A tailored exercise program versus general exercise for a subgroup of patients with low back pain and movement control impairment: a randomised controlled trial with one-year follow-up (original) (raw)
Related papers
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2011
Background: Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) in subacute and chronic stages can be treated effectively with exercise therapy. Research guidelines recommend evaluating different treatments in defined subgroups of patients with NSLBP. A subgroup of patients with movement control impairment (MCI) improved significantly on patient specific function and disability in a previous case series after movement control exercises. Methods/Design: In a randomised controlled trial (RCT) we will compare the effectiveness of movement control and general exercise in patients with MCI. 106 participants aged 18 -75 will be recruited in 5 outpatient hospital departments and 7 private practices. Patients randomly assigned to the movement control exercise group will be instructed to perform exercises according to their MCI. The general exercise group will follow an exercise protocol aimed at improving endurance and flexibility. Patients in both groups will receive 9 -18 treatments and will be instructed to do additional exercises at home. The primary outcome is the level of disability assessed using the patient specific functional scale (PSFS) which links the perceived pain to functional situations and is measured before treatment and at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes concern low back pain related disability (Roland Morris questionnaire, RMQ), graded chronic pain scale (GCPS), range of motion and tactile acuity.
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2012
Background: Practice guidelines recommend various types of exercise for chronic back pain but there have been few head-to-head comparisons of these interventions. General exercise seems to be an effective option for management of chronic low back pain (LBP) but very little is known about the management of a sub-acute LBP within subgroups. Recent research has developed clinical tests to identify a subgroup of patients with chronic non-specific LBP who have movement control dysfunction (MD). Method/Design: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the effects of general exercise and specific movement control exercise (SMCE) on disability and function in patients with MD within recurrent sub-acute LBP. The main outcome measure is the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Discussion: European clinical guideline for management of chronic LBP recommends that more research is required to develop tools to improve the classification and identification of specific clinical subgroups of chronic LBP patients. Good quality RCTs are then needed to determine the effectiveness of specific interventions aimed at these specific target groups. This RCT aims to test the hypothesis whether patients within a subgroup of MD benefit more through a specific individually tailored movement control exercise program than through general exercises.
Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
M any physical approaches to managing low back pain (LBP) include exercise that aims to change motor control. In this context, motor control refers to motor, sensory, and central processes involved in control of posture and movement. Although different approaches share the underlying assumption that the manner in which individuals use their body and load their tissues is related to the development and maintenance of their conditions, there are differences in how motor control is assessed and trained, as well as differences in proposed mechanisms for its efficacy. This commentary aims to describe how motor control is used in 4 clinical approaches commonly used in physical therapy, and to consider areas of convergence and divergence between these approaches and how these approaches interface with nonsurgical medical management of patients with LBP. Clinical Approaches That Focus on Motor Control The clinical approaches included in this U U SYNOPSIS: Many approaches for low back pain (LBP) management focus on modifying motor control, which refers to motor, sensory, and central processes for control of posture and movement. A common assumption across approaches is that the way an individual loads the spine by typical postures, movements, and muscle activation strategies contributes to LBP symptom onset, persistence, and recovery. However, there are also divergent features from one approach to another. This commentary presents key principles of 4 clinical physical therapy approaches, including how each incorporates motor control in LBP management, the convergence and divergence of these approaches, and how they interface with medical LBP management. The approaches considered are movement system impairment syndromes of the lumbar spine, Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy, motor control training, and the integrated systems model. These were selected to represent the diversity of applications, including approaches using motor control as a central or an adjunct feature, and approaches that are evidence based or evidence informed. This identification of areas of convergence and divergence of approaches is designed to clarify the key aspects of each approach and thereby serve as a guide for the clinician and to provide a platform for considering a hybrid approach tailored to the individual patient.
Movement Control Impairment and Low Back Pain: State of the Art of Diagnostic Framing
Medicina, 2019
Background and objectives: Low back pain is one of the most common health problems. In 85% of cases, it is not possible to identify a specific cause, and it is therefore called Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP). Among the various attempted classifications, the subgroup of patients with impairment of motor control of the lower back (MCI) is between the most studied. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the results from trials about validity and reliability of clinical tests aimed to identify MCI in the NSLBP population. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and MedNar databases have been searched until May 2018. The criteria for inclusion were clinical trials about evaluation methods that are affordable and applicable in a usual clinical setting and conducted on populations aged > 18 years. A single author summarized data in synoptic tables relating to the clinical property; a second reviewer intervened in case of doubts about the relevance of t...
