Literature DB >> 30805416

Comparison of Postural Balance between Subgroups of Nonspecific Low-back Pain Patients Based on O'Sullivan Classification System and Normal Subjects during Lifting.

Majid Shahbazi Moheb Seraj1,2,3,4, Javad Sarrafzadeh1,2,3,4, Nader Maroufi1,2,3,4, Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani1,2,3,4, Amir Ahmadi1,2,3,4, Hossein Negahban1,2,3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Balance disorder is one of the most-studied fields in low-back pain patients (LBP). However, there is insufficient information regarding the effect of LBP subgrouping on postural control. The purpose of the present study was to compare postural control between subgroups of chronic nonspecific LBP and healthy subjects during lifting.
METHODS: A total of 35 men with chronic LBP (19 active extension pattern [AEP] and 16 flexion pattern [FP]) and 15 healthy controls were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Pooled LBP was subdivided based on the O'Sullivan's classification system (OCS). The participants were asked to lift a box from the ground to the waist level and hold it for 20 seconds. The load was 10% of the subject's weight. Force plate system was used to record balance parameters, including standard deviations (SDs) of center of pressure (COP) amplitude and COP velocity in anterior-posterior and medial-lateral directions and mean total velocity. The test was divided into two static and dynamic phases. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and independent t-test.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between pooled LBP and control groups in any of the variables, except for the SD of the anterior-posterior direction velocity in the X-plane in the static phase (P=0.017). After classifying LBP, the results showed that the healthy and AEP groups were significantly different in SD of COP velocity in the frontal plane (P=0.021), mean total velocity (P=0.010), and SD of COP velocity in the sagittal plane (P=0.039).
CONCLUSION: The present study showed that postural control was not different between the pooled LBP and normal groups. After classifying pooled LBP based on OCS, we found that the AEP showed different postural control as compared to healthy controls in the dynamic phase. The FP and AEP exhibited different postural control relative to the healthy controls in the static phase, and COP velocity was lower in those groups compared to the control group. The results of this study support the concept of LBP classification.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Classification; Lifting; Low back pain; Postural balance

Year:  2019        PMID: 30805416      PMCID: PMC6372270     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg        ISSN: 2345-461X


  44 in total

Review 1.  Lumbar segmental 'instability': clinical presentation and specific stabilizing exercise management.

Authors:  P B O'Sullivan
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2000-02

2.  Hip muscle imbalance and low back pain in athletes: influence of core strengthening.

Authors:  Scott F Nadler; Gerard A Malanga; Lisa A Bartoli; Joseph H Feinberg; Michael Prybicien; Melissa Deprince
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.411

3.  Postural control during lifting.

Authors:  Josef Kollmitzer; L Oddsson; G R Ebenbichler; J E Giphart; C J DeLuca
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Trunk muscle recruitment patterns in patients with low back pain enhance the stability of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Jaap H van Dieën; Jacek Cholewicki; Andrea Radebold
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Evidence for a role of antagonistic cocontraction in controlling trunk stiffness during lifting.

Authors:  Jaap H van Dieën; Idsart Kingma; Petra van der Bug; J C E van der Bug
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  The inter-examiner reliability of a classification method for non-specific chronic low back pain patients with motor control impairment.

Authors:  W Dankaerts; P B O'Sullivan; L M Straker; A F Burnett; J S Skouen
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2005-06-03

7.  Active trunk stiffness increases with co-contraction.

Authors:  Patrick J Lee; Ellen L Rogers; Kevin P Granata
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 2.368

8.  The role of paraspinal muscle spindles in lumbosacral position sense in individuals with and without low back pain.

Authors:  S Brumagne; P Cordo; R Lysens; S Verschueren; S Swinnen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Pain and motor control of the lumbopelvic region: effect and possible mechanisms.

Authors:  Paul W Hodges; G Lorimer Moseley
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.368

Review 10.  Trunk muscle activation in low-back pain patients, an analysis of the literature.

Authors:  Jaap H van Dieën; Luc P J Selen; Jacek Cholewicki
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.368

View more
  2 in total

1.  Association of perceived physical overload at work with pain and disability in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a 6-month longitudinal study.

Authors:  Samantha J Demarchi; Crystian B Oliveira; Marcia R Franco; Priscila K Morelhão; Thalysi M Hisamatsu; Fernanda G Silva; Tatiana M Damato; Rafael Z Pinto
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Immediate Effects of Lumbosacral Orthosis on Postural Stability in Patients with Low Back Pain: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Fatemeh Azadinia; Ismail Ebrahimi-Takamjani; Mojtaba Kamyab; Morteza Asgari; Mohamad Parnianpour
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2019-07
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.