We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparison of Lower Limb and Back Exercises for Runners with Chronic Low Back Pain.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 2017 December
INTRODUCTION: This single-blind randomized trial was conducted to compare the treatment effect of lower limb (LL) exercises versus conventional lumbar extensor (LE) and lumbar stabilization (LS) exercises in recreational runners with chronic low back pain (cLBP), because there is currently no specific protocol for managing runners with cLBP.
METHODS: Eighty-four recreational runners with cLBP were allocated to three exercise groups (LL, LE, LS) for an 8-wk intervention. Outcome measures included self-rated pain and running capability, LL strength, back muscle function, and running gait. Participants were assessed at preintervention, mid-intervention, and end-intervention; selected outcomes also followed up at 3 and 6 months. Generalized estimating equation was adopted to examine group-time interaction.
RESULTS: The LL group improved 0.949 points per time point in Patient-Specific Functional Scale (P < 0.001), which was higher than the LE (B = -0.198, P = 0.001) and LS groups (B = -0.263, P < 0.001). All three groups improved on average 0.746 points per time point in Numeric Pain Rating Scale for running-induced pain (P < 0.001). Knee extension strength increased 0.260 N·m·kg per time point (P < 0.001) in the LL group, which was higher than the LE (B = -0.220, P < 0.001) and LS groups (B = -0.206, P < 0.001). The LL group also showed a greater increase in running step length (2.464 cm per time point, P = 0.001) compared with LS group (B = -2.213, P = 0.013). All three groups improved similarly in back muscle function.
CONCLUSION: LL exercise therapy could be a new option for cLPB management given its superior effects in improving running capability, knee extension strength, and running gait.
METHODS: Eighty-four recreational runners with cLBP were allocated to three exercise groups (LL, LE, LS) for an 8-wk intervention. Outcome measures included self-rated pain and running capability, LL strength, back muscle function, and running gait. Participants were assessed at preintervention, mid-intervention, and end-intervention; selected outcomes also followed up at 3 and 6 months. Generalized estimating equation was adopted to examine group-time interaction.
RESULTS: The LL group improved 0.949 points per time point in Patient-Specific Functional Scale (P < 0.001), which was higher than the LE (B = -0.198, P = 0.001) and LS groups (B = -0.263, P < 0.001). All three groups improved on average 0.746 points per time point in Numeric Pain Rating Scale for running-induced pain (P < 0.001). Knee extension strength increased 0.260 N·m·kg per time point (P < 0.001) in the LL group, which was higher than the LE (B = -0.220, P < 0.001) and LS groups (B = -0.206, P < 0.001). The LL group also showed a greater increase in running step length (2.464 cm per time point, P = 0.001) compared with LS group (B = -2.213, P = 0.013). All three groups improved similarly in back muscle function.
CONCLUSION: LL exercise therapy could be a new option for cLPB management given its superior effects in improving running capability, knee extension strength, and running gait.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app