-
Gait & Posture Jan 2022Development of more effective interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), requires a robust theoretical framework regarding mechanisms underlying the...
BACKGROUND
Development of more effective interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), requires a robust theoretical framework regarding mechanisms underlying the persistence of LBP. Altered movement patterns, possibly driven by pain-related cognitions, are assumed to drive pain persistence, but cogent evidence is missing.
AIM
To assess variability and stability of lumbar movement patterns, during repetitive seated reaching, in people with and without LBP, and to investigate whether these movement characteristics are associated with pain-related cognitions.
METHODS
60 participants were recruited, matched by age and sex (30 back-healthy and 30 with LBP). Mean age was 32.1 years (SD13.4). Mean Oswestry Disability Index-score in LBP-group was 15.7 (SD12.7). Pain-related cognitions were assessed by the 'Pain Catastrophizing Scale' (PCS), 'Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale' (PASS) and the task-specific 'Expected Back Strain' scale(EBS). Participants performed a seated repetitive reaching movement (45 times), at self-selected speed. Lumbar movement patterns were assessed by an optical motion capture system recording positions of cluster markers, located on the spinous processes of S1 and T8. Movement patterns were characterized by the spatial variability (meanSD) of the lumbar Euler angles: flexion-extension, lateral-bending, axial-rotation, temporal variability (CyclSD) and local dynamic stability (LDE). Differences in movement patterns, between people with and without LBP and with high and low levels of pain-related cognitions, were assessed with factorial MANOVA.
RESULTS
We found no main effect of LBP on variability and stability, but there was a significant interaction effect of group and EBS. In the LBP-group, participants with high levels of EBS, showed increased MeanSD (p = 0.004, η = 0.14), indicating a large effect. MeanSD approached significance (p = 0.06).
SIGNIFICANCE
In people with LBP, spatial variability was predicted by the task-specific EBS, but not by the general measures of pain-related cognitions. These results suggest that a high level of EBS is a driver of increased spatial variability, in participants with LBP.
Topics: Adult; Biomechanical Phenomena; Cognition; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Lumbosacral Region; Movement; Range of Motion, Articular; Rotation
PubMed: 34740059
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.10.032 -
Indian Pediatrics Mar 2014
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Back; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Impetigo; Skin; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 24736928
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... May 2013
Topics: Abdominal Wall; Aged; Back; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Collateral Circulation; Edema; Face; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Pneumonia; Superior Vena Cava Syndrome; Thorax
PubMed: 23584299
DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182843a10 -
Veterinary Research Communications Dec 2023Equine back function is of concern to riders, as well as to veterinarians and physiotherapists; these groups may benefit from knowledge about spinal motion on the...
Equine back function is of concern to riders, as well as to veterinarians and physiotherapists; these groups may benefit from knowledge about spinal motion on the circle. This descriptive and comparative study aimed to quantify equine neck, back and pelvic motion in walk, trot and canter on a 9 m circle. Sixteen healthy horses in training, of varying breed and conformation, were measured using optical motion capture (150 Hz), with optical markers on the poll, withers, T15, tubera coxae and lumbosacral joint. Cervicothoracic and thoracolumbar flexion-extension and lateral bending, and pelvic roll, pitch and yaw, were statistically evaluated using mixed models. Motion patterns showed distinct differences between gaits, but were generally similar between horses. The thoracolumbar back was bent towards the inside of the circle (stride mean 5-6º for all gaits). The cervicothoracic spine was more flexed in walk (18°), and more extended in canter (-4--8°), compared to trot (6-7°), whereas the thoracolumbar spine was slightly less extended in canter than in walk. Thoracolumbar flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) increased from walk (4°) to canter (9°), as did pelvic pitch ROM (walk 7° and canter 15-16°), while back lateral bending ROM and pelvic yaw ROM were lowest in trot. Taken together, the study findings suggest that neck and back motion patterns on the circle reflect an interaction between the constraints of circular movement, and the mechanics and characteristics of each gait.
