Does core stability exercise improve lumbopelvic stability (through endurance tests) more than general exercise in chronic low back pain? A quasi-randomized controlled trial

Shamsi, Mohammad Bagher; rezaei, mandana; Zamanlou, Mehdi; Sadeghi, Mehdi; Pourahmadi, Mohammadreza

doi:10.3109/09593985.2015.1117550

Cited by 31 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this study cannot draw any conclusions about the benefit of exercise because you did not have a control group without exercise to compare with the other two groups, the core exercises are commonly used in the treatment of low back pain, getting good results. [25][26][27] A review study that compared this kind of exercise with general exercise concluded that core exercises were more effective in alleviating pain in patients with chronic low back pain. The authors observed significant differences between groups, with a reduction of pain (main difference: −1.29) and disability (main difference: −7.14) immediately after treatment, but not at six months of follow-up.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of efficacy of a supervised versus non-supervised physical therapy exercise program on the pain, functionality and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of supervised physical therapy program versus non-supervised on pain, functionality, fear of movement and quality of life in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain. Design: A randomized double-blind clinical trial. Setting: Clinical outpatient unit; home. Subjects: A total of 64 participants with non-specific chronic low back pain were randomized into either supervised exercise group ( n = 32) or non-supervised home exercise group ( n = 32). Interventions: The supervised group was treated with therapy exercises (strengthen lumbopelvic musculature), while the non-supervised received an informative session of the exercises, which were performed un-supervised at home. Both groups received three weekly sessions for eight weeks. Main Measures: Pain, disability, fear of movement, quality of life, trunk muscle endurance and trunk anteflexion motion were assessed at baseline, two, and six months of follow-up. Results: Although analysis of variance (ANOVA) test showed statistically significant differences between groups for pain ( P = 0.028; supervised: 2.5 ± 2.1; non-supervised: 3.5 ± 1.5) and disability for Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire ( P = 0.004; supervised: 3.1 ± 2.2; non-supervised: 5.1 ± 3.0) and for Oswestry Disability Index ( P = 0.034; supervised: 14.5 ± 7.1; non-supervised: 19.2 ± 10.0) at 8 weeks immediately posttreatment, there were no differences between the groups in patient-rated pain, functionality, fear of movement and quality of life at six months of follow-up. Conclusion: Patients with chronic low back pain who received supervised exercise showed more improvement in both the short and long term in all patient-rated outcomes over the non-supervised group, but the differences were small and not clinically significant.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of efficacy of a supervised versus non-supervised physical therapy exercise program on the pain, functionality and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We will evaluate the core resistance stability using a standard protocol described by McGill et al [ 77 ], which has been extensively used in scientific studies [ 78 , 79 ]. This methodology includes the Biering-Sorensen extensor endurance test, flexor endurance test (60°), frontal plank test, and the side bridge test.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exercise training as S-Klotho protein stimulator in sedentary healthy adults: Rationale, design, and methodology

Amaro-Gahete

De-la-O

Jurado‐Fasoli

et al. 2018

Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsThe secreted form of the α-Klotho gene (S-Klotho), which is considered a powerful biomarker of longevity, makes it an attractive target as an anti-ageing therapy against functional decline, sarcopenic obesity, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, osteoporosis, and neurodegenerative disorders. The S-Klotho plasma levels could be related to physical exercise inasmuch physical exercise is involved in physiological pathways that regulate the S-Klotho plasma levels. FIT-AGEING will determine the effect of different training modalities on the S-Klotho plasma levels (primary outcome) in sedentary healthy adults. FIT-AGEING will also investigate the physiological consequences of activating the klotho gene (secondary outcomes).MethodsFIT-AGEING will recruit 80 sedentary, healthy adults (50% women) aged 45–65 years old. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to a non-exercise group, i.e. the control group, (n = 20), a physical activity recommendation from World Health Organization group (n = 20), a high intensity interval training group (n = 20), and a whole-body electromyostimulation group (n = 20). The laboratory measurements will be taken at the baseline and 12 weeks later including the S-Klotho plasma levels, physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength), body composition, basal metabolic rate, heart rate variability, maximal fat oxidation, health blood biomarkers, free-living physical activity, sleep habits, reaction time, cognitive variables, and health-related questionnaires. We will also obtain dietary habits data and cardiovascular disease risk factors.

show abstract

“…Using G*Power software (Version 3.1.5, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany) (42) with α = 0.05, β = 0.8, at least 50 subjects with and without nonspecific chronic LBP were needed to be included according to Arab et al (39). Subjects with nonspecific chronic LBP had at least six weeks of continuous pain or three separate periods of pain with at least one week of continuous pain in each period (43). LBP was required to occur following their current employment.…”

Section: Participants and Sample Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…They are used to assess the endurance of the anterior, posterior, and lateral trunk muscles respectively. They have high reliability and validity (39,43,45,(52)(53)(54)(55)(56). The method of performing the tests has been described in detail previously (41).…”

Section: Measurement and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Core Muscles Endurance in Sedentary Individuals with and without Nonspecific Chronic Low Back: A Cross-Sectional Study

Esfahani

Dommerholt

Rezaeian

2021

Muscle Ligaments and Tendons J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Musculoskeletal dysfunction is one of the most important occupational health issues. Prolonged sitting may be a risk factor for low back pain (LBP) associated with reduced muscle endurance, although many people with a sedentary lifestyle and sitting-type job report no pain and discomfort in the lumbar region. In the present study, endurance of the core muscles in individuals with sedentary jobs with nonspecific chronic LBP were compared with those without LBP. Objective. The present study compared core muscle endurance in individuals with sedentary jobs with and without nonspecific chronic low back pain. Methods. A total of 50 sedentary staffs were selected and divided into LBP and control group. Trunk muscle endurance was measured in seconds using the McGill's trunk flexor endurance test, the Sorenson's trunk extensor endurance test, and the right and left trunk flexor endurance test (Side-bridge test). Differences between the two groups were analyzed using multivariate general linear models in 2 ways ANOVA. Results. There were no significant between-group differences in the raw endurance of the extensor, flexor, right/ left flexor muscles (P ≥ 0.05). However, there were significant betweengroup differences in some self-reported physical fitness subscales (P < 0.05), duration of sitting at home (P = 0.035), frequency of assuming a slump sitting position (P = 0.049), and sitting with leaning back to the backrest (P = 0.02) at work. We developed uni-and multivariate general linear models, which showed adjustments to these parameters and unmasked fundamental between-group differences in extensor muscle endurance. Conclusions. Our finding does not support the popular opinion that daily sitting-while-at-work for long durations is necessarily associated with LBP. Instead, sitting posture, lower physical fitness levels, and shorter duration of sitting activities at home may be associated with reduced extensor muscle endurance in nonspecific chronic low back pain.

show abstract

Does core stability exercise improve lumbopelvic stability (through endurance tests) more than general exercise in chronic low back pain? A quasi-randomized controlled trial

Abstract: CSE is not more effective than GE for improving endurance core stability tests and reducing disability and pain in chronic non-specific LBP patients.

Cited by 31 publications

References 31 publications

Comparison of efficacy of a supervised versus non-supervised physical therapy exercise program on the pain, functionality and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of efficacy of a supervised versus non-supervised physical therapy exercise program on the pain, functionality and quality of life of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain: a randomized controlled trial

Exercise training as S-Klotho protein stimulator in sedentary healthy adults: Rationale, design, and methodology

Core Muscles Endurance in Sedentary Individuals with and without Nonspecific Chronic Low Back: A Cross-Sectional Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About