Table 4

Summary of results for studies that investigated intervention effects on the Flexion relaxation response (FRR)
Muscle activity patterns of FRR (electrical patterns of activity in extensor muscles during flexion and return from flexion) (Standardised mean difference and 95% confidence intervals, negative values favour experimental group)
Study and intervention type Study details Movement pattern Was there a statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) in physical parametersbetweengroups? Health outcomes Was there a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in health outcomes between groups? groups?
No. of subjects Baseline differences between groups? FRR* Upper lumbar (T12-L3/4) FRR* Lower lumbar (L4-S1) Angle of onset and cessation for FRR Extension vs flexion EMG ratio Pain Activity
Lalanne 2009Manipulation vs sham 27 No Yes ↑ -1.40 (−2.24, -0.56) No No Not measured No Not measured
Mannion 1999 & 2001Physiotherapyvs aerobics Physiotherapy vs device strength training 99 No NoInsufficient data NoInsufficient data Not measured Not measured No No
Marshall 2008Swiss ball vs general exercise 50 No No Yes ↑ FRR in favour of intervention group −1.60 (−2.25, -0.94) Not measured Not measured No Yes Activity −0.77 (−1.34 to −0.19)
Ritvanen 2007Traditional bone setting vs physiotherapy 61 (Intervention group had right vs left differences pre and post treatment) No No (both groups showed ↓ FRR post intervention Not measured No Trend towards increase for both groups No No

* FRR = Flexion relaxation ratio (the amount of electrical activity in lumbar extensor muscles during flexion compared with end of flexion range of movement).

As reported by authors. Insufficient data for analysis.

Single session intervention with pre and post analysis within session.

Laird et al.

Laird et al. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2012 13:169   doi:10.1186/1471-2474-13-169

Open Data