Programa de Pós Graduação Interdisciplinar em Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Santos, Brazil.
Mestrado Profissional e Acadêmico em Ciências da Saúde, Escola Superior em Ciências da Saúde, Brasilia, Brazil.
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Jun;44(11):2428-2436. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2020.1836269. Epub 2020 Oct 23.
To evaluate the quality of the reporting of exercise interventions with Pilates method for the treatment of lower back pain (LBP) in adults.
Two independent evaluators selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate and high methodological quality included in a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) and from an additional updated search in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Three assessment tools (Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist) were utilized by three pairs of two independent researchers trained. The scales' concordance was measured using the Kappa coefficient.
Ten RCTs were included. The CONTENT scale score was 5.3 (± 1.33) out of 9 points; the TIDieR checklist was 8.5 (± 1.71) out of 12 points and the CERT checklist was 9.5 (± 3.62) out of 19 points. The CONTENT and CERT had moderate concordance, while there was fair concordance between the other tools.
The overall reporting quality for the Pilates exercises in ten moderate-to-high quality RTCs for the management of LBP was low according to CONTENT scale and CERT checklist and high according to TIDieR checklist.Implications for RehabilitationReporting of Pilates exercise program in moderate-to-high quality RCTs for the management of lower back pain remains incomplete.Pilates exercise program should be personalized and contextualized to individual participants.There may be a need to consider adding to or combining the information available from various trials.
评估普拉提方法治疗成人下腰痛（LBP）的运动干预措施报告质量。
两位独立评估者选择了中度和高度方法学质量的随机对照试验（RCT），这些试验包含在 Cochrane 系统评价（SR）中，并从以下数据库的额外更新搜索中进行选择：CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、PEDro 和 SPORTDiscus。三位训练有素的独立研究人员使用了三种评估工具（治疗性运动训练共识（CONTENT）量表、干预描述和复制模板（TIDieR）检查表以及运动报告模板共识（CERT）检查表）。使用 Kappa 系数测量量表的一致性。
共纳入 10 项 RCT。CONTENT 量表得分为 9 分中的 5.3（±1.33）分；TIDieR 检查表得分为 12 分中的 8.5（±1.71）分，CERT 检查表得分为 19 分中的 9.5（±3.62）分。CONTENT 和 CERT 具有中度一致性，而其他工具之间则具有适度一致性。
根据 CONTENT 量表和 CERT 检查表，10 项中等至高质量 RCT 中普拉提运动治疗 LBP 的总体报告质量较低，而根据 TIDieR 检查表则较高。
对于中等至高质量 RCT 中管理下腰痛的普拉提运动方案报告仍然不完整。普拉提运动方案应针对个体参与者进行个性化和情境化。可能需要考虑从各种试验中添加或组合可用信息。
