45 research outputs found
Changes in the flexion relaxation response induced by lumbar muscle fatigue
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The flexion relaxation phenomenon (FRP) is an interesting model to study the modulation of lumbar stability. Previous investigations have explored the effect of load, angular velocity and posture on this particular response. However, the influence of muscular fatigue on FRP parameters has not been thoroughly examined. The objective of the study is to identify the effect of erector spinae (ES) muscle fatigue and spine loading on myoelectric silence onset and cessation in healthy individuals during a flexion-extension task.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Twenty healthy subjects participated in this study and performed blocks of 3 complete trunk flexions under 4 different experimental conditions: no fatigue/no load (1), no fatigue/load (2), fatigue/no load(3), and fatigue/load (4). Fatigue was induced according to the Sorenson protocol, and electromyographic (EMG) power spectral analysis confirmed that muscular fatigue was adequate in each subject. Trunk and pelvis angles and surface EMG of the ES L2 and L5 were recorded during a flexion-extension task. Trunk flexion angle corresponding to the onset and cessation of myoelectric silence was then compared across the different experimental conditions using 2 × 2 repeated-measures ANOVA.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Onset of myoelectric silence during the flexion motion appeared earlier after the fatigue task. Additionally, the cessation of myoelectric silence was observed later during the extension after the fatigue task. Statistical analysis also yielded a main effect of load, indicating a persistence of ES myoelectric activity in flexion during the load condition.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results of this study suggest that the presence of fatigue of the ES muscles modifies the FRP. Superficial back muscle fatigue seems to induce a shift in load-sharing towards passive stabilizing structures. The loss of muscle contribution together with or without laxity in the viscoelastic tissues may have a substantial impact on post fatigue stability.</p
The differential effects of core stabilization exercise regime and conventional physiotherapy regime on postural control parameters during perturbation in patients with movement and control impairment chronic low back pain
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of the present study was to examine the differential effect of core stability exercise training and conventional physiotherapy regime on altered postural control parameters in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). As heterogeneity in CLBP population moderates the effect of intervention on outcomes, in this study, interventions approaches were used based on sub-groups of CLBP.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was an allocation concealed, blinded, sequential and pragmatic control trial. Three groups of participants were investigated during postural perturbations: 1) CLBP patients with movement impairment (n = 15, MI group) randomized to conventional physiotherapy regime 2) fifteen CLBP patients with control impairment randomized to core stability group (CI group) and 3) fifteen healthy controls (HC).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The MI group did not show any significant changes in postural control parameters after the intervention period however they improved significantly in disability scores and fear avoidance belief questionnaire work score (P < 0.05). The CI group showed significant improvements in Fx, Fz, and My variables (p < 0.013, p < 0.006, and p < 0.002 respectively with larger effect sizes: Hedges's g > 0.8) after 8 weeks of core stability exercises for the adjusted p values. Postural control parameters of HC group were analyzed independently with pre and post postural control parameters of CI and MI group. This revealed the significant improvements in postural control parameters in CI group compared to MI group indicating the specific adaptation to the core stability exercises in CI group. Though the disability scores were reduced significantly in CI and MI groups (p < 0.001), the post intervention scores between groups were not found significant (p < 0.288). Twenty percentage absolute risk reduction in flare-up rates during intervention was found in CI group (95% CI: 0.69-0.98).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In this study core stability exercise group demonstrated significant improvements after intervention in ground reaction forces (Fz, Mz; g > 0.8) indicating changes in load transfer patterns during perturbation similar to HC group.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>UTRN095032158-06012009423714</p
Chronic non-specific low back pain - sub-groups or a single mechanism?
Copyright 2008 Wand and O'Connell; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background: Low back pain is a substantial health problem and has subsequently attracted a
considerable amount of research. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of a variety of interventions
for chronic non-specific low back pain indicate limited effectiveness for most commonly applied
interventions and approaches.
Discussion: Many clinicians challenge the results of clinical trials as they feel that this lack of
effectiveness is at odds with their clinical experience of managing patients with back pain. A
common explanation for this discrepancy is the perceived heterogeneity of patients with chronic
non-specific low back pain. It is felt that the effects of treatment may be diluted by the application
of a single intervention to a complex, heterogeneous group with diverse treatment needs. This
argument presupposes that current treatment is effective when applied to the correct patient.
An alternative perspective is that the clinical trials are correct and current treatments have limited
efficacy. Preoccupation with sub-grouping may stifle engagement with this view and it is important
that the sub-grouping paradigm is closely examined. This paper argues that there are numerous
problems with the sub-grouping approach and that it may not be an important reason for the
disappointing results of clinical trials. We propose instead that current treatment may be ineffective
because it has been misdirected. Recent evidence that demonstrates changes within the brain in
chronic low back pain sufferers raises the possibility that persistent back pain may be a problem of
cortical reorganisation and degeneration. This perspective offers interesting insights into the
chronic low back pain experience and suggests alternative models of intervention.
