From:  The impact of chronic low back pain on walking patterns: a systematic review and meta-analysis

 Characteristics of the included studies.

AuthorsInstrumentsParticipantsAgeGender (M/F)Pain intensityComparisonParametersConclusion
Tomkins-Lane et al. 2012 [22]Distance measurement instrument
(Lufkin Pro-Series Model PSMW38a)
44 NSCLBP
32 CON
NSCLBP 62.27 ± 6.70
CON 66.19 ± 8.01
NSCLBP 12/32
CON 11/21
3.79 ± 2.43NSCLBP vs. CONStride length (m)No. sig.
van den Hoorn et al. 2012 [23]3D motion capture13 NSCLBP
12 CON
NSCLBP 35.3 ± 12.4
CON 32.2 ± 13.1
NSCLBP 5/8
CON 4/8
2.92 ± 1.48NSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s)No. sig.
Crosbie et al. 2013 [24]Multi-sensor, 6-df electromagnetic tracking device19 NSCLBP
19 CON
NSCLBP 34 ± 13.3
CON 28.6 ± 5.4
NSCLBP 7/12
CON 6/13
2.8 ± 2.2NSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s)Sig.
Müller et al. 2015 [25]3D motion capture11 NSCLBP
11 CON
NSCLBP 38.2 ± 13.9
CON 38.5 ± 12.1
NSCLBP 5/6
CON 5/6
1.9 ± 1.2NSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); step length (m)Sig. (walking speed), no sig. (step length)
Barzilay et al. 2016 [15]Four convex biomechanical units
(AposTherapy System, APOS—Medical and Sports Technologies Ltd., Herzliya, Israel)
60 NSCLBP
24 CON
NSCLBP 53.3 ± 14
CON 48.4 ± 13.1
NANANSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); cadence (step/min); step length (m); single stance (%)Sig.
Vickers et al. 2017 [16]Gait mat
(Gait Rite 1; CIR Systems, Inc.; Havertown, PA)
30 NSCLBP
25 CON
NSCLBP 51.2 ± 17.9
CON 31.9 ± 12.4
NSCLBP 17/13
CON 10/15
NANSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); cadence (step/min); step length (m); step width (m); single support (%); double support (%)Sig. (walking speed, step length), no sig. (other parameters)
Tabard-Fougère et al. 2020 [27]NA39 NSCLBP
24 CON
NANANANSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); cadence (step/min); step length (m); stance phase (%)No. sig.
Hicks et al. 2017 [26]GaitMat IITMsystem
(E.Q. Inc., Chalfont, PA)
54 NSCLBP
54 CON
NSCLBP 69.3 ± 6.7
CON 71.1 ± 6.8
NSCLBP 17/37
CON 17/37
3.4 ± 1.6NSCLBP vs. CONStep length (m); step width (m); swing time (s); stance time (s); double support time (s)No. sig.
Demirel et al. 2020 [28]NA30 NSCLBP
32 CON
NSCLBP 44.80 ± 11.67
CON 40.81±10.95
NA3.48 ± 3.04NSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); step length (m); stance phase (%); stride length (m); swing phase (%); single support (%); double support (%); cadence (step/min)Sig. (walking speed, step length, stride length), no sig. (other parameters)
Jiménez-del-Barrio et al. 2020 [29]16 Megapixel camera, Nikon Coolpix, model20 NSCLBP
20 CON
NSCLBP 24.6 ± 5.21
CON 23.2 ± 5.01
NSCLBP 5/15
CON 6/14
5.68 ± 2.23NSCLBP vs. CONStep length (m)No. sig.
Castro-Méndez et al. 2020 [30]Opto-gait photocell sensor20 NSCLBP
12 CON
NSCLBP 41 ± 10.7
CON 28 ± 7.6
NSCLBP 16/4
CON 2/10
6.59 ± 0.20NSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); stride length (m); cadence (step/min)Sig. (cadence, stride length), no sig. (other parameters)
Lee et al. 2021 [31]Motion analysis system (Motion Analysis Corporation, Rohnert Park, CA, USA)22 NSCLBP
19 CON
NSCLBP 28.91 ± 12.80
CON 27.58 ± 9.13
NSCLBP 14/8
CON 9/10
NANSCLBP vs. CONWalking speed (m/s); cadence (step/min); stride length (m); step length (m); stance phase (%); swing phase (%)No sig.
Lin et al. 2023 [32]Treadmill (FDM-T Lido, Noraxon, USA) with a deck of 2560 capacitive sensors
(Myo-Pressure-T, Noraxon, USA)
16 NSCLBP
16 CON
NSCLBP 28 ± 6.94
CON 28.88 ± 7.09
NA2 (1–3.5)NSCLBP vs. CONStance phase (%); swing phase (%); step length (m); stride length (m); step width (m); walking speed (m/s); cadence (step/min)No. sig.

CON: control group; NA: not applicable; No sig.: no significance; NSCLBP: non-specific chronic low back pain.