Park Seri, Kim Kihyun, Kang Minbong
Seri Park Pilates Studio, 10, Teheran-ro 88-gil, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06179, Republic of Korea.
Department of Physical Therapy, KyungWoon University, Gumi 39160, Republic of Korea.
Bioengineering (Basel). 2025 Aug 31;12(9):947. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12090947.
The effectiveness of breathing interventions on postural alignment, pain reduction, and functional improvement in patients with forward head posture (FHP) and chronic neck pain remains uncertain. Previously conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved breathing interventions were identified through searches of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Studies were included if they applied diaphragmatic breathing, breathing muscle training, or feedback breathing exercises for at least 2 weeks to chronic neck pain (duration ≥ 3 months) and/or forward head posture. The craniovertebral angle (CVA), the visual analog scale (VAS), and the neck disability index (NDI) were the primary outcome measures. The results showed that breathing interventions had a moderate effect size in terms of improving the CVA. Limited effects were observed for pain reduction, and improvements in neck disability approached statistical significance. However, despite these positive findings, the overall evidence was rated as 'very low certainty' in the GRADE assessment, primarily due to high heterogeneity among studies, limited sample sizes, and the potential for unit-of-analysis errors in diagnosis-based subgroup analyses. Consequently, their overall effectiveness in chronic neck pain was limited. Future research is needed to explore a multidisciplinary approach to neck pain using standardized protocols and larger samples.
呼吸干预对伴有头前倾姿势(FHP)和慢性颈部疼痛患者的姿势对齐、疼痛减轻及功能改善的有效性仍不确定。通过检索PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、科学网和Scopus数据库,识别了先前进行的涉及呼吸干预的随机对照试验(RCT)。如果研究将膈肌呼吸、呼吸肌训练或反馈呼吸练习应用于慢性颈部疼痛(病程≥3个月)和/或头前倾姿势至少2周,则纳入研究。颅椎角(CVA)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和颈部功能障碍指数(NDI)为主要结局指标。结果显示,呼吸干预在改善CVA方面有中等效应量。在减轻疼痛方面观察到有限的效果,颈部功能障碍的改善接近统计学显著性。然而,尽管有这些积极发现,但在GRADE评估中,总体证据被评为“非常低确定性”,主要原因是研究之间存在高度异质性、样本量有限以及基于诊断的亚组分析中存在分析单位错误的可能性。因此,它们在慢性颈部疼痛中的总体有效性有限。未来需要开展研究,采用标准化方案和更大样本探索多学科治疗颈部疼痛的方法。