https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9611-2186
Figures
Abstract
Background
Low-back pain is one of the most common health conditions worldwide. It is defined as pain below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds. Current guidelines recommend management of chronic health (e.g., low back pain) conditions in older people at primary health care settings using active strategies (e.g., exercise). In non-specific low back pain, high quality evidence supports active strategies for general population. However, the management of non-specific low back pain in the older people has been overlooked and evidence is limited to a small number of low powered randomized controlled trials with high risk of bias.
Methods
This is a prospectively registered, open, two-arm randomised controlled trial comparing the group-based exercise and waiting list in pain intensity (11-item Pain Numerical Rating Scale) and disability (Roland Morris questionnaire) of older people (i.e., 60 years old or over) with chronic non-specific low back pain. One hundred and twenty patients will be recruited from Diamantina, Brazil. Follow-ups will be conducted in post-treatment (8 week) and 6- and 12-months post-randomisation.
Discussion
Our hypothesis is that group-based exercise will be better than waiting list in reducing pain intensity and disability in older people with chronic non-specific low back pain.
Impact
The practice of individualized exercise has been studied for the management of chronic non-specific low back pain in older people. However, the group exercise, even showing high quality evidence for the improvement of several important outcomes in this population, has been ignored until now. Thus, the results of this study have the potential to indicate a viable and accessible strategy for managing chronic non-specific low back pain in the older people.
Trial registration
The study was prospectively registered at www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br (RBR-9j5pqs). Date-11/18/2020.
Citation: Silva HdJ, Fonseca LS, Mascarenhas RO, Miranda JPd, Almeida PA, Souza MB, et al. (2022) The ESCAPE trial for older people with chronic low back pain: Protocol of a randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE 17(5): e0266613. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266613
Editor: Walid Kamal Abdelbasset, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, College of Applied Medical Sciences, SAUDI ARABIA
Received: July 26, 2021; Accepted: March 20, 2022; Published: May 26, 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Silva et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
List of abbreviations: LBP, Low back pain; QOL, quality of life; PA, physical activity; GBE, group-based exercise; RMDQ, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; ACSM, American College of Sports Medicine; NRS, numeric rating scale; GPE, Global Perceived Effect Scale; MCID, Minimal clinically important difference
1. Background
Low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most common health conditions worldwide [1]. It is defined as pain below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds, with or without referred leg pain [2, 3]. It is expected that 70% to 85% of the general population will present an episode of LBP during lifetime, including older people (i.e., 60 years old or over) [4, 5]. The most common form of LBP is non-specific [6], defined as the symptoms without a specific cause [7, 8]. Older people with chronic non-specific (CNS) LBP reports disability [9, 10], productivity loss [11] and low quality of life (QOL) [12].
Current guidelines recommend management of chronic health conditions in older people at primary health care settings using active strategies (e.g., exercise) to decrease pain intensity, disability, productivity loss and health care costs [3, 13, 14]. In primary health care, group-based exercise is often used to manage older people [15, 16] because it has shown to be cost-effective for older people with different health conditions [17–19]. For instance, this active strategy is effective for prevention and fear of falling [17, 18], improvement of QOL [17] and balance [17, 20] in the older population.
In CNSLBP, high quality evidence supports active strategies such as exercise for general population [3, 14, 21–25]. Previous systematic reviews also showed promising efficacy of exercise on pain intensity and disability related to CNSLBP in older people [26]. However, the management of CNSLBP in this population has been overlooked and evidence is limited to a small number of low powered randomized controlled trials with high risk of bias [27, 28]. Moreover, efficacy of group-based exercise has not been investigated in older people with CNSLBP [26, 28]. Thus, the primary aim of this randomized controlled trials is to investigate the efficacy of an 8-week group-based exercise program on pain intensity and disability in older people with CNSLBP in a primary health care setting. Our secondary aims are to investigate efficacy on global impression of recovery, frequency of falls, fear of falling and physical activity (PA) level.
