John S Ward1. 1. Department of Physiology and Chemistry, Texas Chiropractic College, Pasadena, Texas.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the protective influence of the Serola Sacroiliac Belt on pain and functional impairment in individuals with low back pain (LBP) during 5 days of strenuous manual labor. Methods: Thirty-three participants (mean ± standard deviation: age, 43.2 ± 11.4 years; height, 1.74 ± 0.11 m; body mass index, 88.3 ± 16.7 kg) with LBP were randomized to either condition A (wearing the Serola Sacroiliac Belt during a 10-minute daily repeated strenuous lifting task) during week 1 or condition B (not wearing a Serola Sacroiliac Belt during the same lifting task) in week 2 or vice versa. All 33 participants completed 1 week under condition A and 1 week under condition B for comparison. At the beginning and end of each week, the following dependent variables were measured: lumbar spine pain on a 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), spine and thigh discomfort on a Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, and completion of a toe-touch surface electromyography flexion relaxation phenomenon test. Results: During the week that participants used the Serola Sacroiliac Belt, spine pain increased 0.2 compared with 0.9 on the NRS for those who did not use the belt. No statistically significant difference was observed for Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire data or the flexion relaxation phenomenon test in this study. Conclusion: The findings of this preliminary study suggest participants using the Serola Sacroiliac Belt while performing a daily repeated lifting task had less progression of their LBP. However, this protective value did not meet the recommended NRS for minimally clinically important difference, and there was no effect on functional impairment.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the protective influence of the Serola Sacroiliac Belt on pain and functional impairment in individuals with low back pain (LBP) during 5 days of strenuous manual labor. Methods: Thirty-three participants (mean ± standard deviation: age, 43.2 ± 11.4 years; height, 1.74 ± 0.11 m; body mass index, 88.3 ± 16.7 kg) with LBP were randomized to either condition A (wearing the Serola Sacroiliac Belt during a 10-minute daily repeated strenuous lifting task) during week 1 or condition B (not wearing a Serola Sacroiliac Belt during the same lifting task) in week 2 or vice versa. All 33 participants completed 1 week under condition A and 1 week under condition B for comparison. At the beginning and end of each week, the following dependent variables were measured: lumbar spine pain on a 0 to 10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), spine and thigh discomfort on a Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, and completion of a toe-touch surface electromyography flexion relaxation phenomenon test. Results: During the week that participants used the Serola Sacroiliac Belt, spine pain increased 0.2 compared with 0.9 on the NRS for those who did not use the belt. No statistically significant difference was observed for Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire data or the flexion relaxation phenomenon test in this study. Conclusion: The findings of this preliminary study suggest participants using the Serola Sacroiliac Belt while performing a daily repeated lifting task had less progression of their LBP. However, this protective value did not meet the recommended NRS for minimally clinically important difference, and there was no effect on functional impairment.
Authors: Marianne Jensen Hjermstad; Peter M Fayers; Dagny F Haugen; Augusto Caraceni; Geoffrey W Hanks; Jon H Loge; Robin Fainsinger; Nina Aass; Stein Kaasa Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Janet K Freburger; George M Holmes; Robert P Agans; Anne M Jackman; Jane D Darter; Andrea S Wallace; Liana D Castel; William D Kalsbeek; Timothy S Carey Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-02-09