scholarly journals Responsiveness of the modified lower extremity functional scale in patients with low back pain and sciatica

Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (14) ◽  
pp. e15105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi-Shiung Horng ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Hou ◽  
Huey-Wen Liang
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Lower Extremity Functional Scale

Application of the Modified Lower Extremity Functional Scale in Low Back Pain

Spine ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (23) ◽  
pp. 2043-2048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huey-Wen Liang ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Hou ◽  
Kai-Shiang Chang
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Lower Extremity Functional Scale

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 Motor Control Exercise for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 89 (12) ◽  
pp. 1275-1286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo O.P. Costa ◽  
Christopher G. Maher ◽  
Jane Latimer ◽  
Paul W. Hodges ◽  
Robert D. Herbert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Motor Control ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Control Exercise

BackgroundThe evidence that exercise intervention is effective for treatment of chronic low back pain comes from trials that are not placebo-controlled.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of motor control exercise for people with chronic low back pain.DesignThis was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.SettingThe study was conducted in an outpatient physical therapy department in Australia.PatientsThe participants were 154 patients with chronic low back pain of more than 12 weeks’ duration.InterventionTwelve sessions of motor control exercise (ie, exercises designed to improve function of specific muscles of the low back region and the control of posture and movement) or placebo (ie, detuned ultrasound therapy and detuned short-wave therapy) were conducted over 8 weeks.MeasurementsPrimary outcomes were pain intensity, activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale), and patient's global impression of recovery measured at 2 months. Secondary outcomes were pain; activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale); patient's global impression of recovery measured at 6 and 12 months; activity limitation (measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) at 2, 6, and 12 months; and risk of persistent or recurrent pain at 12 months.ResultsThe exercise intervention improved activity and patient's global impression of recovery but did not clearly reduce pain at 2 months. The mean effect of exercise on activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale) was 1.1 points (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.3 to 1.8), the mean effect on global impression of recovery was 1.5 points (95% CI=0.4 to 2.5), and the mean effect on pain was 0.9 points (95% CI=−0.01 to 1.8), all measured on 11-point scales. Secondary outcomes also favored motor control exercise.LimitationClinicians could not be blinded to the intervention they provided.ConclusionsMotor control exercise produced short-term improvements in global impression of recovery and activity, but not pain, for people with chronic low back pain. Most of the effects observed in the short term were maintained at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups.

96. A Study on Low Back Pain and Sciatica with Special Reference to Hemodynamic Study of Low Back and Lower Extremity Muscles

1967 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 139-139
Author(s):  
Tadaatsu ITO ◽  
Takashi NAKAGAWA ◽  
Hideyuki ICHISEKI ◽  
Shoichi OBINATA ◽  
Makoto WATANABE ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Special Reference ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Hemodynamic Study

Low back pain in persons with lower extremity amputation: a systematic review of the literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 552-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Jason Highsmith ◽  
Lisa M. Goff ◽  
Amanda L. Lewandowski ◽  
Shawn Farrokhi ◽  
Brad D. Hendershot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Lower Extremity Amputation ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Extremity Amputation

scholarly journals Are stabilisation exercises different to other treatments in improving physical activity or reducing disability for people with persistent low back pain? A systematic literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Sara Gardiner ◽  
Helena Daniell ◽  
Benjamin Smith ◽  
Rachel Chester
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Fear Avoidance ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Disability Questionnaire ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background/Aims Stabilisation exercises are commonly prescribed for people with persistent low back pain. However, for some patients, it has been hypothesised that stabilisation exercises could draw attention to protecting the core, promote hypervigilance and inhibit volitional movement. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and reported adverse events, in particular fear avoidance, of stabilisation exercises compared with placebo or other treatments offered by physiotherapists on the outcome of disability and activity at 12- and 24-months' follow-up. Methods The following electronic databases were searched: Embase, Medline, AMED, CINAHL, from inception to June 2019. Only randomised controlled trails were included. Study selection, data extraction and appraisal of quality criteria using PEDro, were undertaken by two independent assessors. Results Seven studies (n=1820) were eligible. Of six studies that reported adverse effects in the group receiving stabilisation exercises, four reported none and two reported mild exacerbation of pain locally or elsewhere. Fear avoidance was not investigated in any of the studies. Across the studies, 12 analyses were reported and included seven different comparator groups and three outcome measures: Oswestry Disability Index (n=1), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (n=5), Patient Specific Functional Scale (n=4). Two studies included a 24-month follow up in addition to a 12-month follow up. Of the 12 studies, nine reported no significant differences between the effectiveness of stabilisation exercises and comparator groups. Stabilisation exercises were more effective than comparator groups for the following three analyses: compared to manual therapy or education at 12 but not 24 months for the Oswestry Disability Index (15.71, 95% confidence interval 19.3–10.01); compared to placebo for the Patient Specific Functional Scale (1.5, 95% confidence interval 0.7–2.2) but not the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire; and compared to high load lifting for the Patient Specific Functional Scale (1.8 95% confidence interval 2.8–0.7). Conclusions Stabilisation exercises are safe and equally effective to other treatments, and possibly superior for some outcomes at some time points. No or only mild adverse effects were reported. However, none of the studies measured fear avoidance as an outcome and we recommend this be included in future randomised controlled trials measuring the effectiveness of stabilisation exercises.

Diagnostic accuracy of self-report and subjective history in the diagnosis of low back pain with non-specific lower extremity symptoms: A systematic review

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Shultz ◽  
Kristina Averell ◽  
Angela Eickelman ◽  
Holly Sanker ◽  
Megan Burrowbridge Donaldson
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Low Back

scholarly journals Systematic Review of Effectiveness and Complications of Adhesiolysis in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: An Update

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 129-146
Author(s):  
Andrea M Trescot
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain

Background: Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis are interventional pain management techniques used to treat patients with refractory low back pain due to epidural scarring. Standard epidural steroid injections are often ineffective, especially in patients with prior back surgery. Adhesions in the epidural space can prevent the flow of medicine to the target area; lysis of these adhesions can improve the delivery of medication to the affected areas, potentially improving the therapeutic efficacy of the injected medications. Study Design: A systematic review utilizing the methodologic quality criteria of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials and the criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials. Objective: To evaluate and update the effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain due to radiculopathy, with or without prior lumbar surgery, since the 2005 systematic review. Methods: Basic search identified the relevant literature, in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BioMed databases (November 2004 to September 2006). Manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and abstracts from scientific meetings within the last 2 years were reviewed. Randomized and non-randomized studies are included in the review based on criteria established. Percutaneous adhesiolysis and endoscopic adhesiolysis are analyzed separately. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was significant pain relief (50% or greater). Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. Short-term relief was defined as less than 3 months, and long-term relief was defined as 3 months or longer. Results: Studies regarding the treatment of epidural adhesions for the treatment of low back and lower extremity pain were sought and reviewed. The evidence from the previous systematic review was combined with new studies since November 2004. There is strong evidence for short term and moderate evidence for long term effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopy. Conclusion: Percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopy may be effective interventions to treat low back and lower extremity pain caused by epidural adhesions. Key Words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, percutaneous adhesiolysis, spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, spinal stenosis, post lumbar laminectomy syndrome, epidural fibrosis, epidural adhesions, caudal neuroplasty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document