Background: In chronic LBP (CLBP), guideline-endorsed treatment is to stay active, return to normal activity, and to exercise. Several reviews on various exercise types used in CLBP have been published. We aimed to identify systematic reviews of common exercise types used in CLBP, to appraise their quality, and to summarize and compare their effect on pain and disability.Methods: We searched the databases OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE LIBRARY, and WEB OF SCIENCE (Core collection) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on adults between 18 and 70 years of age suffering from chronic or recurrent LBP for a period of at least 12 weeks, which investigated the effects of exercises on pain and disability. All searches were conducted without language restriction. The search was performed up until 2022–01-26. The included reviews were grouped into nine exercise types: aerobic training, aquatic exercises, motor control exercises (MCE), resistance training, Pilates, sling exercises, traditional Chinese exercises (TCE), walking, and yoga. The study quality was assessed with AMSTAR-2. For each exercise type, a narrative analysis was performed, and the level of evidence for the effects of exercise was assessed through GRADE.Results: Our database search resulted in 3,475 systematic reviews. Out of the 253 full texts that were screened, we included 45 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The quality of the included reviews ranged from high to critically low. Due to large heterogeneity, no meta-analyses were performed. We found low-to-moderate evidence of mainly short-term and small beneficial effects on pain and disability for MCE, Pilates, resistance training, TCE, and yoga compared to no or minimal intervention.Conclusions: Our findings show that the effect of various exercise types used in CLBP on pain and disability varies with no major difference between exercise types. Many of the included systematic reviews were of low-to-moderate quality and based on randomized controlled trials with high risk of bias. The conflicting results seen, undermine the certainty of the results leading to very-low-to-moderate quality of evidence for our results. Future systematic reviews should be of higher quality to minimize waste of resources.Trial registration: PROSPERO: Reg no 190409 Registration date 01AUG 2020.

Objectives: To study the effects of a one-year physical activity programme on aerobic capacity, physical activity and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by a randomized control design. Methods: Thirty-five women with low or moderate disease activity and organ damage were randomized to intervention (I) or control (C) group. The intervention during months 0–3 consisted of education, supervised aerobic exercise at high intensity and individual coaching, as well as self-managed physical activity at low-to-moderate intensity. During months 4–12, the physical activity was self-managed and the coaching was successively reduced over time. Outcome measures included: maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂ max) from a bicycle ergometer test, self-reported physical activity and HRQL (SF-36). Results: VO₂ at sub-max. and max. increased, independent of group, during the one-year study period (main effect of time p < 0.0001). VO₂ max. increased between baseline and month 3 ( p < 0.0001), between months 3 and 6 ( p = 0.01) and the increase was sustained at month 12 (ns). Frequency of physical activity at high intensity also increased, independent of group, during the study period. It was increased at months 3, 6 and 12 compared to baseline ( p = 0.02, p < 0.001, p = 0.03). Improvement in mental health between baseline and month 6 ( p = 0.002) was seen for the I-group, not the C-group ( p = 0.03). Disease activity and organ damage did not change. Conclusions: Physical activity and aerobic capacity increased after supervised exercise and coaching, and the improvement was sustained during the one-year programme. However, no interactions between the group differences were seen, which suggests that repeated measurements could motivate to increased physical activity and thereby to increased aerobic capacity. As sub-max. VO₂ increased over time, training-induced changes in VO₂ on-kinetics could be another explanation. Little influence on HRQL was seen after the programme. The study indicates that physical activity at high intensity over one year is tolerated by patients with mild to moderate SLE.

Background: Self-management strategies are regarded as highly prioritized in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment guidelines. However, individual and structural barriers lead to a staggering amount of people with COPD that are not offered support for such strategies, and new approaches are urgently needed to circumvent these barriers. A promising way of delivering health services such as support for self-management strategies is the use of eHealth tools. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the usage of, and factors affecting the use of, eHealth tools over time in people with COPD. Objective: This study aimed, among people with COPD, to explore and describe the experiences of an eHealth tool over time and factors that might affect usage. Methods: The eHealth tool included information on evidence-based self-management treatment for people with COPD, including texts, pictures, videos as well as interactive components such as a step registration function with automatized feedback. In addition to the latter, automated notifications of new content and pedometers were used as triggers to increase usage. After having access to the tool for 3 months, 16 individuals (12 women) with COPD were individually interviewed. At 12 months’ access to the tool, 7 (5 women) of the previous 16 individuals accepted a second individual interview. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. User frequency was considered in the analysis, and participants were divided into users and nonusers/seldom users depending on the number of logins and minutes of usage per month. Results: Three main categories, namely, ambiguous impact, basic conditions for usage, and approaching capability emerged from the analysis, which, together with their subcategories, reflect the participants’ experiences of using the eHealth tool. Nonusers/seldom users (median 1.5 logins and 1.78 minutes spent on the site per month) reported low motivation, a higher need for technical support, a negative view about the disease and self-management, and had problematic health literacy as measured by the Communicative and Critical Health Literacy Scale (median [range] 154 [5-2102]). Users (median 10 logins and 43 minutes per month) felt comfortable with information technology (IT) tools, had a positive view on triggers, and had sufficient health literacy (median [range] 5 [5-1400]). Benefits including behavior changes were mainly expressed after 12 months had passed and mainly among users. Conclusions: Findings of this study indicate that the level of motivation, comfortability with IT tools, and the level of health literacy seem to affect usage of an eHealth tool over time. Besides, regarding behavioral changes, gaining benefits from the eHealth tool seems reserved for the users and specifically after 12 months, thus suggesting that eHealth tools can be suitable media for supporting COPD-specific self-management skills, although not for everyone or at all times. These novel findings are of importance when designing new eHealth tools as well as when deciding on whether or not an eHealth tool might be appropriate to use if the goal is to support self-management among people with COPD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02696187; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02696187 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016851

Purpose: We aimed to map the physiotherapy practice in Sweden of clinical tests and patient-reported outcome measures in low-back pain (LBP), and to study advantages and barriers in using patient-reported outcome measures. Methods: An online survey was mailed to 4934 physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden. Multiple choice questions investigated the use of clinical tests and patient-reported outcome measures in assessing patients with LBP. Open questions investigating the advantages and barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed with content analysis. Results: The response rate was 25% (n = 1217). Clinical tests were used “always/often” by >60% of the participants, while most patient-reported outcome measures were used by <15%. Advantages in using patient-reported outcome measures were: the clinical reasoning process, to increase the quality of assessment, to get the patient’s voice, education and motivation of patients, and communication with health professionals. Barriers were lack of time and knowledge, administrative aspects, the interaction between physiotherapist and patient and, the applicability and validity of the patient-reported outcome measures. Conclusion: Our findings show that physiotherapists working in primary health care use clinical testing in LBP to a great extent, while various patient-reported outcome measures are used to a low-to-very-low extent. Several barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures were reported such as time, knowledge, and administrative issues, while important findings on advantages were to enhance the clinical reasoning process and to educate and motivate the patient. Barriers might be changed through education or organizational change-work. To enhance the use of patient-reported outcome measures and thus person-centered care in low-back pain, recommendation, and education on various patient-reported outcome measures need to be advocated.