Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Comparing core stability and traditional trunk exercise on chronic low back pain patients using three functional lumbopelvic stability tests
Shamsi MB, Sarrafzadeh J, Jamshidi A
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 2015;31(2):89-98
clinical trial
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: No; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

It is a matter of controversy whether core stability exercise is preferred to other types of exercise for chronic low back pain. Lumbopelvic stability is an important element in low back pain. No study was found using lumbopelvic stability tests in comparing core stability and other exercises. The single leg squat, dip test, and runner pose test appear to be suitable as tests for lumbopelvic stability. The aim of this study was to compare "core stability" and "traditional trunk exercise" using these tests and also the Oswestry disability questionnaire and pain intensity. Twenty-nine non-specific chronic low back pain subjects were alternately allocated in one of the two exercise groups. For both groups, a 16-sessions exercise program was provided. Before and after training: (1) video was recorded while subjects performed the tests; (2) Oswestry disability questionnaire was completed; and (3) pain intensity was measured by visual analogue scale. The test videos were scored by three physiotherapists. Statistical analysis revealed a significant improvement in stability test scores (p = 0.020 and p = 0.041) and reduction in disability (p < 0.001) and pain (p < 0.001) within each group. No significant difference was seen between two groups in the three outcomes p = 0.41, p = 0.14, and p = 0.72. Insignificant differences between the two groups may indicate either non-specificity of CSE to increase lumbopelvic stability or equal effectiveness of TTE and CSE on improving LPS. The non-significant differences may also be attributable to the lack of sensitivity of our tests to assess stability change in two groups after training given the relatively small sample size.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help