Effects of attentional focus on quiet standing balance control in individuals with non-specific chronic low back pain

IF 1.6 3区心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES

Human Movement Science Pub Date : 2024-08-20 DOI:10.1016/j.humov.2024.103271

Pardis Pourgravand , Razieh Mofateh , Neda Orakifar , Mohammad-Jafar Shaterzadeh-Yazdi , Maryam Seyedtabib , Ramin Saki

{"title":"Effects of attentional focus on quiet standing balance control in individuals with non-specific chronic low back pain","authors":"Pardis Pourgravand , Razieh Mofateh , Neda Orakifar , Mohammad-Jafar Shaterzadeh-Yazdi , Maryam Seyedtabib , Ramin Saki","doi":"10.1016/j.humov.2024.103271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>Despite the widespread research about the effects of attentional focus on balance control in different populations, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet investigated the effects of attentional focus instructions on balance control in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Therefore, this study was aimed to compare the effects of internal focus (IF) and external focus (EF) of attention on quiet standing balance control between individuals with CLBP and healthy controls. Twenty individuals with CLBP and 20 healthy controls were enrolled in this quasi-experimental study. The participants were asked to stand still with eyes open and eyes closed while performing three tasks: baseline standing with no focus instructions, internally focusing on their feet, and externally focusing on two markers were placed on the force platform. Statistical analyses showed a significant main effect of group for mean total velocity (p = 0.02), area (p = 0.01), and displacement in mediolateral (ML) direction (p = 0.003). Moreover, a significant main effect of vision was observed for mean total velocity (p < 0.001), area (p < 0.001), and displacement in anteroposterior (AP) (p < 0.001) and ML directions (p < 0.001). Also, the results revealed a significant main effect of attentional focus for mean total velocity (p < 0.001), area (p < 0.001), and displacement in AP (p < 0.001) and ML directions (p = 0.01). Our results showed that in both healthy controls and individuals with CLBP, EF led to improve quiet standing balance control compared to IF and control conditions. From a clinical perspective, it may be useful for physical therapists to consider the use of instruction cues that direct performer's attention away from the body for improving quiet standing balance control in individuals with CLBP.</div>","PeriodicalId":55046,"journal":{"name":"Human Movement Science","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 103271"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Movement Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167945724000940","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the widespread research about the effects of attentional focus on balance control in different populations, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet investigated the effects of attentional focus instructions on balance control in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Therefore, this study was aimed to compare the effects of internal focus (IF) and external focus (EF) of attention on quiet standing balance control between individuals with CLBP and healthy controls. Twenty individuals with CLBP and 20 healthy controls were enrolled in this quasi-experimental study. The participants were asked to stand still with eyes open and eyes closed while performing three tasks: baseline standing with no focus instructions, internally focusing on their feet, and externally focusing on two markers were placed on the force platform. Statistical analyses showed a significant main effect of group for mean total velocity (p = 0.02), area (p = 0.01), and displacement in mediolateral (ML) direction (p = 0.003). Moreover, a significant main effect of vision was observed for mean total velocity (p < 0.001), area (p < 0.001), and displacement in anteroposterior (AP) (p < 0.001) and ML directions (p < 0.001). Also, the results revealed a significant main effect of attentional focus for mean total velocity (p < 0.001), area (p < 0.001), and displacement in AP (p < 0.001) and ML directions (p = 0.01). Our results showed that in both healthy controls and individuals with CLBP, EF led to improve quiet standing balance control compared to IF and control conditions. From a clinical perspective, it may be useful for physical therapists to consider the use of instruction cues that direct performer's attention away from the body for improving quiet standing balance control in individuals with CLBP.

查看原文本刊更多论文

注意力集中对非特异性慢性腰痛患者安静站立时平衡控制的影响

尽管有关注意力集中对不同人群平衡控制影响的研究非常广泛，但就我们所知，还没有研究调查过注意力集中指令对慢性腰背痛（CLBP）患者平衡控制的影响。因此，本研究旨在比较内聚焦（IF）和外聚焦（EF）的注意力对慢性腰背痛患者和健康对照组的安静站立平衡控制的影响。这项准实验研究招募了 20 名 CLBP 患者和 20 名健康对照者。研究人员要求受试者睁眼和闭眼静立，同时执行三项任务：无注意力指示的基线站立、内部注意力集中于双脚以及外部注意力集中于放置在受力平台上的两个标记。统计分析显示，组别对平均总速度（p = 0.02）、面积（p = 0.01）和内外侧（ML）方向位移（p = 0.003）有显著主效应。此外，视力对平均总速度（p = 0.001）、面积（p = 0.001）、前后（AP）方向位移（p = 0.001）和内外侧（ML）方向位移（p = 0.003）也有明显的主效应。此外，结果还显示，注意焦点对平均总速度（p <0.001）、面积（p <0.001）、前后方向位移（p <0.001）和上下方向位移（p = 0.01）具有显著的主效应。我们的研究结果表明，与中频和对照组相比，在健康对照组和慢性阻塞性脑病患者中，中频可改善安静站立时的平衡控制。从临床角度来看，物理治疗师可以考虑使用引导表演者将注意力从身体上移开的指令线索来改善CLBP患者的安静站立平衡控制能力。

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

Human Movement Science 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

4.80%

发文量

审稿时长

42 days

期刊介绍： Human Movement Science provides a medium for publishing disciplinary and multidisciplinary studies on human movement. It brings together psychological, biomechanical and neurophysiological research on the control, organization and learning of human movement, including the perceptual support of movement. The overarching goal of the journal is to publish articles that help advance theoretical understanding of the control and organization of human movement, as well as changes therein as a function of development, learning and rehabilitation. The nature of the research reported may vary from fundamental theoretical or empirical studies to more applied studies in the fields of, for example, sport, dance and rehabilitation with the proviso that all studies have a distinct theoretical bearing. Also, reviews and meta-studies advancing the understanding of human movement are welcome. These aims and scope imply that purely descriptive studies are not acceptable, while methodological articles are only acceptable if the methodology in question opens up new vistas in understanding the control and organization of human movement. The same holds for articles on exercise physiology, which in general are not supported, unless they speak to the control and organization of human movement. In general, it is required that the theoretical message of articles published in Human Movement Science is, to a certain extent, innovative and not dismissible as just "more of the same."