Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Jul 14;5(3):100280.
doi: 10.1016/j.arrct.2023.100280. eCollection 2023 Sep.

Erector Spinae Muscle Activation During Forward Movement in Individuals With or Without Chronic Lower Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Euan W Taylor  1   2 , U Chris Ugbolue  1   2 , Yang Gao  3 , Yaodong Gu  1 , Julien S Baker  1   3 , Frédéric Dutheil  4
Affiliations
Review

Erector Spinae Muscle Activation During Forward Movement in Individuals With or Without Chronic Lower Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Euan W Taylor et al. Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. .

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the differences between erector spinae muscle activation in healthy individuals and patients with Chronic Lower Back Pain (CLBP) by conducting (a) systematic review and (b) meta-analysis.

Data sources: PubMed, ScienceDirect, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar were used to conduct the searches, which included studies up to the 31st of March 2023 with no start date specified.

Study selection: Any study otherwise meeting eligibility criteria was included if it reported either (1) a standard mean difference effect size; or (2) the means, SDs, and sample sizes for both the patient group and the comparator group.

Data extraction: A total of 7 case control trials were used for the systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data synthesis: The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that total standardized mean difference in erector spinae muscle activation between healthy individuals vs patients with CLBP expressed in % maximum voluntary isometric contraction was 0.48 (95% confidence interval=0.21-0.74; P<.001) with the heterogeneity being I2=0% (P=.890). The electromyography (EMG) outputs showed significant differences in activation levels between the healthy and CLBP cohorts (P<.001).

Conclusions: A small effect size was found in the meta-analysis. The muscle activation levels of the erector spinae during forward propulsion were higher in CLBP individuals compared with healthy cohorts. The findings provide more clarity about the muscles that were the focus of previous research, what procedures were used to evaluate muscular contributions and what speeds the participants were moving at during the test sessions. Given the limited methodological quality of the included studies, the findings should be interpreted with caution. Future research should evaluate the effect of other factors such as walking distance and any changes in walking surfaces and gradients (ie, non-flat surfaces).

Keywords: Back muscle; Back pain; Electromyography; Rehabilitation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
PRISMA flowchart of the systematic literature.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Funnel plot (meta-funnel) for standard mean difference on erector spinae muscle activation levels for healthy and chronic lower back pain patients. Each dot represents a single study with its corresponding standardized mean difference (X-axis) and its associated standard error (Y-axis). Large high powered studies are placed toward the top, and smaller low powered studies toward the bottom. No studies fell outside the funnel plot. Note: Ideally the plot should resemble a pyramid or inverted funnel, with scatter due to sampling variation.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Result summary of meta-analysis stratified by the erector spinae activation levels for healthy and chronic lower back pain patients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Trompeter K, Fett D, Platen P. Prevalence of back pain in sports: a systematic review of the literature. Sports Med. 2017;47:1183–1207. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tidy C, Knott L. Lower back pain 2020. Available at: https://patient.info/bones-joints-muscles/back-and-spine-pain/lower-back.... Accessed October 16, 2020.
    1. Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, et al. The global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:968–974. - PubMed
    1. Dionne CE, Dunn KM, Croft PR. Does back pain prevalence really decrease with increasing age? A systematic review. Age Ageing. 2006;35:229–234. - PubMed
    1. Katz JN. Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(Suppl 2):21–24. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources