Mindful Walking in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rotter G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9232228 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundVarious exercises have been proposed to mitigate chronic low back pain (LBP). However, to date, no one particular exercise has been shown to be superior. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare the efficiency between 2 exercises: the individualized graded lumbar stabilization exercise (IGLSE) and walking exercise (WE).MethodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted in 48 participants with chronic LBP. After screening, participants were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: flexibility exercise, WE, stabilization exercise (SE), and stabilization with WE (SWE) groups. Participants underwent each exercise for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was visual analog scale (VAS) of LBP during rest and physical activity. Secondary outcomes were as follows: VAS of radiating pain measured during rest and physical activity; frequency of medication use (number of times/day); Oswestry disability index; Beck depression inventory; endurances of specific posture; and strength of lumbar extensor muscles.ResultsLBP during physical activity was significantly decreased in all 4 groups. Exercise frequency was significantly increased in the SE and WE groups; exercise time was significantly increased in the SE group. The endurance of supine, side lying, and prone posture were significantly improved in the WE and SWE groups.ConclusionsLumbar SE and WE can be recommended for patients with chronic LBP because they not only relieve back pain but also prevent chronic back pain through improving muscle endurance.
| S-EPMC6616307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Low Back Pain is a major public health problem all over the western world. Active approaches including exercise in the treatment of low back pain results in better outcomes for patients, but it is not known exactly which types of back exercises are most beneficial or whether general physical activity provide similar benefits. Nordic Walking is a popular and fast growing type of exercise in Northern Europe. Initial studies have demonstrated that persons performing Nordic Walking are able to exercise longer and harder compared to normal walking thereby increasing their cardiovascular metabolism. Until now no studies have been performed to investigate whether Nordic Walking has beneficial effects in relation to low back pain. The primary aim of this study is to investigate whether supervised Nordic Walking can reduce pain and improve function in a population of chronic low back pain patients when compared to unsupervised Nordic Walking and advice to stay active. In addition we investigate whether there is an increase in the cardiovascular metabolism in persons performing supervised Nordic Walking compared to persons who are advised to stay active. Finally, we investigate whether there is a difference in compliance between persons receiving supervised Nordic Walking and persons doing unsupervised Nordic Walking.One hundred and fifty patients with low back pain for at least eight weeks and referred to a specialized secondary sector outpatient back pain clinic are included in the study. After completion of the standard back centre treatment patients are randomized into one of three groups: A) Nordic Walking twice a week for eight weeks under supervision of a specially trained instructor; B) Unsupervised Nordic Walking for eight weeks after one training session with an instructor; C) A one hour motivational talk including advice to stay active. Outcome measures are pain, function, overall health, cardiovascular ability and activity level.No results available at this point.This study will investigate the effect of Nordic Walking on pain and function in a population of people with chronic LBP.
| S-EPMC1610114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWalking is an easily prescribed physical activity for people with low back pain (LBP). However, the evidence for its effectiveness to improve pain and disability levels for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) within a community setting has not been evaluated. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a clinician guided, pedometer-driven, walking intervention for increasing physical activity and improving clinical outcomes compared to education and advice.MethodsRandomized controlled trial recruiting N = 174 adults with CLBP. Participants were randomly allocated into either a standardized care group (SG) or pedometer based walking group (WG) using minimization allocation with a 2:1 ratio to the WG. Prior to randomization all participants were given a standard package of education and advice regarding self-management and the benefits of staying active. Following randomization the WG undertook a physiotherapist guided pedometer-driven walking program for 12 weeks. This was individually tailored by weekly negotiation of daily step targets. Main outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Other outcomes included, numeric pain rating, International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Back Beliefs questionnaire (BBQ), Physical Activity Self-efficacy Scale, and EQ-5D-5L quality of life estimate.ResultsN = 138 (79%) participants completed all outcome measures at 12 weeks reducing to N = 96 (55%) at 12 months. Both observed and intention to treat analysis did not show any statistically significant difference in ODI change score between the WG and the SG at all post-intervention time points. There were also no significant between group differences for change scores in all secondary outcome measures. Post hoc sensitivity analyses revealed moderately disabled participants (baseline ODI ≥ 21.0) demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 months in the WG compared to SG, while WG participants with a daily baseline step count < 7500 steps demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 weeks.ConclusionsOverall, we found no significant difference in change of levels of (ODI) disability between the SG and WG following the walking intervention. However, ODI responses to a walking program for those with moderate levels of baseline disability and those with low baseline step count offer a potential future focus for continued research into the benefit of walking as a management strategy for chronic LBP.Trial registrationUnited States National Institutes of Health Clinical Trails registry (http://ClinicalTrials.gov/) No. NCT02284958 (27/10/2014).
