scholarly journals Effects of a movement control and tactile acuity training in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain and control impairment – a randomised controlled pilot study

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina van Baal ◽  
Jana Allofs ◽  
Katja Ehrenbrusthoff ◽  
Christian Grüneberg ◽  
Thomas Hering ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background Nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a heterogeneous condition that is associated with complex neuromuscular adaptations. Exercise is a widely administered treatment, but its effects are small to moderate. Tailoring patient-specific exercise treatments based on subgroup classification may improve patient outcomes. Objective In this randomised controlled pilot study, our objective was to compare the feasibility and possible effects of a specific sensorimotor treatment (SMT) with those of a general exercise (GE) programme on patients with NSCLBP and control impairment (CI). Methods Patients with NSCLBP and CI were randomised into an SMT or a GE programme spanning 6 sessions each. The feasibility criteria included the study design, assessments, interventions and magnitudes of effects, and costs. Adverse events were documented. Primary (pain, physical function, and quality of life) and secondary outcomes were assessed three times: twice at baseline (t1a and t1b) to estimate parameter stability and once after the intervention (t2). Results Two-hundred and twenty-seven patients were screened to include 34 participants with NSCLBP and CI. Both treatment programmes and the assessments seemed feasible because their durations and contents were perceived as adequate. The total cost per participant was €321. Two adverse events occurred (one not likely related to the SMT, one likely related to the GE intervention). The SMT showed a tendency for superior effects in terms of pain severity (SMT t1a 3.5, t2 1.1; GE t1a 3.0, t2 2.0), pain interference (SMT t1a 1.9, t2 0.4; GE t1a 1.5, t2 0.9), physical component of quality of life (SMT t1a 39, t2 46; GE t1a 45, t2 48), and movement control. Conclusions The SMT approach proposed in this study is feasible and should be tested thoroughly in future studies, possibly as an addition to GE. To ensure the detection of differences in pain severity between SMT and GE in patients with NSCLBP with 80% power, future studies should include 110 patients. If the current results are confirmed, SMT should be considered in interventions for patients with NSCLBP and CI. Trial registration Registered in the German Register for Clinical Trials (Trial registration date: November 11, 2016; Trial registration number: DRKS00011063; URL of trial registry record); retrospectively registered.

Disability and quality of life in patients with low back pain: Focus on sex and gender: A cross-sectional study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Yen-Mou Lu ◽  
Chung-Hwan Chen ◽  
Yi-Jing Lue
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
Gender Role ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sex And Gender ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
And Gender

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender affect responses to pain, but little is known about disability and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of sex and gender on disability and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with low back pain. METHODS: Ninety-three patients with low back pain were included in this cross-sectional survey study. Disability, HRQOL and gender identity were respectively assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form-36 and Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were classified into four gender role orientations (masculinity, femininity, androgyny and undifferentiated). One-way analysis of variance was used to analyze both the sex and the gender role orientation. RESULTS: Females had higher disability than males (p< 0.05), but in gender identity, no significant difference was found. Seven domains of HRQOL were lower than the healthy norms. Males experienced greater impacts than females on vitality and mental health (p< 0.05). For gender identity, five domains of HRQOL had significant differences (p< 0.05). Masculinity orientation had the least impact on four domains (p< 0.05), while undifferentiated orientation had the largest impact on all domains. CONCLUSION: Sex and gender effects can be used to analyze disability and HRQOL in patients with low back pain. Females have higher disability, while HRQOL is greatly influenced by different gender role orientations.

scholarly journals Influence of Pilates Method on Nonspecific Lumbar Pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (04) ◽  
pp. 300-305
Author(s):  
Ana Carla Schimidt ◽  
Paula de Oliveira Herzinger ◽  
Danielle Pacheco Matias ◽  
Leonardo C. Welling
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Perception ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Lumbar Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Reduction Of Pain ◽  
Pilates Method

