Musculoskeletal science & practice · 2023
In non-specific low back pain, is an exercise program carried out through telerehabilitation as effective as one carried out in a physiotherapy center? A controlled randomized trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Villatoro-Luque Francisco Jesús, Rodríguez-Almagro Daniel, Aibar-Almazán Agustín, Fernández-Carnero Samuel, Pecos-Martín Daniel, Ibáñez-Vera Alfonso Javier, Achalandabaso-Ochoa Alexander
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: s:The effectiveness of telerehabilitation (TLRH) in patients with non-specific low back pain (NLBP) remains unknown. No study till date has investigated the efficacy of a mobile-based TLRH in patients with NLBP.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate if a TLRH program is as effective as a clinical exercise programme in improving disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength in patients with NLBP.
DESIGN: Single-blind, two-armed, randomized controlled study.
METHOD: A total of 71 individuals with NLBP were randomly allocated to either the TLRH home group (TLRH) or clinic group (CG). The TLRH followed exercise videos and read information on pain neurophysiology. The CG performed the same exercises and received on-site pain education. Both groups performed the exercises twice weekly for 8 weeks. Disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength were assessed at baseline, at post-treatment, and at three months.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences for time-by-group interaction were detected in the strength of left hip flexors (supine [F = 8.356; p = .005]; sitting [F = 9.828; p = .003]), right hip extensors with extended knee [F = 7.461; p = .008], left hip extensors (extended knee [F = 13.175; p = .001]; flexed knee [F = 13.505; p < .001]), pain during flexion of the right [F = 5.133; p = .027] and left [F = 4.731; p = .033] hips in the supine position, disability [F = 4.557; p = .014], and pain catastrophizing [F = 14.132; p < .001].
CONCLUSION: A TLRH mobile-based is as effective as clinical treatment in improving disability, pain catastrophizing, and pain and strength of the hip structures in patients with NLBP.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate if a TLRH program is as effective as a clinical exercise programme in improving disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength in patients with NLBP.
DESIGN: Single-blind, two-armed, randomized controlled study.
METHOD: A total of 71 individuals with NLBP were randomly allocated to either the TLRH home group (TLRH) or clinic group (CG). The TLRH followed exercise videos and read information on pain neurophysiology. The CG performed the same exercises and received on-site pain education. Both groups performed the exercises twice weekly for 8 weeks. Disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength were assessed at baseline, at post-treatment, and at three months.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences for time-by-group interaction were detected in the strength of left hip flexors (supine [F = 8.356; p = .005]; sitting [F = 9.828; p = .003]), right hip extensors with extended knee [F = 7.461; p = .008], left hip extensors (extended knee [F = 13.175; p = .001]; flexed knee [F = 13.505; p < .001]), pain during flexion of the right [F = 5.133; p = .027] and left [F = 4.731; p = .033] hips in the supine position, disability [F = 4.557; p = .014], and pain catastrophizing [F = 14.132; p < .001].
CONCLUSION: A TLRH mobile-based is as effective as clinical treatment in improving disability, pain catastrophizing, and pain and strength of the hip structures in patients with NLBP.