Search

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to compare the long-term (1-year follow-up) effects of the McKenzie method and motor control exercises on trunk muscle thickness in people with chronic low back pain (LBP) and a directional preference., Design: Randomized controlled trial., Setting: A secondary public health facility in Sydney, Australia., Participants: Seventy adults with greater than 3-month history of LBP and a directional preference., Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive 12 treatments of either the McKenzie method or motor control exercises over 8-weeks., Outcome Measures: Muscle thickness of the transversus abdominis, obliquus internus, and obliquus externus measured from ultrasound images. Secondary outcomes included function, perceived recovery, and pain. Outcomes were collected at baseline, post intervention at 8-weeks, and at 1-year follow-up by blinded assessors. The current paper focuses on the 1-year follow-up., Results: Fifty-eight participants completed data collection for the primary outcome at 1-year. There were no significant between group differences for changes in trunk muscle thickness for any of the three investigated muscles: transversus abdominis [3%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -5%, 11%], obliquus internus [-4%, 95% CI: -9%, 2%] and obliquus externus [3%, 95% CI: -4%, 11%]. Similarly, there were no significant differences between groups for the secondary outcomes of function, perceived recovery and pain., Conclusion: Trunk muscle thickness, function, perceive recovery and pain are similar between patients receiving McKenzie method or motor control exercises at a 1-year follow-up in a population of people with chronic LBP and a directional preference. Clinical Trials Registration number CTRN12611000971932., (Copyright © 2019 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate whether clinical tests used to detect motor control dysfunction can predict improvements in pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) who have undergone an 8-week lumbar stabilization exercise program., Study Design: A prospective cohort study., Setting: Outpatient physical therapy university clinic., Participants: Seventy people with chronic nonspecific LBP were recruited, and 64 completed the exercise program (N=64)., Interventions: The lumbar stabilization program was provided twice a week for 8 weeks., Main Outcome Measures: Pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) and disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) and clinical tests, such as the Deep Muscle Contraction (DMC) scale, Clinical Test of Thoracolumbar Dissociation (CTTD), and Passive Lumbar Extension (PLE) test. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models were used in the prediction analysis., Results: Mean changes in pain intensity and disability following the 8-week stabilization program were -3.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.2 to -4.4) and -7.4 (95% CI, -6.3 to -8.5), respectively. Clinical test scores taken at baseline did not predict changes in pain and disability at 8-week follow-up., Conclusion: Our findings revealed that the DMC scale, CTTD, PLE test, clinical tests used to assess motor control dysfunction, do not predict improvements in pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP following an 8-week lumbar stabilization exercise program., (Copyright © 2019 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of physical activity-based interventions using electronic feedback in reducing pain and disability compared to minimal or no interventions in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain., Data Sources: The following electronic databases were searched: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and main clinical trial registers., Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of physical activity interventions using electronic feedback (eg, physical activity monitors) on pain and disability compared to minimal or no interventions in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain were considered eligible., Data Extraction: Pooled effects were calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence., Data Synthesis: Four published randomized controlled trials and 4 registered unpublished randomized controlled trials were included. At short-term follow-up, pooled estimations showed no significant differences in pain (2 trials: n=116; SMD=-.50; 95% confidence interval, -1.91 to 0.91) and disability (2 trials: n=116; SMD=-.81; 95% confidence interval, -2.34 to 0.73) between physical activity-based interventions and minimal interventions. Similarly, nonsignificant results were found at intermediate-term follow-up. According to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, the overall quality of the evidence was considered to be of low quality., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that physical activity-based interventions using electronic feedback may be ineffective in reducing pain and disability compared to minimal interventions in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Clinicians should be cautious when implementing this intervention in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain., (Copyright © 2017 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Physical activity plays an important role in the management of chronic low back pain (LBP). Engaging in an active lifestyle is associated with a better prognosis. Nevertheless, there is evidence to suggest that patients with chronic LBP are less likely to meet recommended physical activity levels. Furthermore, while exercise therapy has been endorsed by recent clinical practice guidelines, evidence from systematic reviews suggests that its effect on pain and disability are at best moderate and not sustained over time. A limitation of current exercises programmes for chronic LBP is that these programmes are not designed to change patients' behaviour toward an active lifestyle. Therefore, we will investigate the short- and long-term efficacy of a multimodal intervention, consisting of supervised exercises, health coaching and use of an activity monitor (i.e. Fitbit Flex) compared to supervised exercises plus sham coaching and a sham activity monitor on physical activity levels, pain intensity and disability, in patients with chronic, nonspecific LBP., Methods: This study will be a two-group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. One hundred and sixty adults with chronic, nonspecific LBP will be recruited. Participants allocated to both groups will receive a group exercise programme. In addition, the intervention group will receive health coaching sessions (i.e. assisting the participants to achieve their physical activity goals) and an activity monitor (i.e. Fitbit Flex). The participants allocated to the control group will receive sham health coaching (i.e. encouraged to talk about their LBP or other problems, but without any therapeutic advice from the physiotherapist) and a sham activity monitor. Outcome measures will be assessed at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcomes will be physical activity, measured objectively with an accelerometer, as well as pain intensity and disability at 3 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes will be physical activity, pain intensity and disability at 6 and 12 months post randomisation as well as other self-report measures of physical activity and sedentary behaviour, depression, quality of life, pain self-efficacy and weight-related outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months post randomisation., Discussion: This study is significant as it will be the first study to investigate whether a multimodal intervention designed to increase physical activity levels reduces pain and disability, and increases physical activity levels compared to a control intervention in patients with chronic LBP., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03200509 . Registered on 28 June 2017.