2. Methods
2.1 Elaboration protocol
This protocol was developed in accordance with the SPIRIT guidelines [29] and is reported according to the CONSORT statement [30]. The schedule with assessment at different points in time is shown in Fig 1.
2.2 Study design
The Exercise for chronic back pain in older people (ESCAPE) trial is a prospectively registered, open, two arm randomised controlled trial.
2.3 Settings and eligibility criteria
The study will be conducted at primary health care centers in Diamantina, Brazil. Participating in the study are patients aged 60 years old or over who seeks primary health care or a university outpatient physical therapy center in Diamantina, Brazil. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are as follows:
The inclusion criteria:
- Older people aged 60 years old or over who have CNSLBP, defined as pain below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds, for at least 3 months [2, 3]; and
- Disability scores 4 out of 24 points or higher in the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and pain intensity scores 3 out of 10 points or higher in a 11-point numeric rating scale [31].
The exclusion criteria:
- Suspected or confirmed serious spinal pathology (fracture, metastatic, inflammatory or infective diseases of the spine, cauda equina syndrome/widespread neurological disorder);
- Radiculopathy (i.e., degree 2 of strength, reflex or sensation affected for same nerve root);
- Previous history of spinal surgery in the last 12 months; scheduled for major surgery during the study or at the follow up period;
- Indicative of cognitive deficit validated by the Mini Mental State Examination; and
- Contraindications to exercise listed of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines (Table 1) [32].
2.4 Procedure and outcome measures
All eligible older people will receive information about the study and sign an informed consent form prior to participation. Baseline assessment (in person) will include age, sex, history of falls, duration of symptoms, prognosis rating (STarT Back Screening Tool) [33], functional capacity (Short Physical Performance Battery) [34], cognitive function (Mini Mental State Examination), and the primary and secondary outcomes. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed (in person) again at the end of the intervention (i.e., 8 weeks after randomization) and at the 6 and 12-months follow-up. Fig 2 represents the flow of participants during the study.
Primary outcomes.
- Pain intensity over the previous week (measured with a 0–10 points in numeric rating scale [NRS]): The NRS is a self-reported scale in which the patient can select one number that best describes the pain intensity. The score ranges from 0 to 10; higher scores represent higher levels pain intensity. This scale was previously validated for population with low back pain [35, 36].
- Disability (measured with the 0–24 points in Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMDQ]): The RMDQ is a self-reported scale of 24 items in which the patient reports pain-related disability. The score per item ranges from 1 (yes) to 0 (no). Total score ranges from 0 to 24, higher scores represent higher levels of pain-related disability. This instrument was previously validated for the low back pain Brazilian population [37, 38].
Secondary outcomes.
- Global impression of recovery (measured with the—3 to 3 Global Perceived Effect Scale [GPE]) [39]: GPE is a scale that assesses whether the patient condition has gotten worse, better, or stayed the same and to quantify the magnitude of that change. Total score ranges from—3 to 3 (i.e., -3 extremely worse, 0 unchanged and 3 fully recovered). This scale was previously validated for population with low back pain [40].
- Frequency of falls (number of falls during study time): All trial participants will be invited to self-complete a falls diary during study time. Falls diaries will be produced in a calendar format, printed in color on firm card. This cololette method was previously validated for the older people population [41].
- Fear of falling (measured with the 16–64 Falls Efficacy Scale–International [FES-I]) [42]: The FES-I presents questions about the concern with the possibility of falling when performing 16 activities, with respective scores from 1 to 4. The total score can range from 16 (i.e., no concern) to 64 (i.e., extreme concern). This instrument was previously validated for the older people Brazilian population [42].
- PA level (measured with the 1–7 Physical Activity Rating): Physical Activity Rating is a progressive scale with scores from 0 to 7, in which the most appropriate option for the history of physical activity in the last 30 days should be selected. Higher scores represent higher Physical Activity level. This instrument was previously validated for the older people Brazilian population [43].
2.5 Randomisation
The randomisation sequence to our two groups of interest (i.e., group-based exercise or control) will be computer-generated by one of the investigators who will not be involved in the recruitment of participants. The sequence will be blocked (block sizes of 4, 6, and 8, in random order). Allocation will be concealed in sequentially numbered, sealed, opaque envelopes. Participants will be stratified by gender (female or male).
