Isometric vs Isotonic Core Stabilization Exercises to Improve Pain and Disability in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Arash Khaledi, Mehdi Gheitasi
{"title":"Isometric vs Isotonic Core Stabilization Exercises to Improve Pain and Disability in Patients with Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Arash Khaledi, Mehdi Gheitasi","doi":"10.5812/aapm-144046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a prevalent condition that affects 90% of individuals experiencing low back pain. Core stabilization exercises (CSE) stand out as the most commonly employed therapeutic approach for managing NSCLBP. Nevertheless, there remains uncertainty regarding the superior effectiveness between isometric (ISOM) and isotonic (ISOT) types of CSE in the treatment of NSCLBP. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of ISOM and ISOT exercises concerning pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. Additionally, the study aimed to assess the effectiveness of both ISOM and ISOT in comparison to no intervention concerning these variables in these patients. Methods: This study was a randomized controlled trial that involved 41 men and women experiencing NSCLBP. Participants were randomly allocated to three groups: ISOM CSE (n = 13), ISOT CSE (n = 14), and a waitlist control (n = 14). The exercise training was administered for 40 - 60 minutes three times a week over a period of up to 8 weeks. Pain (assessed using the Visual Analog Scale or VAS) and disability (evaluated through the Oswestry Disability Index or ODI) variables were measured before and after the interventions. Results: Based on the results, there was no significant difference between the 2 exercise groups (ISOM and ISOT) regarding pain and disability. However, the ISOM group demonstrated numerically better results than the ISOT group. Both the ISOM and ISOT groups exhibited a significant decrease in pain levels, with the VAS score decreasing from 5.5 to 2.7 for ISOM and from 5.8 to 3.7 for ISOT, as compared to the control group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Additionally, the average disability showed a significant improvement in both the ISOM (ODI score from 17 to 11) and ISOT (ODI score from 15.4 to 11) groups compared to the control group (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Both ISOM and ISOT methods are effective in alleviating pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. However, there is no significant difference in the benefits between them. Numerically, ISOM exercises were found to be superior. Further studies are needed to obtain a more accurate answer regarding their superiority.","PeriodicalId":505231,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm-144046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a prevalent condition that affects 90% of individuals experiencing low back pain. Core stabilization exercises (CSE) stand out as the most commonly employed therapeutic approach for managing NSCLBP. Nevertheless, there remains uncertainty regarding the superior effectiveness between isometric (ISOM) and isotonic (ISOT) types of CSE in the treatment of NSCLBP. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of ISOM and ISOT exercises concerning pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. Additionally, the study aimed to assess the effectiveness of both ISOM and ISOT in comparison to no intervention concerning these variables in these patients. Methods: This study was a randomized controlled trial that involved 41 men and women experiencing NSCLBP. Participants were randomly allocated to three groups: ISOM CSE (n = 13), ISOT CSE (n = 14), and a waitlist control (n = 14). The exercise training was administered for 40 - 60 minutes three times a week over a period of up to 8 weeks. Pain (assessed using the Visual Analog Scale or VAS) and disability (evaluated through the Oswestry Disability Index or ODI) variables were measured before and after the interventions. Results: Based on the results, there was no significant difference between the 2 exercise groups (ISOM and ISOT) regarding pain and disability. However, the ISOM group demonstrated numerically better results than the ISOT group. Both the ISOM and ISOT groups exhibited a significant decrease in pain levels, with the VAS score decreasing from 5.5 to 2.7 for ISOM and from 5.8 to 3.7 for ISOT, as compared to the control group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Additionally, the average disability showed a significant improvement in both the ISOM (ODI score from 17 to 11) and ISOT (ODI score from 15.4 to 11) groups compared to the control group (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Both ISOM and ISOT methods are effective in alleviating pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. However, there is no significant difference in the benefits between them. Numerically, ISOM exercises were found to be superior. Further studies are needed to obtain a more accurate answer regarding their superiority.
改善非特异性慢性腰痛患者疼痛和残疾的等长与等张核心稳定练习:随机对照试验
背景:非特异性慢性腰背痛(NSCLBP)是一种常见病,影响着 90% 的腰背痛患者。核心稳定练习(CSE)是治疗非特异性慢性腰背痛最常用的方法。然而,在治疗 NSCLBP 的过程中,等长(ISOM)和等张(ISOT)类型的 CSE 孰优孰劣仍存在不确定性。目标:本研究的主要目的是比较 ISOM 和 ISOT 运动对 NSCLBP 患者疼痛和残疾的疗效。此外,该研究还旨在评估 ISOM 和 ISOT 在这些变量方面与无干预措施相比的有效性。研究方法该研究是一项随机对照试验,共有 41 名男性和女性 NSCLBP 患者参与。参与者被随机分配到三组:ISOM CSE 组(13 人)、ISOT CSE 组(14 人)和候补对照组(14 人)。运动训练每周进行三次,每次 40-60 分钟,持续时间最长为 8 周。对干预前后的疼痛(使用视觉模拟量表或 VAS 评估)和残疾(使用 Oswestry 残疾指数或 ODI 评估)变量进行了测量。结果结果显示,两个锻炼组(ISOM 组和 ISOT 组)在疼痛和残疾方面没有显著差异。不过,ISOM 组的疗效在数量上优于 ISOT 组。与对照组相比,ISOM 组和 ISOT 组的疼痛水平都有明显下降,ISOM 组的 VAS 评分从 5.5 分降至 2.7 分,ISOT 组从 5.8 分降至 3.7 分(P < 0.001 和 P = 0.001)。此外,与对照组相比,ISOM 组(ODI 分数从 17 分降至 11 分)和 ISOT 组(ODI 分数从 15.4 分降至 11 分)的平均残疾程度均有显著改善(P < 0.001)。结论:ISOM和ISOT方法都能有效缓解NSCLBP患者的疼痛和残疾。然而,两者的益处并无明显差异。从数字上看,ISOM 运动更胜一筹。要想更准确地回答两者的优劣,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信