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2010
Background: The study was conducted to assess whether patient-specific functional impairment and experienced daily disability improved after treatment to address active movement control of the low back. Method: A prospective study was carried out in two outpatient physiotherapy practices in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. 38 patients (17 males and 21 females) suffering from non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and movement control impairment were treated. The study participants had an average age of 45 ± 13 years, an average height of 170 ± 8 cm and an average weight of 73 ± 15 kg. Patients were assessed prior and post treatment. Treatment was aimed at improving movement control of the lumbar spine, pain and disability. Six physiotherapists treated each patient on average nine times (SD 4.6). Treatment effects were evaluated using a set of six movement control tests (MCT), patientspecific functional pain scores (PSFS) and a Roland and Morris disability questionnaire (RMQ). Means, standard deviations, confidence intervals and paired t-tests were calculated. The effect size (d) was based on the change between t1 (time prior intervention) and t2 (time post intervention) using a significance level of p < 0.05, with d > 0.8 being considered a large effect. Power calculations were performed for type I & II error estimation. Results: Movement control (MCT) showed a 59% improvement from 3.2 (max 6) to 1.3 positive tests (d = 1.3, p < 0.001), complaints (PSFS) decreased 41% from 5.9 points (max 10) to 3.5 (d = 1.3, p < 0.001), and disability (RMQ) decreased 43% from 8.9 to 5.1 points (d = 1.0, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The results of this controlled case series study, based on prior and post intervention, showed that movement control, patient specific functional complaints and disability improved significantly following specific individual exercise programs, performed with physiotherapeutic intervention. The results obtained warrant performance of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to substantiate our findings.
Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 2019
M any physical approaches to managing low back pain (LBP) include exercise that aims to change motor control. In this context, motor control refers to motor, sensory, and central processes involved in control of posture and movement. Although different approaches share the underlying assumption that the manner in which individuals use their body and load their tissues is related to the development and maintenance of their conditions, there are differences in how motor control is assessed and trained, as well as differences in proposed mechanisms for its efficacy. This commentary aims to describe how motor control is used in 4 clinical approaches commonly used in physical therapy, and to consider areas of convergence and divergence between these approaches and how these approaches interface with nonsurgical medical management of patients with LBP. Clinical Approaches That Focus on Motor Control The clinical approaches included in this U U SYNOPSIS: Many approaches for low back pain (LBP) management focus on modifying motor control, which refers to motor, sensory, and central processes for control of posture and movement. A common assumption across approaches is that the way an individual loads the spine by typical postures, movements, and muscle activation strategies contributes to LBP symptom onset, persistence, and recovery. However, there are also divergent features from one approach to another. This commentary presents key principles of 4 clinical physical therapy approaches, including how each incorporates motor control in LBP management, the convergence and divergence of these approaches, and how they interface with medical LBP management. The approaches considered are movement system impairment syndromes of the lumbar spine, Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy, motor control training, and the integrated systems model. These were selected to represent the diversity of applications, including approaches using motor control as a central or an adjunct feature, and approaches that are evidence based or evidence informed. This identification of areas of convergence and divergence of approaches is designed to clarify the key aspects of each approach and thereby serve as a guide for the clinician and to provide a platform for considering a hybrid approach tailored to the individual patient.
BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016
Clinical guidelines recommend research on sub-groups of patients with low back pain (LBP) but, to date, only few studies have been published. One sub-group of LBP is movement control impairment (MCI) and clinical tests to identify this sub-group have been developed. Also, exercises appear to be beneficial for the management of chronic LBP (CLBP), but very little is known about the management of sub-acute LBP. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to compare the effects of general exercise versus specific movement control exercise (SMCE) on disability and function in patients with MCI within the recurrent sub-acute LBP group. Participants having a MCI attended five treatment sessions of either specific or general exercises. In both groups a short application of manual therapy was applied. The primary outcome was disability, assessed by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The measurements were taken at baseline, immediately after the three months interventio...
Motor Control Exercises Reduces Pain and Disability in Chronic and Recurrent Low Back Pain
Spine, 2013
Study Design. Meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Objective. To determine the short-term, intermediate, and longterm effectiveness of MCE, with regard to pain and disability, in patients with chronic and recurrent low-back pain. Summary of Background Data. Previous meta-analyses have shown no difference between the effects of MCE and general exercise in the treatment of low back pain. Several high quality studies on this topic have been published lately, warranting a new meta-analysis. Methods. We searched electronic databases up to October 2011 for randomized controlled trials clearly distinguishing MCE from other treatments. We extracted pain and disability outcomes and converted them to a 0 to 100 scale. We used the RevMan5 (Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark) software to perform pooled analyses to determine the weighted mean differences (WMDs) between MCE and 5 different control interventions.