2.6 Blinding
The statistician will be blinded to treatment allocation. The data will be coded in an unidentifiable manner and will not contain any information that can reveal what group a single participant or a group were randomised to. As this is an exercise program, it will not be possible to blind the therapist and the patient. Also, because our outcomes are Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), it will not be possible to blind the assessor. However, PROMs are validated and widely accepted in research and the clinic.
2.7 Intervention
Group-based exercise.
The group-based exercise (GBE) programme will be delivered by two physical therapists (experience in musculoskeletal rehabilitation in primary health care). The GBE comprises three sessions per week of group-based exercise in a local community center, for 8 weeks [44]. Each group session will consist of 10 to 18 participants and each exercise session will last 60 minutes and consist of four stages: (1) five minutes warm up (i.e., self-regulated walk); (2) twenty minutes of moderate intensity walking; (3) thirty minutes of resistance training for the major muscles of the leg, trunk and arm and balance exercises that progress in difficulty; and (4) five-minute cool down period (i.e., self-regulated walk). The exercise intensity will be assessed by one of the following criteria: (1) point of volitional fatigue [45] for the resistance training component; and (2) perceived effort ranging from 3 to 4 on the modified 10-point Borg scale score for the walking component [45]. The intensity will be increased along the 8-week programme following the recommendations of the ACSM guideline [32] (i.e., resistance exercise- a gradual progression of more repetitions per set; and aerobic exercise- a gradual progression of exercise volume by adjusting exercise intensity) [32].
The GBE programme was set up based on tasks that makes part of performance-based assessment instruments widely used for the evaluation of physical performance of the older people (i.e., Berg Balance Scale [46], Dynamic Gait Index [47] and Timed Up and Go [48]). In addition, exercises commonly used in primary health care groups were added [49–51]. The protocol will take place in a gymnasium and will be supervised by a trained physical therapist [52–54]. Examples of the choices of exercises are provided in the S1 Appendix.
Modifications were performed after registration of the clinical trial. We included 5 minutes of warm-up and 5 minutes of cool-down during the intervention. To reduce the risk of injury during the protocol. Furthermore, based on recommendations of the ACSM guideline, criteria were established to intensity increase along the 8-week. All these changes were made before starting to recruit participants. Furthermore, the registry has been updated and is available with new information.
2.8 Data analysis
Sample size calculation.
The sample size calculation was performed using the G*Power 3.1 software. The difference between means of a meta-analysis 1.7 [26] was divided by the standard deviation of the study of Zadro (2019) [55] 4.80 to obtain Cohen’s d. Considering the Cohen’s d, a sample size of 120 participants was calculated (60 in each group), with a statistical power of 80%, alpha of 5%, and 20% dropout rate.
Analysis of treatment effects.
The statistical analysis will be performed following the intention-to-treat analysis principles [56, 57]. The blinded statistician will be given coded data, the normality will be tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the homoscedasticity of the data will be tested using the Levene test. Then, considering normal distribution, an analysis of mixed linear models (random intercepts and fixed coefficients) will be conducted, which incorporated terms for treatment, time, and the treatment-time interactions. As two physical therapists will be responsible for implementing the GBE will be applied multilevel analyses with participants nested by physiotherapist. In this sense, level 1 being the different time points, level 2 the subject, and level 3 the physical therapists.
Mean differences and their confidence intervals (CIs) at 95% will be presented. Primary outcome results will be interpreted based on the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimated for the adult population (i.e., RMDQ > 5 and NRS > 2) points [58]. All statistical analyses will be performed with SPSS (IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp).
In addition, the sample will be dichotomized for improvement / maintenance according to the clinically important differences. The absolute risk reduction will be obtained by subtracting the GBE group risk by the control group risk. This data will be used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) (100% / by reducing the absolute risk).
