Hip Rotations' Influence of Electromyographic Activity of Gluteus Medius Muscle During Pelvic-Drop Exercise.

CONTEXT: Pelvic-drop exercises are often used to strengthen the gluteus medius (GM) muscle with the aim of increasing or prioritizing its recruitment. However, the effect of hip rotation on the performance of the action of the GM is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of hip rotation on the recruitment of the GM, tensor fasciae latae (TFL), and quadratus lumborum (QL). METHOD: Seventeen healthy subjects performed 2 sets of 4 repetitions of pelvic-drop exercise in random order with pelvic-drop lateral, medial, and neutral rotation of the hip. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The electromyographic (EMG) activity of the GM, TFL, and QL was evaluated using surface electromyography. RESULTS: There were significant increases in the activation of the GM with medial and neutral rotation compared with lateral rotation (P = .03, P = .01, respectively), and there was no difference between medial and neutral rotation (P = 1.00). There was no difference in EMG activity of the TFL and QL in any of the positions. The GM:TFL ratio was the same in all analyzed positions. Regarding the GM:QL ratio, there was a significant increase with medial rotation compared with lateral rotation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic-drop exercises are more efficient for activating the GM when the hip is in medial rotation and neutral position.

Analgesic efficacy of cerebral and peripheral electrical stimulation in chronic nonspecific low back pain: a randomized, double-blind, factorial clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-specific low back pain is a major socioeconomic public health issue worldwide and, despite the volume of research in the area, it is still a difficult-to-treat condition. The conservative analgesic therapy usually comprises a variety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. The neuromatrix pain model and the new findings on the process of chronicity of pain point to a higher effectiveness of treatments that address central rather than peripheral structures. The transcranial direct current stimulation is a noninvasive technique of neuromodulation that has made recent advances in the treatment of chronic pain. The simultaneous combination of these two electrostimulation techniques (cerebral and peripheral) can provide an analgesic effect superior to isolated interventions. However, all the evidence on the analgesic efficacy of these techniques, alone or combined, is still fragmented. This is a protocol for a randomized clinical trial to investigate whether cerebral electrical stimulation combined with peripheral electrical stimulation is more effective in relieving pain than the isolated application of electrical stimulations in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODS/DESIGN: Ninety-two patients will be randomized into four groups to receive transcranial direct current stimulation (real/sham) + transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (real/sham) for 12 sessions over a period of four weeks. The primary clinical outcome (pain intensity) and the secondary ones (sensory and affective aspects of pain, physical functioning and global perceived effect) will be recorded before treatment, after four weeks, in Month 3 and in Month 6 after randomization. Confounding factors such as anxiety and depression, the patient's satisfaction with treatment and adverse effects will also be listed. Data will be collected by an examiner unaware of (blind to) the treatment allocation. DISCUSSION: The results of this study may assist in clinical decision-making about the combined use of cerebral and peripheral electrical stimulation for pain relief in patients with chronic low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01896453.

Efficacy of adding the Kinesio Taping method to guideline-endorsed conventional physiotherapy in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic nonspecific low back pain is a significant health condition with high prevalence worldwide and it is associated with enormous costs to society. Clinical practice guidelines show that many interventions are available to treat patients with chronic low back pain, but the vast majority of these interventions have a modest effect in reducing pain and disability. An intervention that has been widespread in recent years is the use of elastic bandages called Kinesio Taping. Although Kinesio Taping has been used extensively in clinical practice, current evidence does not support the use of this intervention; however these conclusions are based on a small number of underpowered studies. Therefore, questions remain about the effectiveness of the Kinesio Taping method as an additional treatment to interventions, such as conventional physiotherapy, that have already been recommended by the current clinical practice guidelines in robust and high-quality randomised controlled trials. We aim to determine the effectiveness of the addition of the use of Kinesio Taping in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain who receive guideline-endorsed conventional physiotherapy. METHODS/DESIGN: One hundred and forty-eight patients will be randomly allocated to receive either conventional physiotherapy, which consists of a combination of manual therapy techniques, general exercises, and specific stabilisation exercises (Guideline-Endorsed Conventional Physiotherapy Group) or to receive conventional physiotherapy with the addition of Kinesio Taping to the lumbar spine (Conventional Physiotherapy plus Kinesio Taping Group) over a period of 5 weeks (10 sessions of treatment). Clinical outcomes (pain intensity, disability and global perceived effect) will be collected at baseline and at 5 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after randomisation. We will also collect satisfaction with care and adverse effects after treatment. Data will be collected by a blinded assessor. All statistical analysis will be conducted following the principles of intention to treat, and the effects of treatment will be calculated using Linear Mixed Models. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide new information about the usefulness of Kinesio Taping as an additional component of a guideline-endorsed physiotherapy program in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

The Long-Term Prognosis in People With Recent Onset Low Back Pain From Emergency Departments: An Inception Cohort Study.

