scholarly journals Can Low Back Loading During Lifting Be Reduced by Placing One Leg Beside the Object to Be Lifted?

2006 ◽  
Vol 86 (8) ◽  
pp. 1091-1105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Idsart Kingma ◽  
Gert S Faber ◽  
Anja JM Bakker ◽  
Jaap H van Dieën
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Lifting Technique ◽  
Spinal Compression ◽  
History Of ◽  
Reaction Forces ◽  
Squat Lifting ◽  
Lifting Techniques

Abstract Background and Purpose. Lifting technique could, through its effect on low back loading, affect the risk of developing low back pain. In this study, 2 lifting techniques (a straddle technique and a 1-leg kneeling technique), which aimed to reduce low back loading by placing one leg beside a load, were compared with stoop lifting and squat lifting with respect to their effect on low back loading. Subjects. Twelve men with no history of low back pain participated in the study. Methods. The subjects lifted wide and narrow 20-kg boxes from 2 initial hand heights. With measured kinematics, ground reaction forces, and electromyography, 3-dimensional spinal forces were calculated. Results. When the subjects lifted a narrow box from a 290-mm height, peak L5–S1 compression forces were 5,060 (SD=827), 3,980 (SD=701), 4,208 (SD=762), and 4,719 (SD=1,015) N for the stoop, squat, straddle, and kneeling techniques, respectively. When the subjects lifted a wide box from 50 mm, spinal compression forces were much higher and distributed differently over lifting techniques: 5,926 (SD=610), 6,868 (SD=924), 6,472 (SD=1,042), and 6,064 (SD=968) N, respectively. Discussion and Conclusion. The authors conclude that no single lifting technique can be advised for all lifting conditions.

scholarly journals Relationship between the Hip and Low Back Pain in Athletes Who Participate in Rotation-Related Sports

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcie Harris-Hayes ◽  
Shirley A. Sahrmann ◽  
Linda R. Van Dillen
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Hip Range Of Motion ◽  
Hip Function ◽  
History Of ◽  
Research Findings

Context:Hip function has been proposed to be related to low back pain (LBP) because of the anatomical proximity of the hip and lumbopelvic region. To date, findings have been inconclusive, possibly because the samples studied were heterogeneous. Subgrouping samples based on characteristics such as activity demand, LBP classification, and sex might clarify research findings.Objective:To describe and summarize studies that examine 3 factors proposed to be important to the study of the hip–LBP relationship.Design:Review of cross-sectional studies.Setting:Academic healthcare center and research laboratory.Subjects:3 groups: athletes with a history of LBP who regularly participate in rotation-related sports, athletes without a history of LBP who are active but do not regularly participate in rotation-related sports, and athletes without a history of LBP who participate in rotation-related sports.Main Outcome:Hip range of motion and hip–lumbopelvic region coordination.Measures:Hip range of motion was measured with an inclinometer. Coordination was examined based on kinematics obtained with a 3-dimensional motion-capture system.Result:Differences among groups were found based on activity demand, LBP classification, and sex.Conclusion:When assessing athletes with and without LBP, characteristics such as activity demand, LBP classification, and sex should be considered.

scholarly journals Rowers with a recent history of low back pain engage different regions of the lumbar erector spinae during rowing

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 1206-1212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Martinez-Valdes ◽  
Fiona Wilson ◽  
Neil Fleming ◽  
Sarah-Jane McDonnell ◽  
Alex Horgan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Erector Spinae ◽  
Recent History ◽  
Low Back ◽  
History Of

Self-Myofascial Release of the Superficial Back Line Improves Sit-and-Reach Distance

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 400-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Whitney Williams ◽  
Noelle M. Selkow
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Myofascial Release ◽  
Plantar Surface ◽  
The Past ◽  
Plantar Aspect ◽  
History Of ◽  
Hamstring Flexibility