| S-EPMC7896363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Attentional distraction from pain has been shown to be largely ineffective for obtaining a hypoalgesic effect in patients with chronic pain when compared to a control condition. It has been hypothesized that this may be due to the non-engaging types of distraction that have been used so far. Moreover, it is suggested that the hypoalgesic effects of distraction may be attenuated by pain-related cognitions and emotions, as they may increase the attention to pain. METHODS:In this randomized controlled trial, patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain in the intervention group (n?=?42) performed a single exercise session with nonimmersive VR games, while those in the control group (n?=?42) performed the same exercises without VR games. We investigated whether VR distraction had a hypoalgesic effect during and immediately after the exercises, and whether it reduced the time spent thinking of pain during the exercises. We further explored whether pain-related fear, pain catastrophizing and baseline pain intensity moderated the effects of VR distraction. RESULTS:VR distraction had a hypoalgesic effect during (Cohen's d?=?1.29) and immediately after (Cohen's d?=?0.85) the exercises, and it also reduced the time spent thinking of pain (Cohen's d?=?1.31). Preliminary exploratory analyses showed that pain-related fear, pain catastrophizing and baseline pain intensity did not moderate the effects of VR distraction. CONCLUSIONS:Large effect sizes of VR distraction induced hypoalgesia were observed. This suggests that nonimmersive VR games can be used when it is deemed important to reduce the pain during exercises in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02679300. This trial was registered on 10 February 2016.
| S-EPMC7178732 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to compare the effectiveness of standardized and individualized acupuncture treatment in patients with chronic low back pain. A single-center randomized controlled single-blind trial was performed in a general medical practice in Germany run by a Chinese-born medical doctor trained in western and Chinese medicine. One hundred and fifty outpatients with chronic low back pain were randomly allocated to two groups (78 standardized and 72 individualized acupuncture). Patients received either standardized acupuncture or individualized acupuncture. Treatment encompassed between 10 and 15 treatments based on individual symptoms with two treatments per week. The main outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC) summarizing eight weeks of daily rated pain severity measured with a visual analogue scale (0?mm?=?no pain, 100?mm?=?worst imaginable pain). No significant differences between groups were observed for the AUC (individualized acupuncture mean: 1768.7 (95% CI, 1460.4; 2077.1); standardized acupuncture 1482.9 (1177.2; 1788.7); group difference, 285.8 (-33.9; 605.5) P = 0.080). In this single-center trial, individualized acupuncture was not superior to standardized acupuncture for patients suffering from chronic pain. As a next step, a multicenter noninferiority study should be performed to investigate whether standardised acupuncture treatment for chronic low back pain might be applicable in a broader usual care setting. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00758017.
| S-EPMC3830844 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic back pain is a major public health problem and the primary reason patients seek acupuncture treatment. Therefore, an objective assessment of acupuncture efficacy is critical for making informed decisions about its appropriate role for patients with this common condition. This study addresses methodological shortcomings that have plagued previous studies evaluating acupuncture for chronic low back pain.A total of 640 participants (160 in each of four arms) between the ages of 18 and 70 years of age who have low back pain lasting at least 3 months will be recruited from integrated health care delivery systems in Seattle and Oakland. They will be randomized to one of two forms of Traditional Chinese Medical (TCM) acupuncture needling (individualized or standardized), a "control" group (simulated acupuncture), or to continued usual medical care. Ten treatments will be provided over 7 weeks. Study participants and the "Diagnostician" acupuncturists who evaluate participants and propose individualized treatments will be masked to the acupuncture treatment actually assigned each participant. The "Therapist" acupuncturists providing the treatments will not be masked but will have limited verbal interaction with participants. The primary outcomes, standard measures of dysfunction and bothersomeness of low back pain, will be assessed at baseline, and after 8, 26, and 52 weeks by telephone interviewers masked to treatment assignment. General health status, satisfaction with back care, days of back-related disability, and use and costs of healthcare services for back pain will also be measured. The primary analysis comparing outcomes by randomized treatment assignment will be analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline value. For both primary outcome measures, this trial will have 99% power to detect the presence of a minimal clinically significant difference among all four treatment groups and over 80% power for most pairwise comparisons. Secondary analyses will compare the proportions of participants in each group that improve by a clinically meaningful amount.Results of this trial will help clarify the value of acupuncture needling as a treatment for chronic low back pain.Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.
| S-EPMC2276474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this large, sham-controlled, randomized trial, we examined the efficacy of the combination of standard treatment and paraspinous lidocaine injection compared with standard therapy alone in subjects with chronic low back pain. There is little research-based evidence for the routine clinical use of paraspinous lidocaine injection for low back pain. A total of 378 subjects with nonspecific chronic low back pain were randomized to 3 groups: paraspinous lidocaine injection, analgesics, and exercises (group 1, LID-INJ); sham paraspinous lidocaine injection, analgesics, and exercises (group 2, SH-INJ); and analgesics and exercises (group 3, STD-TTR). A blinded rater assessed the study outcomes at 3 time points: baseline, after treatment, and after 3 months of follow-up. There were increased frequency of pain responses and better low back functional scores in the LID-INJ group compared with the SH-INJ and STD-TTR groups. These effects remained at the 3-month follow-up but differed between all 3 groups. There were significant changes in pain threshold immediately after treatment, supporting the effects of this intervention in reducing central sensitization. Paraspinous lidocaine injection therapy is not associated with a higher risk of adverse effects compared with conventional treatment and sham injection. Its effects on hyperalgesia might correlate with changes in central sensitization.NCT02387567.There are few data to support paraspinous lidocaine injection use in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. Our results show that this therapy when combined with standard therapy significantly increases the number of responders versus standard treatment alone. Its effects on hyperalgesia might correlate with a change in central sensitization.
