-term back pain . METHODS One hundred fourteen ambulatory patients of working age with back pain for 7 weeks or more were r and omly assigned to the therapies , which were offered in up to 10 sessions during a 6-week treatment period . The outcome was measured by the Oswestry Disability Question naire . Sick-leaves and visits to health centers were recorded for 1 year before and after the therapy . RESULTS The Oswestry disability scores improved most in the bone- setting group ( P = .02 , Kruskall-Wallis test ) . Visits to health centers for back pain were reduced only in the physiotherapy group ( P = .01 , Wilcoxon test ) . Sick-leaves were not significantly different between groups . A secondary analysis based on the use of additional therapies after the intervention showed a possible subgroup with an enhanced effect from bone- setting . CONCLUSIONS Traditional bone- setting seemed more effective than exercise or physiotherapy on back pain and disability , even 1 year after therapy Abstract Objective : To evaluate effectiveness of an exercise programme in a community setting for patients with low back pain to encourage a return to normal activities . Design : R and omised controlled trial of progressive exercise programme compared with usual primary care management . Patients ' preferences for type of management were elicited independently of r and omisation . Participants : 187 patients aged 18 - 60 years with mechanical low back pain of 4 weeks to 6 months ' duration . Interventions : Exercise classes led by a physiotherapist that included strengthening exercises for all main muscle groups , stretching exercises , relaxation session , and brief education on back care . A cognitive-behavioural approach was used . Main outcome measures : Assessment s of debilitating effects of back pain before and after intervention and at 6 months and 1 year later . Measures included Rol and disability question naire , Aberdeen back pain scale , pain diaries , and use of healthcare services . Results : At 6 weeks after r and omisation , the intervention group improved marginally more than the control group on the disability question naire and reported less distressing pain . At 6 months and 1 year , the intervention group showed significantly greater improvement in the disability question naire score ( mean difference in changes 1.35 , 95 % confidence interval 0.13 to 2.57 ) . At 1 year , the intervention group also showed significantly greater improvement in the Aberdeen back pain scale ( 4.44 , 1.01 to 7.87 ) and reported only 378 days off work compared with 607 in the control group . The intervention group used fewer healthcare re sources . Outcome was not influenced by patients ' preferences . Conclusions : The exercise class was more clinical ly effective than traditional general practitioner management , regardless of patient preference , and was cost effective . Key messages Patients with back pain need to return to normal activities as soon as possible but are often afraid that movement or activity may be harmful An exercise programme led by a physiotherapist in the community and based on cognitive-behavioural principles helped patients to cope better with their pain and function better even one year later Patients ' preferences for type of management did not affect outcome Patients in the intervention group tended to use fewer healthcare re sources and took fewer days off work This type of exercise programme should be more widely BACKGROUND The effectiveness of massage therapy for low-back pain has not been documented . This r and omized controlled trial compared comprehensive massage therapy ( soft-tissue manipulation , remedial exercise and posture education ) , 2 components of massage therapy and placebo in the treatment of subacute ( between 1 week and 8 months ) low-back pain . METHODS Subjects with subacute low-back pain were r and omly assigned to 1 of 4 groups : comprehensive massage therapy ( n = 25 ) , soft-tissue manipulation only ( n = 25 ) , remedial exercise with posture education only ( n = 22 ) or a placebo of sham laser therapy ( n = 26 ) . Each subject received 6 treatments within approximately 1 month . Outcome measures obtained at baseline , after treatment and at 1-month follow-up consisted of the Rol and Disability Question naire ( RDQ ) , the McGill Pain Question naire ( PPI and PRI ) , the State Anxiety Index and the Modified Schober test ( lumbar range of motion ) . RESULTS Of the 107 subjects who passed screening , 98 ( 92 % ) completed post-treatment tests and 91 ( 85 % ) completed follow-up tests . Statistically significant differences were noted after treatment and at follow-up . The comprehensive massage therapy group had improved function ( mean RDQ score 1.54 v. 2.86 - 6.5 , p < 0.001 ) , less intense pain ( mean PPI score 0.42 v. 1.18 - 1.75 , p < 0.001 ) and a decrease in the quality of pain ( mean PRI score 2.29 v. 4.55 - 7.71 , p = 0.006 ) compared with the other 3 groups . Clinical significance was evident for the comprehensive massage therapy group and the soft-tissue manipulation group on the measure of function . At 1-month follow-up 63 % of subjects in the comprehensive massage therapy group reported no pain as compared with 27 % of the soft-tissue manipulation group , 14 % of the remedial exercise group and 0 % of the sham laser therapy group . INTERPRETATION Patients with subacute low-back pain were shown to benefit from massage therapy , as regulated by the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario and delivered by experienced massage therapists OBJECTIVE To determine if the use of an isokinetic device for trunk exercise is more effective than st and ard physiotherapy in promoting motor disinhibition for patients with chronic low back pain . POPULATION chronic low back pain out patients who are treated in a Rheumatology or PM & R unit within an academic hospital . METHODOLOGY This is a prospect i ve , controlled , r and omized study , with two groups of treatment : one treated with isokinetic techniques and the other with st and ard physiotherapy , six sessions for each treatment during 2 weeks . Outcome measures include pain ( VSA ) , trunk mobility ( Schöber index , distance from fingers to floor ) , muscle extensibility and muscle strength ( Biering 
    Output:
    
Exercise therapy decreased pain and improved physical function by modest amounts in adults with chronic low back pain .
In adults with acute low back pain , exercise therapy , conservative management , and no treatment had similar effects on pain .
They synthesized the evidence by using a levels-of- evidence approach because of the heterogeneity and insufficiency of the literature and concluded that the evidence did not support effectiveness of exercises for acute low back pain but that exercises may be helpful for chronic low back pain .
We considered studies to provide evidence that the exercise therapy was ineffective if the comparison group statistically significantly improved and the exercise group did not statistically significantly improve .