Table 1 Treatment studies: summary of included studies

Almeida, 2009

Assembly line workers with work related musculoskeletal symptoms in the lumbar spine or lower limb

All female Age: 30.30 ± 7.09 Randomised: 27 Analysed: 27

Prefabricated (heat moulded Ethylene vinyl acetate) orthoses, individually customised vs Prefabricated simple insoles (placebo)

Participants were instructed to wear the insoles daily with the work uniform

8

78%

Basford, 1988

Office and laboratory workers whose job requires standing at least 75% of the day

All female Age: 39.00 ± 12.00 Randomised: 96 Analysed: 64

Prefabricated viscoelastic polyurethane orthoses, 1.3 mm at toe to 5 mm at heel (crossover trial)

Insoles were fitted to participants normal work shoes

5

57%

Cambron, 2011

Chronic LBP patients responding to advert

22 male, 28 female Age: 52.00 ± 16.00 Randomised: 50 Analysed: 46

Custom made polymer orthoses (flexible with arch support)

Participants given procedures for proper use of orthotics (but not detailed in article)

6 & 12

71%

Castro-Mendez, 2013

Chronic LBP patients with a Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) indicating at least one pronated foot

9 male, 51 female Age: 40.63 ± 14.63 Randomised: 60 Analysed: 51

Custom mould polypropylene & polyethylene orthoses in subtalar neutral position vs Flat polyester resin insole (placebo)

Participants were asked to wear the foot orthotics for at least 8 hours per day

4

79%

Shabat, 2005

Workers whose job required long distance walking & who suffered from LBP

25 male, 35 female Age: 39.14 Randomised: 60 Analysed: 57

Custom made viscoelastic polymer orthoses to support the foot vs Flat insole (placebo)

Participants were permitted to use insoles during work or non-work time

5

75%