AbstractLow back pain is defined as pain located between the lower rib cage and the gluteal folds, and its etiology is multifactorial, considerably affecting quality of life. The aim of this literature review was to analyze the influence of the Pilates method on the symptoms of patients with nonspecific low back pain, which is considered a promising treatment for this type of pathology. A narrative review of the literature was carried out using the PubMed, Pedro, Scopus and Scielo databases. To perform the search, Pilates AND Low back nonspecific AND Pain were used as keywords. Articles published in the last 5 years, randomized clinical trials that verified the influence of the Pilates method in adult individuals with unspecified low back pain and full text in English were included. Of the 77 articles identified, 7 articles met the inclusion criteria, 7 analyzed the primary outcomes of pain intensity and disability, 5 articles compared Pilates with other rehabilitation techniques and 2 studies compared the effectiveness of Pilates solo with Pilates apparatus. It was concluded that all the techniques that were compared with Pilates are effective, being difficult to affirm the superiority of Pilates over them in relation to the reduction of pain and disability and improvement of quality of life. However, the Pilates method has shown good results in pain perception and intensity, functional capacity, fear of movement and the idea that movement can worsen your condition, muscle strength, range of motion and flexibility.

The Use of Breathing Exercises in the Treatment of Chronic, Nonspecific Low Back Pain

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 452-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barton E. Anderson ◽  
Kellie C. Huxel Bliven
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lung Function ◽  
Clinical Scenario ◽  
Clinical Question ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
Breathing Exercises

Clinical Scenario:Research has shown a link between poor core stability and chronic, nonspecific low back pain, with data to suggest that alterations in core muscle activation patterns, breathing patterns, lung function, and diaphragm mechanics may occur. Traditional treatment approaches for chronic, nonspecific low back pain focus on exercise and manual therapy interventions, however it is not clear whether breathing exercises are effective in treating back pain.Focused Clinical Question:In adults with chronic, nonspecific low back pain, are breathing exercises effective in reducing pain, improving respiratory function, and/or health related quality of life?Summary of Key Findings:Following a literature search, 3 studies were identified for inclusion in the review. All reviewed studies were critically appraised at level 2 evidence and reported improvements in either low back pain or quality of life following breathing program intervention.Clinical Bottom Line:Exercise programs were shown to be effective in improving lung function, reducing back pain, and improving quality of life. Breathing program frequencies ranged from daily to 2–3 times per week, with durations ranging from 4 to 8 weeks. Based on these results, athletic trainers and physical therapists caring for patients with chronic, nonspecific low back pain should consider the inclusion of breathing exercises for the treatment of back pain when such treatments align with the clinician’s own judgment and clinical expertise and the patient’s preferences and values.Strength of Recommendation:Grade B evidence exists to support the use of breathing exercises in the treatment of chronic, nonspecific low back pain.

scholarly journals Prognostic ability of STarT Back Screening Tool combined with work-related factors in patients with low back pain in primary care: a prospective study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e046446
Author(s):  
Monica Unsgaard-Tøndel ◽  
Ottar Vasseljen ◽  
Tom Ivar Lund Nilsen ◽  
Gard Myhre ◽  
Hilde Stendal Robinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Related Factors

ObjectivePrimary care screening tools for patients with low back pain may improve outcome by identifying modifiable obstacles for recovery. The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) consists of nine biological and psychological items, with less focus on work-related factors. We aimed at testing the prognostic ability of SBST and the effect of adding items for future and present work ability.MethodsProspective observational study in patients (n=158) attending primary care physical therapy for low back pain. The prognostic ability of SBST and the added prognostic value of two work items; expectation for future work ability and current work ability, were calculated for disability, pain and quality of life outcome at 3 months follow-up. The medium and high-risk group in the SBST were collapsed in the analyses due to few patients in the high-risk group. The prognostic ability was assessed using the explained variance (R2) of the outcomes from univariable and multivariable linear regression and beta values with 95% CIs were used to assess the prognostic value of individual items.ResultsThe SBST classified 107 (67.7%) patients as low risk and 51 (32.3%) patients as medium/high risk. SBST provided prognostic ability for disability (R2=0.35), pain (R2=0.25) and quality of life (R2=0.28). Expectation for return to work predicted outcome in univariable analyses but provided limited additional prognostic ability when added to the SBST. Present work ability provided additional prognostic ability for disability (β=−2.5; 95% CI=−3.6 to −1.4), pain (β=−0.2; 95% CI=−0.5 to −0.002) and quality of life (β=0.02; 95% CI=0.001 to 0.04) in the multivariable analyses. The explained variance (R2) when work ability was added to the SBST was 0.60, 0.49 and 0.47 for disability, pain and quality of life, respectively.ConclusionsAdding one work ability item to the SBST gives additional prognostic information across core outcomes.Clinical trial number:NCT03626389

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document