Table 5: Analysis of the methodological quality of Czepa et al.’s [14] study, by PEDro scale.

ItemsCzepa et al. (2013) [14]

Eligibility criteria were specifiedNo
Subjects were randomly allocated to groups (in a crossover study, subjects were randomly allocated an order in which treatments were received) No
Allocation was concealedNo
The groups were similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators Yes
There was blinding of all subjectsNo
There was blinding of all therapists who administered the therapyNo
There was blinding of all assessors who measured at least one key outcomeNo
Measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups No
All subjects for whom outcome measures were available received the treatment or control condition as allocated or, where this was not the case, data for at least one key outcome was analysed by “intention to treat”No
The results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at least one key outcomeYes
The study provides both point measures and measures of variability for at least one key outcomeYes