Systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of motor control exercises in patients with non-specific low back pain do not consider its principles - A review

Background: Motor control exercise (MCEs), spinal stabilization or core stability exercises were developed with the aim of restoring the coordination, control, and capacity of the trunk muscles and systematic reviews (SR) evaluating their effectiveness has shown conflicting results. This we hypothesized was due to the non-consideration of principles of neuroplasticity. The objective of this review was to review the operating definitions used in these reviews for these exercises and evaluate if these reviews have considered and satisfied the principles of these exercises in persons with NSLBP, both acute and chronic. Methods: The available evidence to address the research question was sought in the reviews published in English between January 2006 and April 2019 using the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome format. Data were extracted against the following factors: satisfy the principles of specific inclusion criteria; interventions; experience-dependent plasticity; and measure any one of the concepts of motor control. The quality of the evidence obtained was graded using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence protocol and the quality of SRs evaluated using the R-AMSTAR. Results: Eleven reviews on core stability/spinal stabilization exercises and four reviews on MCE were considered in this review. The results showed that most of the studies considered by the reviews did not adhere to the principles of these exercises. Conclusion: There is wide heterogeneity in the understanding, administration, and progression of exercises. The exercises were implemented without considering the potential for neuroplasticity of the nervous system and the principles of motor learning. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.