{"title":"一项横断面研究:腰痛患者在提升和降低外负荷时动态姿势控制的比较","authors":"Majid Shahbazi PhD , Javad Sarrafzadeh PhD , Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani PhD , Saeed Akhlaghi PhD , Hossein Negahban PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.05.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study aimed to compare dynamic postural control between individuals with and without chronic low back pain (LBP) through load lifting and lowering.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional study included 52 male patients with chronic LBP (age: 33.37 ± 9.23 years) and 20 healthy male individuals (age: 31.75 ± 7.43 years). The postural control parameters were measured using a force plate system. The participants were instructed to stand barefoot (hip-width apart) on the force plate and lift a box (10% of the weight of the participants) from the waist height to overhead and then lower it from overhead to waist height. The interaction between the groups and tasks was determined using a 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There was no significant interaction between the groups and tasks. Regardless of the groups, postural control parameters including amplitude (<em>P</em> = .001) and velocity (<em>P</em> < .001) in anterior-posterior (AP) direction, phase plane in medial-lateral (ML) direction (<em>P</em> = .001), phase plane in AP-ML direction (<em>P</em> = .001), and the mean total velocity (<em>P</em> < .001) were lesser during the lowering compared with lifting. The results indicated that, regardless of the tasks, the postural control parameters including velocity (<em>P</em> = .004) and phase plane in AP direction (<em>P</em> = .004), velocity in ML direction (<em>P</em> < .001), phase plane (AP-ML) (<em>P</em> = .028), and mean total velocity (<em>P</em> = .001) in LBP were lesser compared with the normal group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Different tasks affected postural control differently in patients with LBP and healthy individuals. Moreover, postural control was more challenged during the load-lowering than the load-lifting task. This may have been a result of a stiffening strategy. It may be that the load-lowering task might be considered as a more influential factor for the postural control strategy. These results may provide a novel understanding of selecting the rehabilitation programs for postural control disorders in patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the Dynamic Postural Control During Lifting and Lowering an External Load in Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study\",\"authors\":\"Majid Shahbazi PhD , Javad Sarrafzadeh PhD , Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani PhD , Saeed Akhlaghi PhD , Hossein Negahban PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmpt.2023.05.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study aimed to compare dynamic postural control between individuals with and without chronic low back pain (LBP) through load lifting and lowering.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cross-sectional study included 52 male patients with chronic LBP (age: 33.37 ± 9.23 years) and 20 healthy male individuals (age: 31.75 ± 7.43 years). The postural control parameters were measured using a force plate system. The participants were instructed to stand barefoot (hip-width apart) on the force plate and lift a box (10% of the weight of the participants) from the waist height to overhead and then lower it from overhead to waist height. The interaction between the groups and tasks was determined using a 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There was no significant interaction between the groups and tasks. Regardless of the groups, postural control parameters including amplitude (<em>P</em> = .001) and velocity (<em>P</em> < .001) in anterior-posterior (AP) direction, phase plane in medial-lateral (ML) direction (<em>P</em> = .001), phase plane in AP-ML direction (<em>P</em> = .001), and the mean total velocity (<em>P</em> < .001) were lesser during the lowering compared with lifting. The results indicated that, regardless of the tasks, the postural control parameters including velocity (<em>P</em> = .004) and phase plane in AP direction (<em>P</em> = .004), velocity in ML direction (<em>P</em> < .001), phase plane (AP-ML) (<em>P</em> = .028), and mean total velocity (<em>P</em> = .001) in LBP were lesser compared with the normal group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Different tasks affected postural control differently in patients with LBP and healthy individuals. Moreover, postural control was more challenged during the load-lowering than the load-lifting task. This may have been a result of a stiffening strategy. It may be that the load-lowering task might be considered as a more influential factor for the postural control strategy. These results may provide a novel understanding of selecting the rehabilitation programs for postural control disorders in patients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000301\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475423000301","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of the Dynamic Postural Control During Lifting and Lowering an External Load in Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study
Objective
This study aimed to compare dynamic postural control between individuals with and without chronic low back pain (LBP) through load lifting and lowering.
Methods
This cross-sectional study included 52 male patients with chronic LBP (age: 33.37 ± 9.23 years) and 20 healthy male individuals (age: 31.75 ± 7.43 years). The postural control parameters were measured using a force plate system. The participants were instructed to stand barefoot (hip-width apart) on the force plate and lift a box (10% of the weight of the participants) from the waist height to overhead and then lower it from overhead to waist height. The interaction between the groups and tasks was determined using a 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance.
Results
There was no significant interaction between the groups and tasks. Regardless of the groups, postural control parameters including amplitude (P = .001) and velocity (P < .001) in anterior-posterior (AP) direction, phase plane in medial-lateral (ML) direction (P = .001), phase plane in AP-ML direction (P = .001), and the mean total velocity (P < .001) were lesser during the lowering compared with lifting. The results indicated that, regardless of the tasks, the postural control parameters including velocity (P = .004) and phase plane in AP direction (P = .004), velocity in ML direction (P < .001), phase plane (AP-ML) (P = .028), and mean total velocity (P = .001) in LBP were lesser compared with the normal group.
Conclusion
Different tasks affected postural control differently in patients with LBP and healthy individuals. Moreover, postural control was more challenged during the load-lowering than the load-lifting task. This may have been a result of a stiffening strategy. It may be that the load-lowering task might be considered as a more influential factor for the postural control strategy. These results may provide a novel understanding of selecting the rehabilitation programs for postural control disorders in patients.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) is an international and interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of conservative health care principles and practices. The JMPT is the premier biomedical publication in the chiropractic profession and publishes peer reviewed, research articles and the Journal''s editorial board includes leading researchers from around the world.
The Journal publishes original primary research and review articles of the highest quality in relevant topic areas. The JMPT addresses practitioners and researchers needs by adding to their clinical and basic science knowledge and by informing them about relevant issues that influence health care practices.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