| S-EPMC4910884 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUse of acupuncture has widely increased in patients with chronic low back pain. However, the evidence supporting its efficacy remains unclear. In this article, we report the design and the protocol of a multi-center randomized sham-controlled trial to treat chronic low back pain. Our goal is to verify the effect of acupuncture on chronic low back pain.Methods/designThis study is a multi-center randomized sham-controlled trial with 2 parallel arms. Participants included in the study met the following criteria: 1) low back pain lasting for at least the last 3 months, 2) a documented >or= 5 points on a 10 cm visual analog scale for bothersomeness of low back pain at the time of screening and 3) between 18 and 65 years of age. Participants were blinded to the real and sham acupuncture treatments. The real acupuncture treatment group received real acupuncture 2 times a week, during a total of 12 sessions over 6 weeks. The control group received sham acupuncture during the same period. In order to assess the primary and secondary outcome measures, the participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire at the baseline and 6, 8, 12 and 24 weeks after starting the treatments. The primary outcome was measured using the visual analog scale for bothersomeness of low back pain at 8 weeks after the initiation of treatments.DiscussionThe result of this trial (which will be available in 2010) will demonstrate the efficacy of using acupuncture to treat chronic low back pain.Trial registrationThis study is registered with the U.S. National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials registry: NCT00815529.
| S-EPMC2896349 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. The aim of this randomized, controlled study was to investigate the effectiveness of a mindful walking program in patients with high levels of perceived psychological distress. Methods. Participants aged between 18 and 65 years with moderate to high levels of perceived psychological distress were randomized to 8 sessions of mindful walking in 4 weeks (each 40 minutes walking, 10 minutes mindful walking, 10 minutes discussion) or to no study intervention (waiting group). Primary outcome parameter was the difference to baseline on Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (CPSS) after 4 weeks between intervention and control. Results. Seventy-four participants were randomized in the study; 36 (32 female, 52.3 ± 8.6 years) were allocated to the intervention and 38 (35 female, 49.5 ± 8.8 years) to the control group. Adjusted CPSS differences after 4 weeks were -8.8 [95% CI: -10.8; -6.8] (mean 24.2 [22.2; 26.2]) in the intervention group and -1.0 [-2.9; 0.9] (mean 32.0 [30.1; 33.9]) in the control group, resulting in a highly significant group difference (P < 0.001). Conclusion. Patients participating in a mindful walking program showed reduced psychological stress symptoms and improved quality of life compared to no study intervention. Further studies should include an active treatment group and a long-term follow-up.
| S-EPMC3747483 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveChronic low back pain represents a substantial cost to employers through benefits coverage and days missed due to incapacity. We sought to explore the effectiveness of Naturopathic care on chronic low back pain.MethodsThis study was a randomized clinical trial. We randomized 75 postal employees with low back pain of longer than six weeks duration to receive Naturopathic care (n = 39) or standardized physiotherapy (n = 36) over a period of 12 weeks. The study was conducted in clinics on-site in postal outlets. Participants in the Naturopathic care group received dietary counseling, deep breathing relaxation techniques and acupuncture. The control intervention received education and instruction on physiotherapy exercises using an approved education booklet. We measured low back pain using the Oswestry disability questionnaire as the primary outcome measure, and quality of life using the SF-36 in addition to low back range of motion, weight loss, and Body Mass Index as secondary outcomes.ResultsSixty-nine participants (92%) completed eight weeks or greater of the trial. Participants in the Naturopathic care group reported significantly lower back pain (-6.89, 95% CI. -9.23 to -3.54, p = <0.0001) as measured by the Oswestry questionnaire. Quality of life was also significantly improved in the group receiving Naturopathic care in all domains except for vitality. Differences for the aggregate physical component of the SF-36 was 8.47 (95% CI, 5.05 to 11.87, p = <0.0001) and for the aggregate mental component was 7.0 (95% CI, 2.25 to 11.75, p = 0.0045). All secondary outcomes were also significantly improved in the group receiving Naturopathic care: spinal flexion (p<0.0001), weight-loss (p = 0.0052) and Body Mass Index (-0.52, 95% CI, -0.96 to -0.08, p = 0.01).ConclusionsNaturopathic care provided significantly greater improvement than physiotherapy advice for patients with chronic low back pain.Trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN41920953.
| S-EPMC1976391 | biostudies-literature