Introduction: Strong evidence shows that exercise is effective to improve fall risk factors among older people. However, older people's participation and adherence to exercise programmes is suboptimal. Type of exercise and apathy are reported to be barriers to exercise participation, suggesting that new effective interventions are needed. The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial is to investigate the effect of Senior Dance plus brief education for falls prevention on balance among people aged 60 years or over, compared with a control group receiving only brief education., Methods and Analysis: This single-blind randomised controlled trial will involve 82 community-dwelling older people aged 60 years or over who are cognitively intact. Participants allocated to the intervention group will attend a single educational class on strategies to prevent falls, and will participate in a 12-week, twice-weekly group-based programme of Senior Dance. The Senior Dance consists of different choreographies, which include rhythmic and simple movements with rhythmic folk songs. Participants allocated to the control group will attend the same educational class that intervention group participants will receive, and will be instructed not to take part in any regular exercise programme. The primary outcome will be single-leg stance with eyes closed. Secondary outcomes include: Short Physical Performance Battery, Falls Efficacy Scale, Trail Making Test and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Continuous outcomes will be reported using mean (SD) or median (IQR), depending on the distribution of the data. The linear regression approach to analysis of covariance will be used to compare the mean effect between groups. All patients will be included in the analyses following an intention-to-treat approach., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval has been granted by the Human Ethics Committee of the São Paulo State University (CAAE 48665215.9.0000.5402). Outcomes will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences., Trial Registration Number: NCT02603523, Pre-results., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Objective: To investigate whether physical activity interventions increase objectively measured physical activity levels of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (e.g., osteoarthritis, low back pain) compared to no/minimal intervention., Methods: We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis searching the Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SportDiscus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases, and the main clinical trials registries. Quasirandomized or randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of physical activity interventions on objectively measured physical activity levels (e.g., using accelerometers or pedometers) of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain compared with no/minimal intervention were considered eligible. Analyses were conducted separately for short-term (≤3 months), intermediate (>3 months and <12 months), and long-term (≥12 months) followups. Pooled effects were calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used in summary conclusions., Results: Eight published trials and 6 registered trials were included. For the short-term followup, pooling of 6 trials showed no significant effect (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval -0.09, 0.77) between a physical activity intervention and no/minimal intervention. Similarly nonsignificant results were found for the intermediate and long-term followups. The overall evidence according to the GRADE approach was classified as low quality., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that physical activity-based interventions may lead to little or no difference in objectively measured physical activity levels of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain compared with no/minimal interventions. Given the number of registered trials, the pooled effect found in this review is likely to change once the results of these trials become available., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Background Motor control exercises are believed to improve coordination of the trunk muscles. It is unclear whether increases in trunk muscle thickness can be facilitated by approaches such as the McKenzie method. Furthermore, it is unclear which approach may have superior clinical outcomes. Objectives The primary aim was to compare the effects of the McKenzie method and motor control exercises on trunk muscle recruitment in people with chronic low back pain classified with a directional preference. The secondary aim was to conduct a between-group comparison of outcomes for pain, function, and global perceived effect. Methods Seventy people with chronic low back pain who demonstrated a directional preference using the McKenzie assessment were randomized to receive 12 treatments over 8 weeks with the McKenzie method or with motor control approaches. All outcomes were collected at baseline and at 8-week follow-up by blinded assessors. Results No significant between-group difference was found for trunk muscle thickness of the transversus abdominis (-5.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -15.2%, 3.7%), obliquus internus (-0.7%; 95% CI: -6.6%, 5.2%), and obliquus externus (1.2%; 95% CI: -4.3%, 6.8%). Perceived recovery was slightly superior in the McKenzie group (-0.8; 95% CI: -1.5, -0.1) on a -5 to +5 scale. No significant between-group differences were found for pain or function (P = .99 and P = .26, respectively). Conclusion We found no significant effect of treatment group for trunk muscle thickness. Participants reported a slightly greater sense of perceived recovery with the McKenzie method than with the motor control approach. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b-. Registered September 7, 2011 at www.anzctr.org.au (ACTRN12611000971932). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):514-522. Epub 12 May 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6379.