Motor Control Exercises Compared to Strengthening Exercises for Upper- and Lower-Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to compare the efficacy of motor control exercises (MCEs) to strengthening exercises for adults with upper- or lower-extremity musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted up to April 2020 in Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL. Randomized controlled trials were identified on the efficacy of MCEs compared to strengthening exercises for adults with upper- or lower-extremity MSKDs. Data were extracted with a standardized form that documented the study characteristics and results. For pain and disability outcomes, pooled mean differences (MDs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated using random-effects inverse variance models. RESULTS: Twenty-one randomized controlled trials (n = 1244 participants) were included. Based on moderate-quality evidence, MCEs lead to greater pain (MD = -0.41 out of 10 points; 95% CI = -0.72 to -0.10; n = 626) and disability reductions (SMD = -0.28; 95% CI = -0.43 to -0.13; n = 713) when compared to strengthening exercises in the short term; these differences are not clinically important. When excluding trials on osteoarthritis (OA) participants and evaluating only the trials involving participants with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, shoulder instability, hip-related groin pain, or patellofemoral pain syndrome, there is moderate quality evidence that MCEs lead to greater pain (MD = -0.74 out of 10 points; 95% CI = -1.22 to -0.26; n = 293) and disability reductions (SMD = -0.40; 95% CI = -0.61 to -0.19; n = 354) than strengthening exercises in the short term; these differences might be clinically important. CONCLUSIONS: MCEs lead to statistically greater pain and disability reductions when compared to strengthening exercises among adults with MSKDs in the short term, but these effects might be clinically important only in conditions that do not involve OA. Inclusion of new trials might modify these conclusions. IMPACT: These results suggest that MCEs could be prioritized over strengthening exercises for adults with the included non-OA MSKDs; however, results are unclear for OA disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.078 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".