2.9 Implementation and study group
The project will involve primary care centers that care for older peoples with CNSLBP or a university outpatient physical therapy center in Diamantina, Brazil. Older people referred to treat the condition of interest in the included settings will be invited. If there is an interest in participating, they will undergo an eligibility screening with a physiotherapist. We hypothesise that the GBE program will benefit older peoples with CNSLBP by reducing disability, pain intensity, global impression of recovery, frequency of falls, fear of falling and PA level compared with waiting list.
2.10 Plan for supervision and monitoring
The study will be conducted and monitored by the lead investigator (HJS) under the supervision of the coauthor (VCO), with assistance of the research team. All the ethical principles as provided by Declaration of Helsinki will be followed by all the members of this research throughout the study.
2.11 Plan for data integrity and management
The research data will be collected by a research assistant who will be trained to collect and manage it. Participant identifiers (including name, address and contact information) will be removed from the research data and will be stored separately. Data will be entered in Microsoft Excel. Research data will be monitored weekly by scrutinising entered data. Any errors in entry will be identified (if any) and amended. Consent forms will be scanned and stored in password-protected computers of the lead researcher and at the University’s along with other research data files.
2.12 Ethics
Participants will be informed about the study and will sign an informed consent form before participating in the trial. This study was approved by the Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri (UFVJM) Ethics Committee (number 37088920.5.0000.5108) on October 20, 2020. The protocol was prospectively registered at www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br (RBR-9j5pqs). Protocol modifications will be reported to the Institutional Review Board and to the trial registry.
3. Discussion
3.1 Potential study impact and significance
CNSLBP results in a high rate of disability [9, 10] and in high direct and indirect healthcare costs for both patients and healthcare systems [59]. Among direct costs, a predominance of spending on physiotherapy (17%) and inpatient services (17%), followed by pharmacy (13%) and primary care (13%), were observed. As indirect costs, productivity loss predominates [59].
The findings of this study protocol may be useful for physio therapist and their patients, as they could have the potential to identify a viable and accessible strategy for CNSLBP management in older people. From the point of view of physio therapist the group based exercised is a practical intervention, inexpensive and applicable to clinical practice in different levels of healthcare [60–63]. On the other hand, patients can benefit from an easy-to-access and low-cost intervention, which has already shown efficacy in different outcomes in this population [17, 18, 20].
3.2 Study strengths and weaknesses
The main strength of this study protocol is that it is a randomized controlled trial with concealed allocations. The sample size was calculated to provide adequate statistical power to detect intergroup differences in the primary outcome. The physio therapist responsible for supervising the strengthening protocol will have similar clinical experience and will receive prior training.
The main limitation of our study is that the participants and therapists will not be blinded to the group allocations. In addition, it is not possible to affirm the blinding of the evaluator due to the fact that our outcomes are reported by patients, so the patient is his own evaluator.
Acknowledgments
We acknowledgment the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
References
- 1. Rapoport J, Jacobs P, Bell NR, Klarenbach S. Refining the measurement of the economic burden of chronic diseases in Canada. Chronic Dis Can. 2004;25(1):13–21. pmid:15298484
- 2. Maher CG, Latimer J, Hodges PW, Refshauge KM, Moseley GL, Herbert RD, et al. The effect of motor control exercise versus placebo in patients with chronic low back pain [ACTRN012605000262606]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005 Nov 4;6:54. pmid:16271149
- 3. Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, Hildebrandt J, Klaber-Moffett J, Kovacs F, et al. Chapter 4: European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Vol. 15, European Spine Journal. Eur Spine J; 2006. pmid:16550448
- 4. Teixeira MJ, Teixeira WGJ, Santos FP de S, Andrade DCA de, Bezerra SL, Figueiró JB, et al. Epidemiologia clínica da dor músculo-esquelética. Rev Med. 2001 Jun 29;80:1–21.
- 5.
de Souza IMB, Sakaguchi TF, Yuan SLK, Matsutani LA, Do Espírito-Santo A de S, Pereira CA de B, et al. Prevalence of low back pain in the elderly population: A systematic review. Vol. 74, Clinics. Universidade de Sao Paulo; 2019.
- 6.
Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain [Internet]. Vol. 389, The Lancet. Lancet Publishing Group; 2017 [cited 2020 Apr 15]. p. 736–47. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673616309709
- 7. Balagué F, Mannion AF, Pellisé F, Cedraschi C. Non-specific low back pain [Internet]. Vol. 379, The Lancet. 2012 [cited 2020 Apr 15]. p. 482–91. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673611606107 pmid:21982256
- 8. Iizuka Y, Iizuka H, Mieda T, Tsunoda D, Sasaki T, Tajika T, et al. Prevalence of chronic nonspecific low back pain and its associated factors among middle-aged and elderly people: An analysis based on data from a musculoskeletal examination in Japan. Asian Spine J. 2017 Dec 1;11(6):989–97. pmid:29279756
- 9. Edmond SL, Felson DT. Function and Back Symptoms in Older Adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Dec;51(12):1702–9. pmid:14687347
- 10. Cooper JK, Kohlmann T. Factors associated with health status of older Americans. Age Ageing [Internet]. 2001 [cited 2020 Mar 31];30(6):495–501. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/ageing/article/30/6/495/39940 pmid:11742779
- 11. Schofield DJ, Shrestha RN, Percival R, Callander EJ, Kelly SJ, Passey ME. Early retirement and the financial assets of individuals with back problems. Eur Spine J. 2011 May;20(5):731–6. pmid:21132556
- 12. Hirano K, Imagama S, Hasegawa Y, Ito Z, Muramoto A, Ishiguro N. Impact of low back pain, knee pain, and timed up-and-go test on quality of life in community-living people. J Orthop Sci. 2014;19(1):164–71. pmid:24132792
- 13. Abdulla A, Adams N, Bone M, Elliott AM, Gaffin J, Jones D, et al. Guidance on the management of pain in older people. Age Ageing [Internet]. 2013 Mar [cited 2019 Oct 12];42(suppl 1):i1–57. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23420266 pmid:23420266
- 14.
O’Sullivan K, O’Keeffe M, O’Sullivan P. NICE low back pain guidelines: Opportunities and obstacles to change practice. Vol. 51, British Journal of Sports Medicine. BMJ Publishing Group; 2017. p. 1632–3.
- 15.
Carron A V, Hausenblas HA, Mack D. Social Influence and Exercise: A Meta-Analysis. Vol. 18, JOURNAL OF SPORT & EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY. Human Kinetics Publishers. Inc; 1996.
- 16. Estabrooks PA, Carron A V. Group cohesion in older adult exercisers: Prediction and intervention effects. J Behav Med. 1999;22(6):575–88. pmid:10650537
- 17. Martin JT, Wolf A, Moore JL, Rolenz E, DiNinno A, Reneker JC. The effectiveness of physical therapist-administered group-based exercise on fall prevention: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Geriatr Phys Ther [Internet]. 2013 Oct [cited 2020 Apr 6];36(4):182–93. Available from: http://journals.lww.com/00139143-201310000-00005 pmid:23449007
- 18. Olsen CF, Bergland A. The effect of exercise and education on fear of falling in elderly women with osteoporosis and a history of vertebral fracture: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Osteoporos Int [Internet]. 2014 Aug 8 [cited 2020 Apr 6];25(8):2017–25. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00198-014-2724-3 pmid:24807628
- 19. Timonen L, Rantanen T, Mäkinen E, Timonen TE, Törmäkangas T, Sulkava R. Cost analysis of an exercise program for older women with respect to social welfare and healthcare costs: A pilot study. Scand J Med Sci Sport [Internet]. 2008 Dec 3 [cited 2020 Apr 6];18(6):783–9. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2007.00752.x pmid:18248543
- 20. Bulat T, Hart-Hughes S, Ahmed S, Quigley P, Palacios P, Werner DC, et al. Effect of a group-based exercise program on balance in elderly [Internet]. Vol. 2, Clinical Interventions in Aging. 2007 [cited 2020 Apr 6]. Available from: http://www.visn8.
- 21. Choi BK, Verbeek JH, Tam WW-S, Jiang JY. Exercises for prevention of recurrences of low-back pain. Cochrane database Syst Rev [Internet]. 2010 Jan 20 [cited 2020 Feb 8];(1):CD006555. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091596 pmid:20091596
- 22.
Engers A, Jellema P, Wensing M, Van Der Windt DAWM, Grol R, Van Tulder MW. Individual patient education for low back pain [Internet]. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley and Sons Ltd; 2008 [cited 2020 Feb 8]. p. CD004057. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18254037
- 23. Hayden J, van Tulder MW, Malmivaara A, Koes BW. Exercise therapy for treatment of non-specific low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20; pmid:16034851
- 24. Delitto A, George SZ, Professor A, Van Dillen L, Whitman JM, Sowa GA, et al. Associate Professor in Physical Therapy and Orthopaedic Surgery, Program in Physical Therapy. J Orthop Sport Phys Ther [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Apr 6];42(4):1–57. Available from: www.jospt.org
- 25. de Campos TF. Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management NICE Guideline [NG59]. J Physiother [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Mar 31];63(2):120. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27929617/ pmid:28325480
- 26.
Amaral LKB, Souza MB, Campos MGM, Mendonça VA, Bastone A, Pereira LSM, et al. Efficacy of conservative therapy in older people with nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and GRADE recommendations. Vol. 90, Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Elsevier Ireland Ltd; 2020. p. 104177.
- 27.
Paeck T, Ferreira ML, Sun C, Lin CWC, Tiedemann A, Maher CG. Are older adults missing from low back pain clinical trials? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vol. 66, Arthritis Care and Research. John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 2014. p. 1220–6.
- 28.
Nascimento PRC d., Costa LOP, Araujo AC, Poitras S, Bilodeau M. Effectiveness of interventions for non-specific low back pain in older adults. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vol. 105, Physiotherapy (United Kingdom). Elsevier Ltd; 2019. p. 147–62.
- 29. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ [Internet]. 2013 Jan 9 [cited 2019 Apr 19];346:e7586. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e7586 pmid:23303884
- 30. Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, Bond CM, Hopewell S, Thabane L, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ [Internet]. 2016 Oct 24 [cited 2019 Apr 19];355:i5239. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i5239 pmid:27777223
- 31. Rundell SD, Sherman KJ, Heagerty PJ, Mock CN, Dettori NJ, Comstock BA, et al. Predictors of persistent disability and back pain in older adults with a new episode of care for back pain. Pain Med (United States) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Jun 8];18(6):1049–62. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27688311/ pmid:27688311
- 32. Dalleck LC, Tischendorf JS. Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription (ACSM). In: Encyclopedia of Lifestyle Medicine & Health [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Apr 15]. Available from: www.acsm.org
- 33. Pilz B, Vasconcelos RA, Marcondes FB, Lodovichi SS, Mello W, Grossi DB. The Brazilian version of start back screening tool—translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability. Brazilian J Phys Ther. 2014 Sep 1;18(5):453–61. pmid:25372008
- 34. Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, Glynn RJ, Berkman LF, Blazer DG, et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: Association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. Journals Gerontol [Internet]. 1994 [cited 2020 Aug 17];49(2). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8126356/
- 35. Chiarotto A, Maxwell LJ, Ostelo RW, Boers M, Tugwell P, Terwee CB. Measurement Properties of Visual Analogue Scale, Numeric Rating Scale, and Pain Severity Subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review. J pain [Internet]. 2019 Mar 1 [cited 2021 Nov 10];20(3):245–63. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30099210/ pmid:30099210
- 36. Scrimshaw S V., Maher C. Responsiveness of visual analogue and McGill pain scale measures. J Manipulative Physiol Ther [Internet]. 2001 Oct [cited 2020 Mar 30];24(8):501–4. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0161475401871657 pmid:11677548
