You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PEDro systematic review update
Yoga for low back pain: PEDro systematic review update
  1. Bruno T Saragiotto,
  2. Tiê P Yamato,
  3. Chris Maher
  1. Musculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Heath, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Bruno T Saragiotto, Musculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Heath, University of Sydney, Level 13, 321 Kent St, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia; bsaragiotto{at}georgeinstitute.org.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-093780

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    This section features a recent systematic review that is indexed on PEDro, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (http://www.pedro.org.au). PEDro is a free, web-based database of evidence relevant to physiotherapy.

    ▸ Cramer H, Lauche R, Haller H, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Yoga for low back pain. Clin J Pain 2013;450:460

    Background

    Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem around the world. Up to 85% of the population can expect to experience at least some back pain in their lifetime.1 This highly prevalent condition places a major burden on individuals and healthcare systems.2 Moreover, LBP is also the most common condition for which complementary therapies are used,3 and the practice of yoga appears among the most common complementary treatments used to manage LBP.4 The clinical trial evidence on yoga for LBP has not previously been systematically reviewed.

    Aim

    To systematically review the clinical trial evidence on effectiveness of yoga in …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors BTS, TPY and CM selected the systematic review. BTS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. TPY and CM contributed to the interpretation of the data and revision of the final manuscript.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.