Background: Backpack loads produce changes in standing posture when compared with unloaded posture. Although 'poor' unloaded standing posture has been related to spinal pain, there is little evidence of whether, and how much, exposure to posterior load produces injurious effects on spinal tissue. The objective of this study was to describe the effect on adolescent sagittal plane standing posture of different loads and positions of a common design of school backpack. The underlying study aim was to test the appropriateness of two adult 'rules-of-thumb'-that for postural efficiency, backpacks should be worn high on the spine, and loads should be limited to 10% of body weight.

Purpose: This preliminary study aimed to determine the intrarater reliability of the quantitative tests for the study of non-specific low back pain.Methods: Test-retest reliability of the measurements of ratio data was determined by an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurements (SEMs), coefficient of variation (CV), and one-way repeated measures ANOVA using the values collected from 13 young individuals (25.8 ± 6.2 years) with chronic non-specific low back pain on two occasions separated by 2 days. Percent agreement of the ordinal data was also determined by Cohen's Kappa statistics (kappa). The measures consisted of tissue blood flow (BF), average pain visual analog scales (VAS), pressure pain threshold (PPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), heat pain threshold (HPT) and lumbo-pelvic stability test (LPST). An acceptable reliability was determined as the ICC values of greater than 0.85, SEMs less than 5%, CV less than 15%, the kappa scores of greater than 80% and no evidence of systematic error (ANOVA, P > 0.05).Results: ICC of all measures in the lumbo-sacral area were greater than 0.87. The kappa was also greater than 83%. Most measures demonstrated a minimal error of measurements and less potential of systemic error in nature. Only the SEMs and the CV of the CPT exceeded the acceptable level. Conclusions:It is concluded that most of the quantitative measurements are reliable for the study of non-specific low back pain, however the CPT should be applied with care as it has a great variation among individuals and potential of measurement error.

Purpose: This study was performed to assess and compare the effects of Pilates exercise on flexibility and lumbo-pelvic movement control between the Pilates training and control groups.Methods: A randomized single-blinded controlled design was utilized in the study. Forty healthy male and female volunteers (mean age 31.65 ± 6.21 years) were randomly divided into Pilates-based training (20 subjects) and the control groups (20 subjects). The Pilates group attended 45-minute training sessions, 2 times per week, for a period of 8 weeks. Flexibility and lumbo-pelvic stability tests were determined as outcome measures using a standard "sit and reach test" and "pressure biofeedback" respectively at 0, 4 and 8 weeks of the study. Results:The results showed that the Pilates training group improved flexibility significantly (P<0.001) during time intervals. This effect was also significantly greater than the control group for both 4 weeks and 8 weeks of the training period (P<0.001). There were 65% and 85% of the subjects from Pilates group passing the lumbo-pelvic stability test at 4 and 8 weeks of training periods respectively. No subjects from the control group passed the test at any stages. Conclusions:Pilates can be used as an adjunctive exercise program to improve flexibility, enhance control-mobility of trunk and pelvic segments. It may also prevent and attenuate the predisposition to axial musculoskeletal injury.

Lumbopelvic stabilization training may provide therapeutic effects by inducing pain modulation through an improvement in the pain threshold and reduction in pain intensity. LPST may be considered as part of the management programs for treatment of chronic low back pain.

The NDI-TH and NPDS-TH seem to be reliable instruments to measure functional limitation and disability in Thai patients with neck pain. However, further research is still needed to determine responsiveness and validity of these questionnaires.