Literature DB >> 18303467

Self-report measures best explain changes in disability compared with physical measures after exercise rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.

Paul Marshall1, Bernadette Murphy.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Sixteen-week intervention for chronic patients with low back pain (LBP) with 9-month follow-up. Primary randomization at 4 weeks into either supervised Swiss ball exercise or an exercise advice group.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in disability and pain in individuals with chronic LBP after combined treatment and exercise interventions, and to evaluate whether changes in self-report or physical measures would best explain improvements in disability SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a need to understand what the effectiveness of a clinically applicable treatment intervention is for an individual's perception of their back pain. There is insufficient evidence about the different combinations of manual treatment that commonly precede involvement in exercise programs.
METHODS: Sixty individuals with chronic nonspecific LBP (at least 3-month duration) were randomly assigned (after 4 weeks of manipulative or nonmanipulative treatment) to either a supervised Swiss ball exercise group, or an advice group. The exercise intervention was for 12 weeks with a long-term follow-up of 9 months. Self-report measures and physical measures (endurance times and myoelectric fatigue) were collected throughout the study.
RESULTS: Self-rated disability improved more after the treatment period for individuals who received supervised exercise compared with advice alone. There was no difference found between individuals who received manipulative or nonmanipulative treatment. Multiple regression analysis found that self-report measures best explained improvements in disability throughout the study. Long-term findings showed no group differences.
CONCLUSION: Supervised exercise is a more successful subsequent to manual treatment compared with exercise advice. The improvements associated with this type of program were primarily manifested in the psychologic self-report measures rather than physical measurements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18303467     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816233eb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  4 in total

1.  A literature review reveals that trials evaluating treatment of non-specific low back pain use inconsistent criteria to identify serious pathologies and nerve root involvement.

Authors:  Ciaran Williams; Mark J Hancock; Manuela Ferreira; Paulo Ferreira; Chris G Maher
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2012-05

Review 2.  A systematic review on the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain.

Authors:  Marienke van Middelkoop; Sidney M Rubinstein; Ton Kuijpers; Arianne P Verhagen; Raymond Ostelo; Bart W Koes; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-07-18       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Jill A Hayden; Jenna Ellis; Rachel Ogilvie; Antti Malmivaara; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-28

Review 4.  The effect of journal impact factor, reporting conflicts, and reporting funding sources, on standardized effect sizes in back pain trials: a systematic review and meta-regression.

Authors:  Robert Froud; Tom Bjørkli; Philip Bright; Dévan Rajendran; Rachelle Buchbinder; Martin Underwood; David Evans; Sandra Eldridge
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 2.362

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.