Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Stabilization exercise shows moderate effect on dynamic balance versus conventional PT in chronic lumbopelvic painStabilization exercises may improve balance for some adults with chronic low back pain

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider stabilization exercise for dynamic balance in chronic lumbopelvic pain, but evidence certainty is low.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of stabilization exercise programs versus conventional physical therapy interventions on balance in adults with non-specific chronic lumbopelvic pain. The analysis included 466 participants across 14 randomized controlled trials, though specific study settings and follow-up durations were not reported. The primary outcome was static and dynamic balance, with secondary outcomes including pain and functional disability.

For dynamic balance measured by the Y balance test, stabilization exercise showed a moderate effect size favoring the intervention (standardized mean difference = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.19). Most studies also reported improved static balance with stabilization exercise, though effect sizes and confidence intervals were not reported for this outcome. Safety and tolerability data were not reported in the included studies.

Key limitations include numerous RCTs with risk of bias, imprecision due to small sample sizes, and inconsistent measurement tools for static balance assessment. The evidence certainty was rated as low. While these findings suggest stabilization exercise may offer benefits for dynamic balance in this population, clinicians should consider the methodological limitations and lack of safety data when applying these results to practice.

Researchers analyzed 14 randomized controlled trials involving 466 adults with non-specific chronic low back and pelvic pain. They compared the effects of stabilization exercise programs—which focus on strengthening core muscles—against conventional physical therapy interventions. The main question was whether these exercises could improve both static (standing still) and dynamic (moving) balance.

The analysis found that stabilization exercises showed a moderate benefit for dynamic balance, measured by the Y balance test, compared to conventional therapy. Most studies also reported improvements in static balance, though the measurement tools varied. The review did not report on safety concerns or adverse events from either type of exercise.

It's important to understand that this evidence is considered low certainty. The studies were relatively small, and many had methodological issues that could affect their reliability. The results suggest stabilization exercises might be helpful for balance in this specific group, but more robust research is needed to confirm these findings and understand who might benefit most.

What this means for you:
Low-certainty evidence suggests stabilization exercises may help balance in chronic low back pain, but more research is needed.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 466
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of a stabilization exercise (SE) program with other conventional physical therapy (PT) interventions on improving balance in people with non-specific chronic lumbopelvic pain (NSCLPP). METHOD: Seven electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to October 2023 and updated in January 2025: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. RCTs included individuals with NSCLPP receiving SE compared with a conventional PT program. Primary outcomes were static and dynamic balance. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (Rob 2) was used to assess study quality, while the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework assessed the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We included 14 studies with 466 participants and conducted a meta-analysis on dynamic balance using seven of these studies. Only those evaluating dynamic balance with the Y balance test showed a moderate effect size favoring SE (SMD = 0.71, CI = 0.22, 1.19). There is low certainty evidence that SE has a clinically relevant effect on dynamic balance compared with conventional PT interventions. The certainty in the evidence was downgraded to two levels because numerous RCTs had a risk of bias and imprecision due to the small sample size. Additionally, most studies reported improved static balance using inconsistent measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional PT interventions, SE program appears more effective in engaging core muscles during functional activities, leading to improved static and dynamic balance performance, and in reducing pain and functional disability in people with NSCLPP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42023482155.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.