scholarly journals Compression shorts reduce prenatal pelvic and low back pain: a prospective quasi-experimental controlled study

PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e7080
Author(s):  
Jaclyn M. Szkwara ◽  
Wayne Hing ◽  
Rodney Pope ◽  
Evelyne Rathbone

BackgroundCommon prenatal ailments negatively impact performance of activities of daily living and it has been proposed that the use of dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses, more commonly referred to as compression garments, during pregnancy might aid in the reduction of pain from these ailments, allowing for improved functional capacity. However, the effectiveness of such garments in this context has not been established. This study aims to determine whether compression shorts are effective and thermally safe in the prevention and management of prenatal pelvic and low back pain (LBP).MethodA prospective quasi-experimental controlled study using parallel groups without random allocation was conducted, involving 55 childbearing women (gestational weeks 16–31) recruited from hospital and community-based maternity care providers. The compression shorts group (SG) wore SRC Pregnancy Shorts in addition to receiving usual care. The comparison group (CG) received usual care alone. Primary outcome measures—Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and secondary measures Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire - 7 (PFIQ-7) and SF-36 Short Form Health Survey—were assessed fortnightly over 6-weeks for both groups. The compression SG self-assessed daily their body temperatures to monitor thermal impact. Data analysis involved descriptive analyses of the primary and secondary outcome measures scores by group and time-point, and multivariable linear regressions to assess between-group differences in change scores at 6-weeks from baseline while controlling for baseline factors.ResultsAfter controlling for baseline scores, gestational weeks and parity, statistically significant differences in NPRS and RMDQ change scores between groups were in favour of the compression SG. At 6-weeks, mean (SD) NPRS change scores in the compression SG and CG were significantly different, at −0.38 (2.21) and 2.82 (2.68), respectively,p= 0.003. Mean (SD) RMDQ change scores in the compression SG and CG were also significantly different, at 0.46 (3.05) and 3.64 (3.32), respectively,p= 0.009. A total of 883 (99.7%) of the reported daily self-assessed body temperatures ranged between 35.4 and 38.0 °C when wearing the compression shorts. At 6-weeks, mean (SD) PFIQ-7 and SF-36 change scores in the compression SG and CG were not significantly different.ConclusionCompression shorts are effective and thermally safe for prenatal management of pelvic and LBP.RegistrationTrial registration was not required (Australian Government Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), 2018).

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-222
Author(s):  
Oluwadare Akanni Ogundipe ◽  
Olufemi Opeyemi Ogundiran

BACKGROUND: The use of physical modalities in treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) is potentially beneficial, but the general evidence still leaves questions about its security application. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to investigate and compare the relative efficacy of Vertical Oscillatory Pressure (VOP) and Transverse Oscillatory Pressure (TOP) in the management chronic low back pain (CLBP) of mechanical origin. METHODS: A two-group, quasi-experimental design was utilized, involving a total of forty-two participants purposively recruited with due consideration of the specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Five research questions were raised with corresponding hypotheses formulated for them, which were tested at 0.05 level of significance. The participants were randomly assigned to the VOP and TOP groups, and were subsequently managed thrice weekly for a duration of six weeks. The pain intensity rating, straight leg raising, and spinal range of motion were the outcome measures selected, which were assessed before and after treatment. Data were collected, organized, and analyzed using descriptive and T-Student test analytical statistics. RESULTS: The results of the study showed a significant difference in each of the outcome measures for both groups (p<0,05). CONCLUSION: This suggested that both VOP and VOP were relatively effective in managing CLBP.


2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 422-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen D. Kendall ◽  
Christie Schmidt ◽  
Reed Ferber

Context:It has been theorized that a positive Trendelenburg test (TT) indicates weakness of the stance hip-abductor (HABD) musculature, results in contralateral pelvic drop, and represents impaired load transfer, which may contribute to low back pain. Few studies have tested whether weakness of the HABDs is directly related to the magnitude of pelvic drop (MPD).Objective:To examine the relationship between HABD strength and MPD during the static TT and during walking for patients with nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) and healthy controls (CON). A secondary purpose was to examine this relationship in NSLBP after a 3-wk HABD-strengthening program.Design:Quasi-experimental.Setting:Clinical research laboratory.Participants:20 (10 NSLBP and 10 CON).Intervention:HABD strengthening.Main Outcome Measures:Normalized HABD strength, MPD during TT, and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion during walking.Results:At baseline, the NSLBP subjects were significantly weaker (31%; P = .03) than CON. No differences in maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion (P = .72), right MPD (P = 1.00), or left MPD (P = .40) were measured between groups. During the static TT, nonsignificant correlations were found between left HABD strength and right MPD for NSLBP (r = −.32, P = .36) and CON (r = −.24, P = .48) and between right HABD strength and left MPD for NSLBP (r = −.24, P = .50) and CON (r = −.41, P = .22). Nonsignificant correlations were found between HABD strength and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion for NSLBP (r = −.04, P = .90) and CON (r = −.14, P = .68). After strengthening, NSLBP demonstrated significant increases in HABD strength (12%; P = .02), 48% reduction in pain, and no differences in MPD during static TT and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion compared with baseline.Conclusions:HABD strength was poorly correlated to MPD during the static TT and during walking in CON and NSLBP. The results suggest that HABD strength may not be the only contributing factor in controlling pelvic stability, and the static TT has limited use as a measure of HABD function.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-116
Author(s):  
Dulce Marieli Danieli ◽  
Fabíola De Almeida Gomes ◽  
Bruna Eibel ◽  
William Dhein