Topics: Horses; Animals; Biomechanical Phenomena; Gait; Back; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 37127806
DOI: 10.1007/s11259-023-10132-y -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Jun 2022Balance and posture are two topics that have been extensively studied, although with some conflicting findings. Therefore, the aim of this work is to analyze the...
Balance and posture are two topics that have been extensively studied, although with some conflicting findings. Therefore, the aim of this work is to analyze the relationship between the postural angles of the spine in the sagittal plane and the stable static balance. A cross-sectional study was conducted with children and adolescents from schools in northern Portugal in 2019. An online questionnaire was used to characterize the sample and analyze back pain. Spinal postural angle assessment (pelvic, lumbar, and thoracic) was performed using the Spinal Mouse, while stabilometry assessment was performed using Namrol Podoprint. Statistical significance was set as α = 0.05. The results showed that girls have better balance variables. There is a weak correlation between the anthropometric variables with stabilometry variables and the postural angles. This correlation is mostly negative, except for the thoracic spine with anthropometric variables and the lumbar spine with BMI. The results showed that postural angles of the spine are poor predictors of the stabilometric variables. Concerning back pain, increasing the postural angle of the thoracic spine increases the odds ratio of manifestation of back pain by 3%.
Topics: Adolescent; Animals; Back Pain; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Lumbosacral Region; Mice; Postural Balance; Posture; Spine
PubMed: 35808468
DOI: 10.3390/s22134973 -
Journal of Thermal Biology Dec 2023Infrared thermography (IRT) is a non-harmful, risk-free imaging technique and it has application for healthy and pathological population.
BACKGROUND
Infrared thermography (IRT) is a non-harmful, risk-free imaging technique and it has application for healthy and pathological population.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to evaluate the thermographic profiles of the back of sport practitioners from different disciplines and compare it with those of sedentary healthy individuals.
METHOD
The back of 160 healthy subjects were evaluated, and participants were grouped considering their sport practice: team sport (TS), individual sport (IS), weight training (WT), inactive (I). Three regions of interest were identified to analyze the cervical, thoracic and lumbar temperatures of the back.
RESULTS
The Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) resulted significant showing statistical differences for the cervical (p < 0.001), dorsal (p = 0.0011), and lumbar areas (p = 0.0366). The Tukey post-hoc test for pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between groups. For the cervical area significance was found between the IN and WT group (p = 0.002), the IN and IS group (p < 0.001), IN and TS group (p = 0.020). The dorsal area resulted significant between the IN and WT group (p = 0.007), the IN and IS group (p < 0.001), IN and TS group. The lumbar area showed significant differences only between the IN and WT group and the IN and IS group (p = 0.043).
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrated that inactive individuals manifest a statistically significant higher temperature in the cervical, dorsal and lumbar area of the back compared to sportive individuals.
Topics: Humans; Thermography; Skin Temperature; Temperature; Lumbosacral Region; Fever
PubMed: 38000144
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2023.103751 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2008Lumbar supports are used in the treatment of low-back pain patients, to prevent the onset of low-back pain (primary prevention) or to prevent recurrences of a low-back... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Lumbar supports are used in the treatment of low-back pain patients, to prevent the onset of low-back pain (primary prevention) or to prevent recurrences of a low-back pain episode (secondary prevention).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of lumbar supports for prevention and treatment of non-specific low-back pain.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We updated the search in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL to December 2006. We also screened references given in relevant reviews and identified trials, and contacted experts to identify additional RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that reported on any type of lumbar supports as preventive or therapeutic intervention for non-specific low-back pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
One review author generated the electronic search. Two review authors independently identified trials that met the inclusion criteria. One review author extracted data on the study population, interventions, and final results. The methodological quality and the clinical relevance were independently assessed by two review authors. Because it was not possible to perform a quantitative analysis, we performed a qualitative analysis in which the strength of evidence on the effectiveness of lumbar supports was classified as strong, moderate, limited, conflicting, or no evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven preventive studies (14,437 people) and eight treatment studies (1361 people) were included in this updated review. Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was rather low. Only five of the fifteen studies met 50% or more of the internal validity items. There was moderate evidence that lumbar supports are not more effective than no intervention or training in preventing low-back pain, and conflicting evidence whether lumbar supports are effective supplements to other preventive interventions. It is still unclear if lumbar supports are more effective than no or other interventions for the treatment of low-back pain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate evidence that lumbar supports are not more effective than no intervention or training in preventing low-back pain, and conflicting evidence whether they are effective supplements to other preventive interventions. It remains unclear whether lumbar supports are more effective than no or other interventions for treating low-back pain. There is still a need for high quality randomized trials on the effectiveness of lumbar supports. One of the most essential issues to tackle in these future trials seems to be the realization of an adequate compliance. Special attention should be paid to different outcome measures, types of patients and types of lumbar support.