- 37. Nusbaum L, Natour J, Ferraz MB, Goldenberg J. Translation, adaptation and validation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire—Brazil Roland-Morris. Brazilian J Med Biol Res [Internet]. 2001 [cited 2021 Nov 10];34(2):203–10. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/j/bjmbr/a/RxTsHMSSJTZ8vpcn3MC4K4r/?lang=en
- 38. Monteiro J, Faísca L, Nunes O, Hipólito J. [Roland Morris disability questionnaire—adaptation and validation for the Portuguese speaking patients with back pain]. Acta Med Port [Internet]. [cited 2020 Mar 30];23(5):761–6. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49670325_Roland_Morris_disability_questionnaire_Adaptation_and_validation_for_the_Portuguese_speaking_patients_with_back_pain pmid:21144314
- 39. Costa LOP, Maher CG, Latimer J, Ferreira PH, Ferreira ML, Pozzi GC, et al. Clinimetric testing of three self-report outcome measures for low back pain patients in Brazil: Which one is the best? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Oct 15;33(22):2459–63. pmid:18923324
- 40. Bobos P, Ziebart C, Furtado R, Lu Z, MacDermid JC. Psychometric properties of the global rating of change scales in patients with low back pain, upper and lower extremity disorders. A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Orthop [Internet]. 2020 Sep 1 [cited 2021 Nov 10];21:40–8. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32082038/ pmid:32082038
- 41. Griffin J, Lall R, Bruce J, Withers E, Finnegan S, Lamb SE, et al. Comparison of alternative falls data collection methods in the Prevention of Falls Injury Trial (PreFIT). J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Feb 1;106:32–40. pmid:30266633
- 42. Camargos FFO, Dias RC, Dias JMD, Freire MTF. Adaptação transcultural e avaliação das propriedades psicométricas da Falls Efficacy Scale—International em idosos Brasileiros (FES-I-BRASIL). Brazilian J Phys Ther [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2021 Nov 10];14(3):237–43. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/j/rbfis/a/G6DXXwm9TS4zvFpyWxwnQPs/?lang=pt
- 43. De Albuquerque G, Neto M, Ponce De Leon AC2, De Tarso P, Farinatti V. VALIDADE DE CRITÉRIO E EQUIVALÊNCIA DE MENSURAÇÃO DA ESCALA PHYSICAL ACTIVITY RATING EM IDOSOS. VALIDADE CRITÉRIO E EQUIVALÊNCIA MENSURAÇÃO DA ESCALA Phys Act Rat EM IDOSOS [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2020 Aug 24];16(4):295–9. Available from: https://rbafs.org.br/RBAFS/article/view/619
- 44.
Roberts CE, Phillips LH, Cooper CL, Gray S, Allan JL. Effect of different types of physical activity on activities of daily living in older adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis [Internet]. Vol. 25, Journal of Aging and Physical Activity. Human Kinetics Publishers Inc.; 2017 [cited 2020 May 18]. p. 653–70. Available from: https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/japa/25/4/article-p653.xml
- 45. DeSimone G. ACSM’s resources for the group exercise instructor [Internet]. ACSM’s Resources for the Group Exercise Instructor. 2011 [cited 2020 Sep 3]. 1–262 p. Available from: file:///C:/Users/hytal/Downloads/ACSM’s Resources for the Group Exercise Instructor (PDFDrive.com).pdf
- 46. Miyamoto ST, Lombardi I, Berg KO, Ramos LR, Natour J. Brazilian version of the Berg balance scale. Brazilian J Med Biol Res [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2020 Aug 25];37(9):1411–21. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-879X2004000900017&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en pmid:15334208
- 47. De Castro SM, Perracini MR, Ganança FF. Versão brasileira do Dynamic Gait Index. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol [Internet]. 2006 Dec [cited 2020 Aug 25];72(6):817–25. Available from: http://www.rborl.org.br/http://www.rborl.org.br/
- 48. Filippin LI, Miraglia F, Teixeira VN de O, Boniatti MM. Timed Up and Go test as a sarcopenia screening tool in home-dwelling elderly persons. Rev Bras Geriatr e Gerontol [Internet]. 2017 Aug [cited 2020 Aug 25];20(4):556–61. Available from:
- 49. Koumantakis GA, Watson PJ, Oldham JA. Trunk muscle stabilization training plus general exercise versus general exercise only: Randomized controlled trial of patients with recurrent low back pain. Phys Ther [Internet]. 2005 Mar 1 [cited 2020 Aug 25];85(3):209–25. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/ptj/article/85/3/209/2804993 pmid:15733046
- 50. Moffett JK, Frost H. Back to fitness programme. Physiotherapy. 2000;86(6):295–305.
