Table 7 Findings of systematic reviews: effectiveness of Pilates in people with chronic low back pain

1. Aladro-Gonzalvo et al. [10]

a) Minimal intervention e.g. no treatment, usual care, exercise

a) Reduction is statistically significant (SMD=−0.44, 95% CI −0.09,–0.80)

a) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD = −0.28, 95% CI 0.07, –0.62)

b) Other physiotherapeutic treatment e.g. massage, physiotherapy

b) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD = 0.14, 95% CI 0.27, –0.56)

b) Reduction is statistically significant (SMD = −0.55, 95% CI −0.08,–1.03)

2. La Touche et al. [6]

* Usual care, back school exercise⁺

* Reduced

* Reduced

3. Lim et al. [7]

a) Minimal intervention e.g.no treatment, usual care, massage, physiotherapy

a) Reduction is statistically significant (SMD = −2.72, 95% CI −5.33, –0.11)

a) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =−0.74, 95% CI −1.81, 0.33)

b) Other forms of exercise e.g. back school exercise, lumbar stabilisation

b) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =0.03, 95% CI −0.52, 0.58)

b) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD = −0.41, 95% CI =−0.96, 0.14)

4. Pereira et al. [8]

a) Variable treatment e.g. no treatment, usual care, massage, physiotherapy

a) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =−1.99, 95% CI –4.35, 0.37)

a) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =−1.34, 95% CI –2.80, 0.11)

b) Lumbar stabilisation exercise

b) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =−0.11, 95% CI −0.74, 0.52)

b) Reduction is not statistically significant (SMD =−0.31, 95% CI −1.02, 0.40)

5. Posadzki et al. [9]

* Usual care, back school exercise

* Unknown, evidence is inconclusive

* Unknown, evidence is inconclusive