scholarly journals Effect of Movement Control Spinal Exercise Programme on Pain and Mobility in Individual with Non-Specific Low Back Pain

2021 ◽  
pp. 292-298
Author(s):  
Celina Elias D’souza ◽  
Sandeep Shinde ◽  
Prachiti Bhore
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Total Duration ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Exercise Programme ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Test Assessment ◽  
Post Test ◽  
The Individual

Background: Low back pain is the most common condition that affects the majority of the population with up to 84% lifetime prevalence. A specific diagnosis of low back pain is only possible in 15% of patients and the majority of cases the pain is non – specific low back pain (NSLBP). The main objectives were to assess the effect of movement control spinal exercises (MVCSE) on NSLBP and to examine the effect of MCSE on mobility. Methods: The study was conducted in the physiotherapy out-patient department. After screening of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 35 individuals with NSLBP were selected. A pre-test assessment was done, the protocol included warmup sessions, exercise protocol and cool down sessions. Exercises were demonstrated to the patients according to the spinal movements control impairment, the total duration of the protocol was of 6 weeks with one session of 1 hour per day. Later the post- test assessment was done and further statistical analysis was done. Results: After 6 weeks post evaluation, patients with flexion movement control impairment (MVCI) had improvement in their movement control; extension, lateral and rotational movement control impairments were the same as before. Conclusion: The patient- specific functional complaints and disabilities improved significantly after implementation of the individual based specific exercise programme, along with the regular physiotherapeutic interventions. Movement Control Spinal Exercise treatment has shown results in improving mobility and disability in the short term and long term for individuals with NSLBP and MVCI to than other interventions.

scholarly journals Movement Control Impairment and Low Back Pain: State of the Art of Diagnostic Framing

Medicina ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (9) ◽  
pp. 548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvioli ◽  
Pozzi ◽  
Testa
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Property A ◽  
Rater Reliability

Background and objectives: Low back pain is one of the most common health problems. In 85% of cases, it is not possible to identify a specific cause, and it is therefore called Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP). Among the various attempted classifications, the subgroup of patients with impairment of motor control of the lower back (MCI) is between the most studied. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the results from trials about validity and reliability of clinical tests aimed to identify MCI in the NSLBP population. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and MedNar databases have been searched until May 2018. The criteria for inclusion were clinical trials about evaluation methods that are affordable and applicable in a usual clinical setting and conducted on populations aged > 18 years. A single author summarized data in synoptic tables relating to the clinical property; a second reviewer intervened in case of doubts about the relevance of the studies. Results: 13 primary studies met the inclusion criteria: 10 investigated inter-rater reliability, 4 investigated intra-rater reliability, and 6 investigated validity for a total of 23 tests (including one cluster of tests). Inter-rater reliability is widely studied, and there are tests with good, consistent, and substantial values (waiter’s bow, prone hip extension, sitting knee extension, and one leg stance). Intra-rater reliability has been less investigated, and no test have been studied for more than one author. The results of the few studies about validity aim to discriminate only the presence or absence of LBP in the samples. Conclusions: At the state of the art, results related to reliability support the clinical use of the identified tests. No conclusions can be drawn about validity.

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.

A Patient-specific Approach for Measuring Functional Status in Low Back Pain

Physiotherapy ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 82 (8) ◽  
pp. 467 ◽  
Author(s):  
AJHM Beurskens ◽  
HCW de Vet ◽  
AJA Köke
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Specific Approach

scholarly journals Physical activity in patients with nonspecific low back painin therapy

2021 ◽  
pp. 67-72
Author(s):  
V. A. Parfenov ◽  
I. A. Lamkova
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Therapy Group ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Lumbar Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Standard Therapy Group ◽  
The Individual

Introduction. Kinesitherapy (KT) – one of the leading areas of patient care with chronic nonspecific (musculoskeletal pain) low back pain. For chronic lumbar pain, a standard KT is commonly used, that includes group sessions with a medical specialist. Often not taking into account the individual characteristics of patients, their attitude to KT, does not use a backpain education program in combination with KT (extended KT). Physical activity and hypodynamia are compared in patients with chronic nonspecificlow back pain in standard KT and extended KT.Aim of study is to assess the effectiveness of the standard and extended KT in the enhancement of physical activity.Materials and methods. 71 patients were observed (17 men and 54 women, average age 55.09 ± 13 years) with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Patients received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as painkillers. 34 patients received a standard KT, 37 patients – an extended KT. Patients were asked to complete the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) at baseline, after 7 days and 90 days.Results and discussion. In the extended KT group, physical activity increased from 11 (7–16) points to 16 (13–19) points after 7 days (p = 0.001) and up to 23 (15–26) points after 3 months (p = 0.0002). There has been a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of patients with hypodynamy (p = 0.0015). There is no statistically significant increase in physical activity in the standard therapy group. The use of NSAIDs in non-specific low back pain is discussed, the effectiveness of the use of dexketoprofen (Dexalgin) during lumbar pain is noted.Conclusion. In the case of nonspecific low back pain, the extended KTimprovesphysical activity and reduce hypodynamy.

scholarly journals Effect of Global Postural Reeducation Exercise on Pain and Hip Muscle Flexibility in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain and Movement Control Dysfunction

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 148-154
Author(s):  
Bahram Sheikhi
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Hip Muscle ◽  
Hamstring Muscles ◽  
Hip Muscles ◽  
Tensor Fasciae Latae

Introduction: Patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and movement control dysfunction demonstrate alternation in hip muscles flexibility and spinal movement patterns. Therapeutic modalities that augment hip muscles flexibility could help these patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of global postural reeducation (GPR) on pain and hip muscle flexibility in patients with NSLBP and movement control dysfunction. Materials and Methods: A total of 27 men with a mean age of 31.21±2.5147 years, height of 166.44±6.11 cm, and weight of 64.21±5.25 kg participated in this study. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain. The flexibility of hip muscles (rectus femoris, tensor fasciae latae, external rotators and hamstring) was measured using universal goniometer. All data were assessed at baseline and after the intervention. The Shapiro-Wilk test and paired t test were used for statistical analysis at significance level of P=0.05. Results: Our results revealed a decline in pain (P<0.004) and an increase in the flexibility of the hamstring muscles in the right (P<0.003) and left (P<0.003) legs. There were no statistically significant differences in the flexibility of rectus femoris muscle, external rotators, and tensor fasciae latae. Conclusion: The results suggest that GPR had a significant effect on the level of pain. Further, it affected the flexibility of hamstring muscles in legs. Using GPR is recommended for pain relief and improving the flexibility of hamstring muscles in patients with NSLBP.

Movement control impairment tests in patients with low back pain and healthy controls and its correlation with clinical measures

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 58
Author(s):  
AlagappanThangamani Ramalingam ◽  
SN Senthilkumar ◽  
ShaikhRahila Banu Mohammed Hanif ◽  
SolankiKrutikaben Rameshbhai ◽  
SurtiAatekabanu Mohamed Kasim
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Clinical Measures ◽  
Movement Control Impairment

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document