INTRODUÇÃO: O diafragma é o principal músculo respiratório e desempenha um papel importante na respiração e na regulação fisiológica. Uma terapia que visa melhorar essas condições referentes ao diafragma, é a técnica de liberação manual diafragmática. OBJETIVO: O objetivo deste estudo foi verificar a aplicabilidade clínica das técnicas manuais de liberação diafragmática e identificar as principais técnicas, populações investigadas, variáveis avaliadas e seus desfechos. MÉTODOS: Foram pesquisadas as seguintes bases de dados: PubMed, Scielo e Science Direct, com os descritores “Diaphragm [Mesh]” e “Musculoskeletal Manipulations [Mesh]” com seus correspondentes no mesmo idioma. Foram incluídos ensaios clínicos randomizados, não randomizados, estudos semi, quase-experimentais e estudos pilotos ou de caso, que abordaram técnicas de liberação manuais diafragmáticas.RESULTADOS: Há variadas técnicas de liberação diafragmática, sendo as mais mencionadas: normalização dos pilares do diafragma, alongamento e estiramento do diafragma, relaxamento dos pilares do diafragma. Além disso, as técnicas de liberação diafragmática vêm sendo associadas a protocolos de terapia manipulativa osteopática (TMO). As principais populações estudadas foram de pacientes saudáveis, com lombalgia, cervicalgia, osteoartrite, asmáticos, doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica, constipados, cardiopatas e com refluxo gastroesofágico. Os principais desfechos avaliados são variáveis musculoesqueléticas (dor, flexibilidade, amplitude, espessura diafragmática), variáveis cardiorrespiratórias (pressão inspiratória/expiratória máxima (PImax e Pemax), mobilidade torácica, frequência cardíaca e respiratória), qualidade de vida e disfunções gastrointestinais/gastroesofágicas. CONCLUSÃO: A aplicabilidade clínica das técnicas de liberação diagramática está sendo investigada associado com outras técnicas osteopáticas, em protocolos de TMO em pacientes saudáveis, pneumopatas, cardiopatas, gestantes, em cicatriz pós-cirúrgica, constipados, com refluxo gastroesofágico, osteoartrite, cervicalgia e com lombalgia. Evidencia-se: diminuição ou eliminação das dores musculoesqueléticas, aumento da flexibilidade, ADM, Pimáx e Pemáx, aumento da mobilidade torácica, aumento da qualidade de vida, diminuição do inchaço e dor abdominal e sem efeito em cardiopatas.ABSTRACT. Clinical applicability of manual diaphragmatic release techniques: a systematic review.BACKGROUND: The diaphragm is the main respiratory muscle and plays an important role in breathing and physiological regulation. A therapy that aims to improve these conditions regarding the diaphragm, is the manual diaphragmatic release technique.OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to verify the clinical applicability of manual diaphragmatic release techniques and searching the main techniques, population, evaluated variables, and outcomes. METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Scielo, and Science Direct, with the descriptors “Diaphragm [Mesh]” and “Musculoskeletal Manipulations [Mesh]” with their correspondents in the same language. There were included randomized clinical trial, non-randomized clinical trials, semi, and quasi-experimental studies, and pilot or case studies, which addressed manual diaphragmatic release techniques.RESULTS: There are various diaphragmatic release techniques, the most mentioned are: normalization of the diaphragm pillars, stretching of the diaphragm, relaxation of the diaphragm pillars, and protocols for osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT) for the diaphragm. The main populations studied were healthy patients, with low back pain, asthmatics, chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, constipated, cardiac patients, and gastroesophageal reflux. The main outcomes assessed are musculoskeletal variables (pain, flexibility, range of motion, diaphragmatic thickness), cardiorespiratory variables (maximal inspiratory/expiratory pressure (MIP and MEP), chest mobility, heart, and respiratory rate), quality of life, and gastrointestinal/ gastroesophageal disorders.CONCLUSION: The clinical applicability of diagrammatic release techniques is being investigated in association with other osteopathic techniques, in protocols of OMT in healthy subjects, patients with lung diseases, heart disease, pregnant women, scar tissue, constipated, with gastroesophageal reflux, osteoarthritis, cervicalgia and with low back pain. There is evidence of reduction and elimination of musculoskeletal pain, increased MIP, increased chest mobility, an increase in health quality, a decrease of bloating and abdominal pain related to constipation, and a decrease of reflux symptoms.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Rhon ◽  
Julie Fritz ◽  
Joshua Cleland ◽  
Deydre Teyhen
Keyword(s):  

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Rhon ◽  
Julie Fritz ◽  
Joshua Cleland ◽  
Deydre Teyhen
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e001068
Author(s):  
Shaun Wellburn ◽  
Cormac G Ryan ◽  
Andrew Coxon ◽  
Alastair J Dickson ◽  
D John Dickson ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEvaluate the outcomes and explore experiences of patients undergoing a residential combined physical and psychological programme (CPPP) for chronic low back pain.DesignA longitudinal observational cohort design, with a parallel qualitative design using semistructured interviews.SettingResidential, multimodal rehabilitation.Participants136 adults (62 male/74 female) referred to the CPPP, 100 (44 male/56 female) of whom completed the programme, during the term of the study. Ten (2 male/8 female) participated in the qualitative evaluation.InterventionA 3-week residential CPPP.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome measures were the STarT Back screening tool score; pain intensity—11-point Numerical Rating Scale; function—Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); health status/quality of life—EQ-5D-5L EuroQol five-Dimension-five level; anxiety—Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; depression—Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Secondary outcome measures were the Global Subjective Outcome Scale; National Health Service Friends and Family Test;.ResultsAt discharge, 6 and 12 months follow ups, there were improvements from baseline that were greater than minimum clinically important differences in each of the outcomes (with the sole exception of ODI at discharge). At 12 months, the majority of people considered themselves a lot better (57%) and were extremely likely (86%) to recommend the programme to a friend. The qualitative data showed praise for the residential nature of the intervention and the opportunities for interaction with peers and peer support. There were testimonies of improvements in understanding of pain and how to manage it better. Some participants said they had reduced, or stopped, medication they had been taking to manage their pain.ConclusionsParticipants improved, and maintained long term, beyond minimum clinically important differences on a wide range of outcomes. Participants reported an enhanced ability to self-manage their back pain and support for the residential setting.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 365-368
Author(s):  
William B. Weeks ◽  
Jason Pike ◽  
Christopher J. Schaeffer ◽  
Mathew J. Devine ◽  
John M. Ventura ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Groff ◽  
Andrew T. Dailey ◽  
Zoher Ghogawala ◽  
Daniel K. Resnick ◽  
William C. Watters ◽  
...  

The utilization of pedicle screw fixation as an adjunct to posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) has become routine, but demonstration of a definitive benefit remains problematic. The medical evidence indicates that the addition of pedicle screw fixation to PLF increases fusion rates when assessed with dynamic radiographs. More recent evidence, since publication of the 2005 Lumbar Fusion Guidelines, suggests a stronger association between radiographic fusion and clinical outcome, although, even now, no clear correlation has been demonstrated. Although several reports suggest that clinical outcomes are improved with the addition of pedicle screw fixation, there are conflicting findings from similarly classified evidence. Furthermore, the largest contemporary, randomized, controlled study on this topic failed to demonstrate a significant clinical benefit with the use of pedicle screw fixation in patients undergoing PLF for chronic low-back pain. This absence of proof should not, however, be interpreted as proof of absence. Several limitations continue to compromise these investigations. For example, in the majority of studies the sample size is insufficient to detect small increments in clinical outcome that may be observed with pedicle screw fixation. Therefore, no definitive statement regarding the efficacy of pedicle screw fixation as a means to improve functional outcomes in patients undergoing PLF for chronic low-back pain can be made. There appears to be consistent evidence suggesting that pedicle screw fixation increases the costs and complication rate of PLF. High-risk patients, including (but not limited to) patients who smoke, patients who are undergoing revision surgery, or patients who suffer from medical conditions that may compromise fusion potential, may appreciate a greater benefit with supplemental pedicle screw fixation. It is recommended, therefore, that the use of pedicle screw fixation as a supplement to PLF be reserved for those patients in whom there is an increased risk of nonunion when treated with only PLF.


Author(s):  
Collins Ogbeivor

Introduction: Research evidence suggests that a stratified care management approach is better at improving clinical and economic outcomes for low back pain (LBP) patients compared with usual care in the short term. However, it is unclear if these health and economic benefits are sustainable in the longer term. The aim of this study was, therefore, to determine the effectiveness of stratified care compared with standard physiotherapy for LBP treatment. Methodology: A comprehensive search was undertaken of seven electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Pedro, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Register for Controlled Trials, and Web of Science with full text). Although no time limits were applied, studies were limited to English language publications and those involving human participants only. Study selection, data extraction, and appraisal of study were independently undertaken by both reviewers (CO and LE). Result: In total, 6842 patients (aged 18 years and above) were included in the eight trials reviewed;  four were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four were non-RCTs. The pooled analysis of three studies (n = 2460) demonstrated a strong evidence in favor of stratified care over standard care at improving overall pain (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) [random] 0.46 [95% CI 0.21, 0.71]; P < 0.0003), with overall effect (Z = 3.6) and (Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ) scores (WMD [random] 0.71 [95% CI 0.05, 1.37]; P < 0.03), with overall effect (Z = 2.11) at three-, four-, and six-months’ follow-up periods. Conclusion: This current review demonstrated that a stratified care approach provides substantial clinical, economic, and health-related cost benefits in the medium- and high-risk subgroups compared with usual care. Further research is needed for longer-term benefits.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document