Supriya G Shah1, Tenzin Choezom2, G Prabu Raja3. 1. Department of Exercise and Sports Sciences, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India. Electronic address: dr.supriyashah@gmail.com. 2. Department of Exercise and Sports Sciences, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India. Electronic address: tenchoe41225@gmail.com. 3. Department of Exercise and Sports Sciences, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India. Electronic address: prabu.raja@manipal.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) may lack coordination between the stabilising and respiratory functions of trunk muscles. The trunk stabilisers compromise breathing to maintain spinal stability, leading to breathing dysfunctions. Maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) is indicative of the respiratory muscle endurance and strength whereas end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) gives an estimate of breathing patterns that closely reflect the arterial measurement of CO2. CLBP has been shown to have a significant effect on respiratory functions. However, the impact has not yet been quantified. Further, there is a dearth of literature comparingrespiratory functions between CLBP and healthy individuals. This study investigates respiratory functions in participants with and without CLBP. METHODS: The study compared the respiratory functions of maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) and End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide (PETCO2) between 14 participants with CLBP and 14 healthy individuals. Participants in both groups were matched for age, height, weight and body surface area. The assessment of MVV and PETCO2 were performed sitting, standing on a stable surface, and on an unstable surface (BOSU ball). RESULTS: The mean of measured MVV (L/min) was found to be lower (p < 0.05) in the CLBP group when compared to the healthy group. Mean PETCO2 and respiratory rate was found to be higher in CLBP group when compared to the healthy group in all three positions, although this was not found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study demonstrated sub-optimal respiratory parameters in participants with chronic low back pain. However, when adjusted for gender, the difference was not found to be significant between the two groups.
BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) may lack coordination between the stabilising and respiratory functions of trunk muscles. The trunk stabilisers compromise breathing to maintain spinal stability, leading to breathing dysfunctions. Maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) is indicative of the respiratory muscle endurance and strength whereas end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) gives an estimate of breathing patterns that closely reflect the arterial measurement of CO2. CLBP has been shown to have a significant effect on respiratory functions. However, the impact has not yet been quantified. Further, there is a dearth of literature comparingrespiratory functions between CLBP and healthy individuals. This study investigates respiratory functions in participants with and without CLBP. METHODS: The study compared the respiratory functions of maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) and End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide (PETCO2) between 14 participants with CLBP and 14 healthy individuals. Participants in both groups were matched for age, height, weight and body surface area. The assessment of MVV and PETCO2 were performed sitting, standing on a stable surface, and on an unstable surface (BOSU ball). RESULTS: The mean of measured MVV (L/min) was found to be lower (p < 0.05) in the CLBP group when compared to the healthy group. Mean PETCO2 and respiratory rate was found to be higher in CLBP group when compared to the healthy group in all three positions, although this was not found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study demonstrated sub-optimal respiratory parameters in participants with chronic low back pain. However, when adjusted for gender, the difference was not found to be significant between the two groups.