Multicenter multidisciplinary training program for chronic low back pain: French experience of the Renodos back pain network (Réseau Nord-Pas-de-Calais du DOS)

AbstractObjectivesTo evaluate the short- and long-term effectiveness of the multidisciplinary training program (MTP). To show the benefits which the network organization brings to the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLPB).MethodsThe member centres of the Renodos back pain network included 748 subjects in the MTP. The centres used a common evaluation protocol including pain and quality of life visual analogue scales (VAS), fingertip-to-floor distance (FFD), muscle isometric endurance tests, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), the Dallas Pain Questionnaire (DPQ) and the Hospital Anxiety Depression (HAD) scale. Measurements were carried out before (T0) and immediately after (T1) the intervention, and at the 3-, 6-, 12-month (T3, T6, T12) follow-up visits.ResultsStatistically discernible improvement occurred for men and women on every outcome measure from before to after the MTP (T0–T1, p<0.0001). This improvement obtained at T1 was maintained for most of the outcome measures throughout the 12-month follow-up. However, the pain intensity and isometric muscle endurance times showed significant negative evolution. Significant differences between genders were found for the trunk flexibility measurement (FFD), the isometric endurance time of the quadratus lumborum muscle, the RDQ and the HAD depression. There was no time–gender interaction.ConclusionThe MTP was effective in reducing back pain intensity, functional disability, symptoms of anxiety and depression and in improving quality of life, flexibility and isometric muscle endurance time. It was possible to propose the MTP to both men and women. A network organization effectively contributes to the harmonization of evaluation methods and brings coherence to the treatment of CLBP patients

Comparison of maximal aerobic speed as assessed with laboratory and field measurements in moderately trained subjects.

International audienceIn order to compare the Maximal Aerobic Speed (MAS) evaluated with different methods, eleven male physical education students (22.2 +/- 3.0 years) were submitted to a maximal treadmill protocol and to the Université de Montréal Track Test (UMTT). Four methods were used to calculate MAS. After treadmill measurement of VO2max, MAS was calculated (MAS_calc) by the following formula: MAS_calc = (VO2max - 0.083)/C, where VO2max is the maximal oxygen uptake (ml.kg-1.s-1) and C the energy cost of running (ml.kg-1.m-1). The extrapolated MAS (MAS_ex) was obtained from the measured VO2max and by extrapolation of the VO2 versus speed relationship. The MAS for treadmill measurement (MAS_tr) and for UMTT (MAS_UMTT) were the velocities at the last completed stages. The average MAS_calc (4.71 +/- 0.48 m.s-1), MAS_ex (4.62 +/- 0.48 m.s-1), MAS-tr (4.75 +/- 0.57 m.s-1) and MAS_UMTT (4.64 +/- 0.35 m.s-1) were not significantly different and were significantly correlated, between 0.85 (MAS_ex vs MAS_UMTT) and 0.99 (MAS_calc vs MAS_tr), with p < 0.001 in both cases. MAS measurements were significantly correlated to measured VO2max but independent of C

Validity of the Université de Montréal Track Test to assess the velocity associated with peak oxygen uptake for adolescents.

International audienceThe purpose of the study was to test the ability to determine the velocity associated with peak oxygen uptake for adolescents by means of a simple field test, the Université de Montréal Track Test (UMTT). Fifteen adolescents, 13.4 +/- 1.0 years, performed two maximal field tests where oxygen uptake and heart rate were continuously monitored. The first test (graded field test, first stage 8 km.h-1, increment 1.5 km.h-1, duration 3 min) allowed the subjects to reach a steady-state oxygen uptake. Then, the velocity associated with peak oxygen uptake was calculated from the ratio between peak oxygen uptake above resting level to energy cost of running. The calculated velocity was kept as the criterion velocity. For the second test (UMTT, first stage 8 km.h-1; increment 1 km.h-1; duration 2 min), the velocity measured at the last completed stage was retained. The measured peak oxygen uptake for the graded field test (51.8 +/- 6.5 ml.kg-1.min-1) and for the UMTT (51.0 +/- 7.9 ml.kg-1.min-1) were not significantly different. The calculated velocity (12.9 +/- 1.0 km.h-1) and the measured velocity (12.7 +/- 0.9 km.h-1) were not significantly different and were significantly correlated (r = 0.80, p < 0.001). It was concluded that, for adolescents, the velocity measured at the last completed stage of the UMTT allows a valid estimation of the velocity associated with peak oxygen uptake

Comparison of two field tests to estimate maximum aerobic speed.

International audienceThe measurement of maximal aerobic speed (MAS) and the prediction of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2 max) by means of field tests were carried out on 17 students studying physical education. The subjects underwent a continuous multi-stage track test (Léger and Boucher, 1980), shuttle test (Léger et al., 1984) and VO2 max measurement on a treadmill. The VO2 max values estimated using the track test (56.8 +/- 5.8 ml kg-1 min-1) were not significantly different from the values measured in the treadmill test (56.8 +/- 7.1 ml kg-1 min-1), but were higher than those estimated using the shuttle test (51.1 +/- 5.9 ml kg-1 min-1). The maximal nature of the tests was checked by measurement of heart rate and lactate concentration, taken within 2 min post-test. The means of the MAS observed in the track test (15.8 +/- 1.9 km h-1) and in the treadmill test (15.9 +/- 2.6 km h-1) were not significantly different (P > 0.10). The mean of the shuttle test MAS (13.1 +/- 1 km h-1) was significantly lower (P < 0.01) than those of the other tests. However, the MAS of the shuttle test and track test are linked. The equation for linear regression between MAS values in these two tests is MAStrack = 1.81 x MASshuttle -7.86 (r = 0.91), allowing estimation of one of these MAS values when the other is known. Thus these values may be used within diversified training