The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare data on the level of aerobic capacity and body composition of nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with normative data matched for sex, age and level of sporting activity. The study population consisted of 101 outpatients with nonspecific CLBP who had entered a rehabilitation programme. Results were as follows: the mean (standard deviation) aerobic capacity (VO2max) of CLBP patients was significantly (P<0.001) lower 7.3 (5.6) ml/kg lean body mass/min as compared with the normative data. The mean (standard deviation) body fat percentage of the patients was significantly (P<0.001) higher 3.9 % (5.9) as compared with the normative data. These results provide evidence of a reduced level of aerobic capacity and an increased body fat percentage in nonspecific CLBP patients compared with healthy participants.
Objective: Psychophysical lift capacity tests are lifting tests in which the performance, expressed in Newtons, is divided by the perceived exertion, expressed on a Borg scale. The aim of this study was to analyse test-retest reliability of psychophysical lift capacity tests. Subjects: Patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (n=20) and healthy subjects (n=20). Methods: Psychophysical lift capacity tests were assessed during a back school intake at the Centre for Rehabilitation of the University Medical Centre Groningen. Patients on the waiting list and healthy subjects were assessed twice, with a 2-week interval between assessments. Intra-class correlation (ICC) was calculated as a measure of reliability. An ICC ≥0.75 was considered as an acceptable reliability. Limits of agreement as a measure for natural variation were calculated. Results: The psychophysical static and dynamic lift capacity tests showed good reliability (ICC ≥0.75). The limits of agreement are substantial, indicating a considerable natural variation between test-sessions for all psychophysical tests. Conclusion: The psychophysical static lift capacity and dynamic lifting capacity are reliable instruments for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain and healthy subjects. However, a substantial amount of natural variation should be taken into account between 2 test sessions when interpreting the test results clinically.Key words: reproducibility of results, low back pain, psycho physical capacity.
The present study shows that the LBM-based Astrand test is a reliable, valid, and feasible method for patients with non-specific CLBP. However, a substantial amount of variation should be taken into account in patients when interpreting the test results clinically.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.