Context: Decreased hamstring flexibility can lead to a plethora of musculoskeletal injuries, including low back pain, hamstring strains, and patellofemoral pain. Lack of flexibility may be the result of myofascial adhesions. The fascia connected to the hamstrings is part of the superficial back line that runs from the cranium to the plantar aspect of the foot. Any disruption along this chain may limit the flexibility of the hamstring. Objective: To investigate if self-myofascial release (SMR) of the plantar surface of the foot in addition to the hamstring group was more effective at improving the flexibility of the hamstrings when compared with either intervention alone. Design: Cross-over study. Setting: Athletic training facility. Participants: Fifteen college students (5 males and 10 females; age: 20.9 [1.4] y, height: 173.1 [10.3] cm, mass: 80.0 [24.9] kg) who were not older than 30, with no history of low back pain or injury within the past 6 months, no history of leg pain or injury within the past 6 months, no current signs or symptoms of cervical or lumbar radicular pain, no current complaint of numbness or tingling in the lower-extremity, and no history of surgery in the lower-extremity or legs. Interventions: Each participant received each intervention separated by at least 96 hours in a randomized order: hamstring foam rolling, lacrosse ball on the plantar surface of the foot, and a combination of both. Main Outcome Measures: The sit-and-reach test evaluated hamstring flexibility of each participant before and immediately after each intervention. Results: There were no significant differences found among the SMR techniques on sit-and-reach distance (F2,41 = 2.7, P = .08, ). However, at least 20% of participants in each intervention improved sit-and-reach distance by 2.5 cm. Conclusions: SMR may improve sit-and-reach distance, but one technique of SMR does not seem to be superior to another.

scholarly journals Prévalence De La Douleur Neuropathique Chez Des Patients Souffrant De Lomboradiculalgie Commune En Consultation Rhumatologique À Lomé (Togo)

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Kodjo Kakpovi ◽  
Komi Cyrille Tagbor ◽  
Eyram Fianyo ◽  
Agbeko Komlan Doleagbenou ◽  
Kokou Mensah Guinhouya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Past History ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Study Results ◽  
History Of

Objective: To determine the prevalence and factors associated with neuropathic pain in patients with non-specific low back pain. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted from May to July 2016 in the Rheumatology, Neurology and Neurosurgery departments of Lome. The DN4 questionnaire was used for the diagnosis of neuropathic pain in the 200 patients with low back pain included in this study. Results: Of the 200 patients (147 women and 53 men) included in the study, neuropathic pain was present in 92 (46%). The average age of the 92 patients (67 women vs 25 men, p = 0.04) was 55.5 ± 12.4 years (women 55.2 ± 12.8 vs. men 54.6 ± 11.4, p = 0.5). The characteristics of neuropathic pain mainly found were: burning sensation (n = 67, 72.8%); electrical discharges (n = 64, 69.6%); tingling (n = 90; 97.8%); tickling (n = 57; 62%); numbness (n = 89; 96.7%); hypoesthesia (n = 52; 56.5%). Factors significantly associated with the presence of neuropathic pain in LBP were age (p = 0.005), duration of LBP (p = 0.04), high blood pressure (p = 0.001), radicular pain (p = 0.00002) and the past history of the LBP (0.000000). Conclusion: Neuropathic pain is common in patients with LBP at Lome. The duration of LBP, past history of LBP, previous NSAID use, BMI, pain severity and radicular pain appear to be predictive of the occurrence of these neuropathic pains.

scholarly journals EFFECTIVENESS OF LUMBAR MANIPULATION (HIGH VELOCITY LOW AMPLITUDE) FOR THE TREATMENT OF LOW BACK PAIN IN COMPARISON TO BACK STRETCHING EXERCISES

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-27
Author(s):  
Syed Abid Mehdi Kazmi ◽  
Nabiha Mujahid Faruq ◽  
Sumaira Imran Farooqui ◽  
Jharna Devi
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
High Velocity ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Before And After ◽  
History Of ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Low Amplitude ◽  
Stretching Exercises

OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of lumbar manipulation (high velocity low amplitude) for the treatment of low back pain in comparison to back stretching exercises. Randomized Control Trial (Experimental Study) The study was conducted on 200 patients at the Physiotherapy Department of Ziauddin Hospital among patients with history of low back pain of acute, sub acute or chronic origin. In this study, patients were divided into two groups, group A and group B equally. Group A of 100 patients received Lumbar Manipulation (High Velocity Low Amplitude) and at the same time Group B of 100 patients were treated by back stretching exercises. A pre tested and structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Data was entered and analyzed by using SPSS. Pain was measured on Visual Analogue Scale before and after the given treatment. The study showed significant results for both the interventions in the treatment of low back pain but Lumbar Manipulation has been more effective in different types of low back pain while stretching exercises are less effective. On the basis of this study, we are very confident that lumbar manipulation is more effective for the treatment of low back pain compared to back stretching

scholarly journals Improvement in Automatic Postural Coordination Following Alexander Technique Lessons in a Person With Low Back Pain

2005 ◽  
Vol 85 (6) ◽  
pp. 565-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy W Cacciatore ◽  
Fay B Horak ◽  
Sharon M Henry
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Muscular Activity ◽  
Alexander Technique ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Postural Coordination ◽  
Postural Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Automatic Postural Responses

Abstract Background and Purpose. The relationship between abnormal postural coordination and back pain is unclear. The Alexander Technique (AT) aims to improve postural coordination by using conscious processes to alter automatic postural coordination and ongoing muscular activity, and it has been reported to reduce low back pain. This case report describes the use of the AT with a client with low back pain and the observed changes in automatic postural responses and back pain. Case Description. The client was a 49-year-old woman with a 25-year history of left-sided, idiopathic, lumbrosacral back pain. Automatic postural coordination was measured using a force plate during horizontal platform translations and one-legged standing. Outcomes. The client was tested monthly for 4 months before AT lessons and for 3 months after lessons. Before lessons, she consistently had laterally asymmetric automatic postural responses to translations. After AT lessons, the magnitude and asymmetry of her responses and balance improved and her low back pain decreased. Discussion. Further research is warranted to study whether AT lessons improve low back pain-associated abnormalities in automatic postural coordination and whether improving automatic postural coordination helps to reduce low back pain.

Are there differences in lifting technique between those with and without low back pain? A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-227
Author(s):  
David Nolan ◽  
Kieran O’Sullivan ◽  
Chris Newton ◽  
Gurpreet Singh ◽  
Benjamin E. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Muscle Activity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Lifting Technique ◽  
Manual Handling ◽  
Free People

AbstractBackground and aimsTo systemically review the literature to compare freestyle lifting technique, by muscle activity and kinematics, between people with and without low back pain (LBP).MethodsFive databases were searched along with manual searches of retrieved articles by a single reviewer. Studies were included if they compared a freestyle lifting activity between participants with and without LBP. Data were extracted by two reviewers, and studies were appraised using the CASP tool for case-control studies.ResultsNine studies were eligible. Heterogeneity did not allow for meta-analysis. Most studies (n = 8 studies) reported that people with LBP lift differently to pain-free controls. Specifically, people with LBP lift more slowly (n = 6 studies), use their legs more than their back especially when initiating lifting (n = 3 studies), and jerk less during lifting (n = 1 studies). Furthermore, the four larger studies involving people with more severe LBP also showed that people with LBP lift with less spinal range of motion and greater trunk muscle activity for a longer period.ConclusionsPeople with LBP move slower, stiffer, and with a deeper knee bend than pain-free people during freestyle lifting tasks. Interestingly, such a lifting style mirrors how people, with and without LBP, are often told how to lift during manual handling training. The cross-sectional nature of the comparisons does not allow for causation to be determined.ImplicationsThe changes described may show embodiment of cautious movement, and the drive to protect the back. There may be value in exploring whether adopting a lifting style closer to that of pain-free people could help reduce LBP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document