Most studies investigating the course of recent-onset low back pain (LBP) included patients from primary care. We aimed to describe the prognosis in people with recent-onset LBP presenting to emergency departments (EDs) and to identify prognostic factors for nonrecovery. This inception cohort study with a 1-year follow-up recruited 600 consecutive acute LBP patients presenting to 4 EDs. The outcomes measured the days to recover from pain, recover from disability, return to previous work hours and duties, and complete recovery. Within 12 months, 73% of participants (95% confidence interval [CI] = 69-77) recovered from pain, 86% (95% CI = 82-90) recovered from disability, 79% (95% CI = 71-87) returned to previous work hours and duties, and 70% (95% CI = 66-74) completely recovered. The median recovery times were 67 days (95% CI = 54-80) to recover from pain, 37 days (95% CI = 31-43) to recover from disability, 37 days (95% CI = 25-49) to return to previous work hours and duties, and 70 days (95% CI = 57-83) to recover completely. Higher pain levels, a higher perceived risk of persistent LBP, more days of reduced activity due to LBP, more pain sites, and higher duration of LBP were associated with complete nonrecovery within 6 months. PERSPECTIVE: This information relates to prognosis and to likely recovery times for patients with recent-onset LBP in EDs. The findings also confirm previous factors associated with poor outcomes in patients with recent-onset LBP.

Profile of Patients With Acute Low Back Pain Who Sought Emergency Departments: A Cross-sectional Study.

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the profile of patients with acute low back pain (LBP) who sought emergency departments (EDs) in Brazilian public hospitals. We also described the profile of these patients according to the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LBP is the most common musculoskeletal condition worldwide and is one of the main complaints in EDs. There is a lack of evidence describing the profile of these patients from low- to middle-income countries. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study involving patients with a new episode of nonspecific acute LBP that was conducted between August 2014 and August 2016. Variables related to clinical, psychological, sociodemographic and work status characteristics were investigated through structured, in-person oral questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients were included in the study. The majority of the patients were women (58%), with a median of eight points on pain intensity (measured on an 11-point scale) and 17 points on disability (measured on a 24-item questionnaire). With regards to the SBST evaluation, 295 (49.2%) patients were classified as being at high risk of developing an unfavorable prognosis with a median pain intensity of nine points on pain intensity, 20 points on disability, and seven points on depression (measured on an 11-point scale). Despite this, the majority of the patients (74%) continued working normally without interference from LBP. CONCLUSION: Identifying the profile of patients seeking care in EDs can help to define effective management for LBP in low- and middle-income countries. Patients with nonspecific acute LBP who seek EDs in Brazil present high levels of pain intensity and disability. Most patients were classified as having a high risk of developing an unfavorable prognosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Effects of a Knee Brace With a Patellar Hole Versus Without a Patellar Hole in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.

The objective of this study was to observe the immediate effect of a knee brace with a patellar hole versus without a patellar hole on pain perception in patients with knee osteoarthritis. To accomplish this, a double-blind, randomized controlled trial enrolled 108 patients divided into two groups (knee brace with a patellar hole or without a patellar hole). Patients were evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in order to measure their pain sensation, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test was used to evaluate their ability to walk, and the 8-m walking test (8MWT) was used to estimate their walking speed. Both groups presented significant reduction in pain perception, higher function of the lower extremities, and greater mobility while wearing a knee brace. However, the patients who wore a knee brace without a patellar hole presented more favorable results than those who wore a knee brace with a patellar hole: a 1.6-point reduction was found versus 1.1 points in the VAS, the patients presented 0.7 s less time versus 0.4 s in the TUG, and the speed was reduced by 1.4 s versus 0.8 s in the 8MWT. Therefore, the knee brace without a patellar hole presented more favorable results when compared with the knee brace with a patellar hole.

Kinesio Taping Does Not Provide Additional Benefits in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Who Receive Exercise and Manual Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Study Design Randomized controlled trial. Background Many clinical practice guidelines endorse both manual therapy and exercise as effective treatment options for patients with low back pain. To optimize the effects of the treatments recommended by the guidelines, a new intervention known as Kinesio Taping is being widely used in these patients. Objectives To determine the effectiveness of Kinesio Taping in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain when added to a physical therapy program consisting of exercise and manual therapy. Methods One hundred forty-eight patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain were randomly allocated to receive 10 (twice weekly) sessions of physical therapy, consisting of exercise and manual therapy, or the same treatment with the addition of Kinesio Taping applied to the lower back. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability (5 weeks after randomization) and the secondary outcomes were pain intensity, disability (3 months and 6 months after randomization), global perceived effect, and satisfaction with care (5 weeks after treatment). Data were collected by a blinded assessor. Results No between-group differences were observed in the primary outcomes of pain intensity (mean difference, -0.01 points; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.88, 0.85) or disability (mean difference, 1.14 points; 95% CI: -0.85, 3.13) at 5 weeks' follow-up. In addition, no between-group differences were observed for any of the other outcomes evaluated, except for disability 6 months after randomization (mean difference, 2.01 points; 95% CI: 0.03, 4.00) in favor of the control group. Conclusion Patients who received a physical therapy program consisting of exercise and manual therapy did not get additional benefit from the use of Kinesio Taping. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b. Prospectively registered May 28, 2013 at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01866332). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):506-513. Epub 6 Jun 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6590.