Topics: Braces; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbosacral Region; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 18425875
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001823.pub3 -
Journal of Healthcare Engineering 2022Lumbopelvic kinematics has been observed to include different parameters and directly relate to the movement of the hip spine. In the current scenario, more than 65... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Lumbopelvic kinematics has been observed to include different parameters and directly relate to the movement of the hip spine. In the current scenario, more than 65 million people have been suffering from spinal pain, and 18% of adults experience chronic spinal pain.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis selected 9 studies for analysis via electronic databases like EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane (CENTRAL). After collecting the data, the dataset has been systematically analyzed through statistical methodologies using RevMan and Stata.
RESULTS
Out of 116 studies initially scrutinized, nine were finally selected for the meta-analysis. When range of motion was studied via meta-analysis, it was noted that a considerable reduced movement was noted in the lumbar region of the spine when people were suffering from lower back pain in comparison to control group people. Hence, reduced lumbar range of motion, no difference in the angle of lordosis, and no significant difference in extension and rotation in people with lower back pain were found. However, variability was noted in people suffering from lower back pain for flexion and lateral flexion. A significant heterogeneity was found between the studies which lacked some details and standardization of the criteria which were used for defining patients with lower back pain or without them (control group). Results show that spinal pain is the main reason behind the limitation of lumbar range of motion. It is clear from the data set of mean and standard deviation, and this is clear to establish the relationship between the causes of pelvic and spinal pain. In flexion-based ROM, the mean difference was found to be -9.77 (95% CI: -21.86, 2.32). Similarly, for lateral flexion, the mean difference was found to be -5.58 (with 95% CI: -10.38, -0.79).
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that spinal disease is too influential for people; thereby, it affects day-to-day life activities by creating painful and restricted movements. It is concluded that people suffering from lower back pain have reduced proprioception and range of movement in the lumbar region when compared to control groups with no lower back pain, which mainly focus on flexion and lateral flexion.
Topics: Adult; Biomechanical Phenomena; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Lumbosacral Region; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 35345658
DOI: 10.1155/2022/7369242 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Oct 2008Low back pain (LBP) affects about 70% of people in resource-rich countries at some point. Acute low back pain is usually perceived as self-limiting; however, one year... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Low back pain (LBP) affects about 70% of people in resource-rich countries at some point. Acute low back pain is usually perceived as self-limiting; however, one year later, as many as 33% of people still have moderate-intensity pain and 15% have severe pain. It has a high recurrence rate; 75% of those with a first episode have a recurrence. Although acute episodes may resolve completely, they may also increase in severity and duration over time.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of oral drug treatments for low back pain? What are the effects of local injections for low back pain? What are the effects of non-drug treatments for low back pain? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 34 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: acupuncture, advice to stay active, analgesics (paracetamol, opioids), back exercises, back schools, bed rest, behavioural therapy, electromyographic biofeedback, epidural corticosteroid injections, lumbar supports, massage, multidisciplinary treatment programmes, muscle relaxants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), spinal manipulation (in the short term), temperature treatments (short wave diathermy, ultrasound, ice, heat), traction, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS).
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbosacral Region; Manipulation, Spinal
PubMed: 19445792
DOI: No ID Found -
Anaesthesia Oct 1980
Topics: Back Pain; Denervation; Humans; Lumbosacral Region
PubMed: 6449879
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1980.tb05017.x