Summary: The disappointing results of clinical research are commonly explained by the failure of
researchers to adequately attend to sub-grouping of the chronic non-specific low back pain
population. Alternatively, current approaches may be ineffective and clinicians and researchers may
need to radically rethink the nature of the problem and how it should best be managed
A randomised controlled trial among cleaners-Effects on strength, balance and kinesiophobia
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cleaners constitute a job group with poor health and low socioeconomic resources. Therefore, there is a great need for scientifically documented health promoting initiatives for cleaners. However, both workplace initiatives and high quality intervention studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a 3-month workplace trial with interventions to improve physical or cognitive behavioural resources among cleaners.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted among 294 female cleaners from 9 workplaces. The participants were allocated to three groups: Physical coordination training (PCT, n = 95), Cognitive behavioural theory-based training (CBTr, n = 99) and Reference group (REF, n = 100). Interventions were conducted during work hours for an average of 1 hour/week. Muscle strength was measured by maximal voluntary contractions in trunk/extension, and shoulder abduction/elevation. Postural balance was measured on a force platform. Kinesiophobia was measured with Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Test and questionnaires were completed at baseline and at 3-month follow-up and analyses followed the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle with last observation carried forward in case of missing data at follow-up. Reports and analyses are given on true observations as well.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>ITT-analyses revealed that PCT improved strength of the trunk (p < .05) and postural balance (p < .05) compared to CBTr and REF. Based on true observations the strength and balance improvements corresponded to ~20% and ~16%, respectively. ITT-analyses showed that CBTr reduced kinesiophobia compared to PCT and REF (p < .05). Based on true observations, the improvement corresponded to a ~16% improvement.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This workplace-based intervention study including PCT and CBTr among cleaners improved strength and postural balance from PCT, and kinesiophobia from CBTr. The improved strength, postural balance and kinesiophobia may improve the cleaners' tolerance for high physical work demands. Future studies should investigate the potential in the combination of PCT and CBTr in a workplace intervention.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current controlled trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN96241850">ISRCTN96241850</a></p
Lumbar position sense and the risk of low back injuries in college athletes: a prospective cohort study
Efficacy of movement control exercises versus general exercises on recurrent sub-acute nonspecific low back pain in a sub-group of patients with movement control dysfunction. protocol of a randomized controlled trial
Background: Practice guidelines recommend various types of exercise for chronic back pain but there have been few head-to-head comparisons of these interventions. General exercise seems to be an effective option for management of chronic low back pain (LBP) but very little is known about the management of a sub-acute LBP within sub-groups.
Recent research has developed clinical tests to identify a subgroup of patients with chronic non-specific LBP who have movement control dysfunction (MD).
Method/Design: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the effects of general exercise and specific movement control exercise (SMCE) on disability and function in patients with MD within recurrent sub-acute LBP. The main outcome measure is the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire.
Discussion: European clinical guideline for management of chronic LBP recommends that more research is required to develop tools to improve the classification and identification of specific clinical sub-groups of chronic LBP patients. Good quality RCTs are then needed to determine the effectiveness of specific interventions aimed at these specific target groups. This RCT aims to test the hypothesis whether patients within a sub-group of MD benefit more through a specific individually tailored movement control exercise program than through general exercises
Avaliação da qualidade de vida com o instrumento SF-36 em lombalgia crônica
OBJETIVO: Avaliar a qualidade de vida através dos domínios do Instrumento SF-36 em portadores de lombalgia crônica inespecífica.
MÉTODOS: Trinta portadores de lombalgia crônica inespecífica foram aleatorizados para três grupos (grupo Iso (Isostretching), grupo RPG (Reeducação Postural Global) e Iso+RPG), e avaliados quanto à dor e qualidade de vida antes e após as intervenções fisioterápicas e reavaliados novamente após 2 meses de acompanhamento. Após a aceitação do Termo de Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido os pacientes foram submetidos a procedimentos como: avaliação fisioterápica através do Instrumento de Avaliação da Coluna Vertebral, Escala Visual Analógica de Dor (EVA), Questionário de Qualidade de Vida através do Instrumento SF-36, antes da 1ª sessão e após três meses de tratamento, e reavaliados 2 meses após o tratamento.
RESULTADOS: Mostraram que ambas as técnicas fisioterápicas diminuíram a dor (p<0,001), porém quando foram associadas as duas técnicas (Iso + RPG) a melhora da dor foi significativamente maior, e na avaliação após dois meses de acompanhamento o método de RPG foi mais eficaz. Quanto à avaliação da qualidade de vida, as técnicas fisioterápicas foram eficazes após as intervenções (P<0,001), porém o método do Iso foi mais eficaz quando os pacientes foram reavaliados no acompanhamento.