- 51. Lehtola V, Luomajoki H, Leinonen V, Gibbons S, Airaksinen O. Sub-classification based specific movement control exercises are superior to general exercise in sub-acute low back pain when both are combined with manual therapy: A randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Aug 25];17(1). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27005470/ pmid:27005470
- 52. Duckham RL, Masud T, Taylor R, Kendrick D, Carpenter H, Iliffe S, et al. Randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of community group and home-based falls prevention exercise programmes on bone health in older people: The ProAct65+ bone study. Age Ageing [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Mar 29];44(4):573–9. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4476850/ pmid:25906791
- 53. Iliffe S, Kendrick D, Morris R, Skelton D, Gage H, Dinan S, et al. Multi-centre cluster randomised trial comparing a community group exercise programme with home based exercise with usual care for people aged 65 and over in primary care: Protocol of the ProAct 65+ trial. Trials [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2020 Mar 29];11. Available from: http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/11/1/6 pmid:20082696
- 54. Stiggelbout M, Popkema DY, Hopman-Rock M, De Greef M, Van Mechelen W. Once a week is not enough: Effects of a widely implemented group based exercise programme for older adults; a randomised controlled trial. J Epidemiol Community Health [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2020 Apr 12];58(2):83–8. Available from: www.jech.com
- 55. Zadro JR, Shirley D, Simic M, Mousavi SJ, Ceprnja D, Maka K, et al. Video-Game-Based Exercises for Older People with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlledtable Trial (GAMEBACK). Phys Ther. 2019 Jan 1;99(1):14–27. pmid:30247715
- 56. Little RJ, D’Agostino R, Cohen ML, Dickersin K, Emerson SS, Farrar JT, et al. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. Vol. 367, New England Journal of Medicine. 2012. p. 1355–60. pmid:23034025
- 57. Estimating G, Data M. 7 Westferry Circus • Canary Wharf • London E14 4HB • United Kingdom Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Guideline on Missing Data in Confirmatory Clinical Trials Guideline on Missing Data in Confirmatory Clinical Trials. 2008 [cited 2020 Apr 18];44(July 2010):1–12. Available from: www.ema.europa.eu
- 58. Ostelo RWJG, Deyo RA, Stratford P, Waddell G, Croft P, Von Korff M, et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: Towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Jan;33(1):90–4. pmid:18165753
- 59.
Dagenais S, Caro J, Haldeman S. A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally. Vol. 8, Spine Journal. Elsevier; 2008. p. 8–20.
- 60. Patel S, Heine PJ, Ellard DR, Underwood M. Group exercise and self-management for older adults with osteoarthritis: A feasibility study. Prim Heal Care Res Dev [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 May 24];17(3):252–64. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27031815/ pmid:27031815
- 61. States RA, Spierer DK, Salem Y. Long-term group exercise for people with parkinson’s disease: A feasibility study. J Neurol Phys Ther [Internet]. 2011 Sep [cited 2021 May 24];35(3):122–8. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21934373/ pmid:21934373
- 62. Sherrington C, Pamphlett PI, Jacka JA, Olivetti LM, Nugent JA, Hall JM, et al. Group exercise can improve participants’ mobility in an outpatient rehabilitation setting: A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil [Internet]. 2008 Jun [cited 2021 May 24];22(6):493–502. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18511529/
- 63. Malcolm L, Mein G, Jones A, Talbot-Rice H, Maddocks M, Bristowe K. Strength in numbers: patient experiences of group exercise within hospice palliative care. BMC Palliat Care. 2016 Dec 13;15(1):1–8. pmid:27964735