MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083623774 · doi:10.7860/jcdr/2025/80478.21672

An Investigation of Physiotherapy Interventions in the Management of Lower Cross Syndrome: A Literature Review

2025· article· en· W7083623774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMassageManual therapyTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulationPopulationRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lower Cross Syndrome (LCS), characterised by muscular imbalances with weak gluteals/abdominals, tight hip flexors/lumbar extensors, contributes to a range of musculoskeletal complications. Physiotherapy interventions have been its primary treatment modality. Given the increasing prevalence of sedentary lifestyles and the availability of diverse physiotherapy interventions,there is a critical need to understand the most effective physiotherapy interventions for managing LCS. This literature review, therefore aims to investigate the effectiveness of various physiotherapy interventions in managing LCS. To achieve this, an extensive search for full-text articles addressing the role of physiotherapy intervention for the treatment of LCS, published in the English language between 2019 and 2024, was thus carried out through the databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PEDro and EBSCOhost using a combination of keywords, including 'Lower Cross Syndrome,' 'Postural Disorder,' 'Exercise Therapy,' and 'Physiotherapy,' and Boolean operators to refine the search strategy.No geographical limitations or study design restrictions were applied for study inclusion. Following the comprehensive search, a total of 5 randomised clinical/control trials and 2 experimental studies met the eligibility criteria. The study population comprised males and females aged between 11 and 50 years. The physiotherapeutic interventions included 6 to 24 sessions of conventional physiotherapy involving stretching and strengthening exercises and the use of specific manual therapy techniques like Janda’s approach, Sahrmann’s approach, muscle energy technique, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation technique, dynamic neuromuscular stabilisation training, and lacrosse ball massage technique. The effectiveness of these interventions was assessed using outcome measures, including the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire for functional disability, Modified Thomas test and goniometry for hip flexibility, sit-and-reach test for overall flexibility, visual analogue scale and numeric pain rating scale for pain, manual muscle testing for abdominal and gluteal strength, Y-balance test and functional movement screening for postural control, McGill Pain Index and plank test for muscle function, and clinical measurements such as costovertebral angle, lumbosacral angle, and anterior pelvic tilt for postural assessment. Findings suggest that physiotherapy plays a crucial role in LCS management. A comprehensive approach encompassing strengthening, stretching, manual therapy, and patient education is recommended. Future research should focus on standardised protocols and long-term outcomes to enhance treatment efficacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.401 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCHSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207