QUESTION: Is eight weeks of high-intensity strengthening of the isolated lumbar extensors more effective than low-intensity strengthening or no strengthening? Are any gains maintained 16 weeks later? DESIGN: Randomised, three-arm trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat-analysis. Participants in the waiting list control group were randomised again, after the first 8 weeks, to either the high-intensity or the low-intensity strengthening program. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-five army personnel with non-specific chronic low back pain. INTERVENTION: The high-intensity training group received 10 sessions of 15 to 20 repetitions for the isolated lumbar extensor muscles. The low-intensity training group received a nonprogressive, low-intensity resistance protocol. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were global perceived effect and disability. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, fear of movement/(re-)injury, and isometric lumbar extensor muscle strength. Measures were taken before and after the training and 16 weeks later. RESULTS: At eight weeks, SF-36 overall score was on average 7% (95% CI 1 to 13) greater in the high-intensity training group compared with the low-intensity training group and the waiting list control group, and self-assessed decrease of back symptoms was on average 39% (95% CI 14 to 64) greater in the high-intensity training group compared with the waiting list control group. There was no difference in improvement between the groups for any other outcome at 8 weeks or 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Although some beneficial effects were found, the results of this high-intensity strengthening program of the isolated lumbar extensor muscles do not clearly support the generally-claimed beneficial influence of exercise for chronic non-specific low back pain.
RCT Entities:
QUESTION: Is eight weeks of high-intensity strengthening of the isolated lumbar extensors more effective than low-intensity strengthening or no strengthening? Are any gains maintained 16 weeks later? DESIGN: Randomised, three-arm trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat-analysis. Participants in the waiting list control group were randomised again, after the first 8 weeks, to either the high-intensity or the low-intensity strengthening program. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-five army personnel with non-specific chronic low back pain. INTERVENTION: The high-intensity training group received 10 sessions of 15 to 20 repetitions for the isolated lumbar extensor muscles. The low-intensity training group received a nonprogressive, low-intensity resistance protocol. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were global perceived effect and disability. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, fear of movement/(re-)injury, and isometric lumbar extensor muscle strength. Measures were taken before and after the training and 16 weeks later. RESULTS: At eight weeks, SF-36 overall score was on average 7% (95% CI 1 to 13) greater in the high-intensity training group compared with the low-intensity training group and the waiting list control group, and self-assessed decrease of back symptoms was on average 39% (95% CI 14 to 64) greater in the high-intensity training group compared with the waiting list control group. There was no difference in improvement between the groups for any other outcome at 8 weeks or 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Although some beneficial effects were found, the results of this high-intensity strengthening program of the isolated lumbar extensor muscles do not clearly support the generally-claimed beneficial influence of exercise for chronic non-specific low back pain.
Authors: Karin Pieber; Malvina Herceg; Michael Quittan; Robert Csapo; Rudolf Müller; Guenther F Wiesinger Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2014-01-11 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Heather K Vincent; Steven Z George; Amanda N Seay; Kevin R Vincent; Robert W Hurley Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Giovane Galdino; Thiago Romero; José Felippe Pinho da Silva; Daniele Aguiar; Ana Maria de Paula; Jader Cruz; Cosimo Parrella; Fabiana Piscitelli; Igor Duarte; Vincenzo Di Marzo; Andrea Perez Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Pieter H Helmhout; J Bart Staal; Martijn W Heymans; Chris C Harts; Erik J M Hendriks; Rob A de Bie Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-12-25 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Luciana G Macedo; Bruno T Saragiotto; Tiê P Yamato; Leonardo O P Costa; Luciola C Menezes Costa; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Christopher G Maher Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-02-10
Authors: Joshua Hanel; Patrick J Owen; Steffen Held; Scott D Tagliaferri; Clint T Miller; Lars Donath; Daniel L Belavy Journal: Sports Med Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Bruno T Saragiotto; Christopher G Maher; Tiê P Yamato; Leonardo O P Costa; Luciola C Menezes Costa; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Luciana G Macedo Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-01-08