CONCLUSÃO: As técnicas fisioterápicas utilizadas neste estudo foram eficazes para tratar a lombalgia crônica inespecífica apresentada pelos pacientes, pois diminuíram a algia que os mesmos apresentavam e melhoraram a qualidade de vida segundo os domínios do Instrumento SF-36. Nível de Evidência II, Ensaio Clínico Controlado e Randomizado. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACTThe objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of life (QL) with the use of the SF-36 Questionnaire in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP). Thirty patients with CNLBP were randomly assigned to one of three groups (Iso group (Isostretching), GPR group (Global Postural Reeducation), and the Iso+GPR group. Patients underwent physical therapy assessment with the use of the Vertebral Spine Assessment, the Visual Analog Scale of Pain (VASP), and the SF-36 life quality questionnaire before the first session (first assessment), after three months of treatment (second assessment) and reassessed two months after the final session in the follow-up (third assessment). The results indicated that both physical therapy techniques reduced pain (p<0.001); when the techniques (Iso+GPR) were combined, the reduction in pain was significantly greater; and, in the follow-up assessment, the GPR method was more efficient. As for the QL, physical therapy techniques were effective after the interventions (p<0.001), and the Iso method was more effective when patients were reassessed in the follow-up. We conclude that the physical therapy techniques used in this study were efficient to treat CNLBP in the patients since they reduced pain and increased QL according to the results of the SF-36 questionnaire. Level of Evidence II, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Movement control exercise versus general exercise to reduce disability in patients with low back pain and movement control impairment. A randomised controlled trial
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) in subacute and chronic stages can be treated effectively with exercise therapy. Research guidelines recommend evaluating different treatments in defined subgroups of patients with NSLBP. A subgroup of patients with movement control impairment (MCI) improved significantly on patient specific function and disability in a previous case series after movement control exercises.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In a randomised controlled trial (RCT) we will compare the effectiveness of movement control and general exercise in patients with MCI. 106 participants aged 18 - 75 will be recruited in 5 outpatient hospital departments and 7 private practices.</p> <p>Patients randomly assigned to the movement control exercise group will be instructed to perform exercises according to their MCI. The general exercise group will follow an exercise protocol aimed at improving endurance and flexibility. Patients in both groups will receive 9 - 18 treatments and will be instructed to do additional exercises at home.</p> <p>The primary outcome is the level of disability assessed using the patient specific functional scale (PSFS) which links the perceived pain to functional situations and is measured before treatment and at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes concern low back pain related disability (Roland Morris questionnaire, RMQ), graded chronic pain scale (GCPS), range of motion and tactile acuity.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>To our knowledge this study will be the first to compare two exercise programs for a specific subgroup of patients with NSLBP and MCI. Results of this study will provide insight into the effectiveness of movement control exercise and contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms behind MCI and its relation to NSLBP.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN80064281">ISRCTN80064281</a></p
Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Background: Clinicians commonly examine posture and movement in people with the belief that correcting dysfunctional movement may reduce pain. If dysfunctional movement is to be accurately identified, clinicians should know what constitutes normal movement and how this differs in people with low back pain (LBP). This systematic review examined studies that compared biomechanical aspects of lumbo-pelvic movement in people with and without LBP. Methods. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, AMI, CINAHL, Scopus, AMED, ISI Web of Science were searched from inception until January 2014 for relevant studies. Studies had to compare adults with and without LBP using skin surface measurement techniques to measure lumbo-pelvic posture or movement. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria, and identified and extracted data. Standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for group differences between people with and without LBP, and where possible, meta-analyses were performed. Within-group variability in all measurements was also compared. Results: The search identified 43 eligible studies. Compared to people without LBP, on average, people with LBP display: (i) no difference in lordosis angle (8 studies), (ii) reduced lumbar ROM (19 studies), (iii) no difference in lumbar relative to hip contribution to end-range flexion (4 studies), (iv) no difference in standing pelvic tilt angle (3 studies), (v) slower movement (8 studies), and (vi) reduced proprioception (17 studies). Movement variability appeared greater for people with LBP for flexion, lateral flexion and rotation ROM, and movement speed, but not for other movement characteristics. Considerable heterogeneity exists between studies, including a lack of detail or standardization between studies on the criteria used to define participants as people with LBP (cases) or without LBP (controls). Conclusions: On average, people with LBP have reduced lumbar ROM and proprioception, and move more slowly compared to people without LBP. Whether these deficits exist prior to LBP onset is unknown