Exercise for chronic pelvic pain in pre-menopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In: BMC Women's Health · 2026 · doi:10.1186/s12905-026-04847-8 · W7212002865
article OA: gold CC0
AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-13

This systematic review found very uncertain evidence that exercise improves short- and long-term pain and quality of life in pre-menopausal women with chronic pelvic pain, necessitating low-risk bias studies for confirmation.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-13 · read from full text

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of exercise interventions for managing chronic pelvic pain in pre-menopausal women with gynecological or urological origins. The authors analyzed six randomized controlled trials involving 333 participants, noting that all included studies carried a high risk of bias. Results indicated very uncertain evidence regarding short- and long-term improvements in pain intensity and quality of life compared to usual care or minimal intervention. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically listed as one indication for exercise therapy within the broader scope of chronic pelvic pain management.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

In women, chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is recurrent or constant pain in the pelvis, lower abdominal region, and female organs that persists for longer than 6 months. Exercise has been effective for other chronic pain conditions and could potentially be effective for CPP. The objective was to evaluate if exercise is more effective than no intervention, minimal intervention or usual care for improving pain and quality of life (QOL) in the short, medium, and long-term in women of reproductive age with ongoing CPP of gynaecological or urological origin. Short-term pain was the primary endpoint. This was a systematic review with meta-analysis. Four databases were searched. Title/abstract, full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two independent authors. Risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool. For pain, scales were converted to a standardised 0 to 10 scale, with a smallest clinically worthwhile effect of 1.5 points. For QOL, scales were converted to a Standardised Mean difference (SMD). Random effects meta-analyses were used, and GRADE syntheses were performed. We identified 9319 records. Six studies ( n = 333) were included. All studies were high risk of bias. Two studies included yoga as an exercise modality, while the remaining used multiple exercise types. Comparators included advice, medication, or usual care. For pain, the evidence was very uncertain that exercise was better than the comparator and the effect was clinically worthwhile in the short- (MD: -2.74, 95%CI: -3.70 to -1.78, 4 studies) and long-term (MD: -3.38, 95%CI: -4.80 to -1.96, 2 studies). For QOL, the evidence was very uncertain that exercise was better than the comparator in the short- (SMD: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.08 to 1.19, 3 studies) and long-term (SMD: 1.12, 95%CI: 0.36 to 1.89, n = 31, 1 study). No studies investigated medium-term pain or QOL. The evidence was very uncertain for exercise on short-and long-term pain and QOL. Studies with low risk of bias are required to confirm these effects and to determine if any specific exercise modality is more effective. The protocol was pre-registered in Open Science Framework on May 31st, 2024 (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FA3CR).
Full text 5,232 characters · extracted from oa-html · 5 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background In women, chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is recurrent or constant pain in the pelvis, lower abdominal region, and female organs that persists for longer than 6 months. Exercise has been effective for other chronic pain conditions and could potentially be effective for CPP. The objective was to evaluate if exercise is more effective than no intervention, minimal intervention or usual care for improving pain and quality of life (QOL) in the short, medium, and long-term in women of reproductive age with ongoing CPP of gynaecological or urological origin. Short-term pain was the primary endpoint.

Methods

This was a systematic review with meta-analysis. Four databases were searched. Title/abstract, full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two independent authors. Risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool. For pain, scales were converted to a standardised 0 to 10 scale, with a smallest clinically worthwhile effect of 1.5 points. For QOL, scales were converted to a Standardised Mean difference (SMD). Random effects meta-analyses were used, and GRADE syntheses were performed.

Results

We identified 9319 records. Six studies (n = 333) were included. All studies were high risk of bias. Two studies included yoga as an exercise modality, while the remaining used multiple exercise types. Comparators included advice, medication, or usual care. For pain, the evidence was very uncertain that exercise was better than the comparator and the effect was clinically worthwhile in the short- (MD: -2.74, 95%CI: -3.70 to -1.78, 4 studies) and long-term (MD: -3.38, 95%CI: -4.80 to -1.96, 2 studies). For QOL, the evidence was very uncertain that exercise was better than the comparator in the short- (SMD: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.08 to 1.19, 3 studies) and long-term (SMD: 1.12, 95%CI: 0.36 to 1.89, n = 31, 1 study). No studies investigated medium-term pain or QOL.

Conclusion

The evidence was very uncertain for exercise on short-and long-term pain and QOL. Studies with low risk of bias are required to confirm these effects and to determine if any specific exercise modality is more effective. Protocol registration The protocol was pre-registered in Open Science Framework on May 31st, 2024 (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FA3CR). Abbreviations - CENTRAL: - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials - CINAHL: - Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature - CPP: - Chronic Pelvic Pain - EHP-30: - Endometriosis Health Profile-30 - EQ5D-5L: - EuroQol-5 Dimension, 5-Level questionnaire - GRADE: - Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation - MD: - Mean difference - NSAIDS: - Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs - NR: - Not Reported - NRS: - Numerical Rating Scale - PEDro: - Physiotherapy Evidence Database - PRISMA: - Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses - QOL: - Quality of life - RCT: - Randomised Controlled trial - SD: - Standard Deviation - SF-36: - 36-Item Short Form Health Survey - SMD: - Standardised Mean Difference - VAS: - Visual Analogue Scale - WHOQOL‑Bref: - World Health Organization Quality of Life - Bref

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the UTS information specialist (Kimberley Porteous) for helping create and revise the search. Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Ethics declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Non applicable. Consent for publication Non applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Additional information Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Supplementary Information Rights and permissions Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. About this article Cite this article Sun, M., Warren, I., Hodgkinson, O. et al. Exercise for chronic pelvic pain in pre-menopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Women's Health (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-026-04847-8 Received: Accepted: Published: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-026-04847-8

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-html

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-09-20T06:06:26.060083+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK