The influence of physical exercise on behavioral habits, kinesiophobia, and disability in people with low back pain: A retrospective cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Physical exercise improves physical fitness and health, helping to reduce pain and prevent low back pain. This study aims to compare the intensity of low back pain (LBP), behavioral habits, and the level of disability and kinesiophobia among exercising and non-exercising subjects with LBP. METHODS: Consecutive sample of 102 individuals was divided into exercising group (EG) and non-exercising group (NEG). The data was extracted from the answers to the questionnaires Back Pain and Body Posture Evaluation Instrument (BackPEI-A), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Fear-avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ-Brazil). For statistical analysis, the chi-square test was used, α ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Both groups presented predominance of mild to moderate pain intensity and absence of kinesiophobia in the practice of physical activity, with no statistically significant difference. However, there was significant difference between the groups for the risk of occurrence of LBP and for levels of incapacity and kinesiophobia related to work. CONCLUSION: Exercising individuals appear to present with a lower risk for occurrence of LBP, lower level of disability, and absence of work-related kinesiophobia.

Kinematic Characteristics of Sit-to-Stand Movements in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to identify different kinematic characteristics between the movements of sit-to-stand-to-sit, sit-to-stand, or stand-to-sit of individuals with and without low back pain (LBP). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on scientific databases. The analyzed kinematic variables were duration of the movement, reproduction of the movement, ranges of motion, velocity, and acceleration. The studies were appraised for methodological quality using the Downs & Black scale and for the level of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: After all screening stages, this systematic review comprised 8 cross-sectional studies. When comparing the patients with LBP vs controls, patients with LBP take longer to perform the sit-to-stand-to-sit, sit-to-stand, and stand-to sit movements (eg, 9.33 ± 1.49 seconds vs 8.29 ± 1.23 seconds in the sit-to-stand-to-sit movement), show decreased mobility of the lumbar spine (eg, 26.21° ± 8.76° vs 32.07° ± 6.77° in the sit-to-stand-to-sit movement) and the hip (eg, 51.0° vs 77.25° in the sit-to-stand movement), present decreased velocity of the trunk (eg, 95.31° ± 25.13°/s vs 138.23° ± 23.42°/s in the sit-to-stand-to-sit movement) and the hip (eg, 46° ± 13°/s vs 69° ± 13°/s in the sit-to-stand movement), and decreased overall acceleration of the trunk (eg, 280.19° ± 113.08°/s2 vs 460.16° ± 101.49°/s2 in the sit-to-stand-to-sit movement), besides presenting greater variability of the trunk (eg, 5.53° ± 0.48° vs 4.32° ± 0.46° in the sit-to-stand movement). CONCLUSION: There are kinematic alterations in the lumbar spine, the hip, and the trunk of patients with LBP. However, information about pelvic and overall trunk mobility, velocity, and acceleration of the lumbar spine; and mobility, speed, and acceleration of hip and pelvis remain incipient in individuals with LBP. Based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, the results of this review indicate that there is low scientific evidence on the characteristics of the kinematic variables (duration of the movement, reproduction of the movement, range of motion, velocity, and acceleration) of the trunk, lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip in patients with LBP.

Repeatability and Reproducibility of Postural Variables by Photogrammetry.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the reliability of postural variables analyzed by photogrammetry obtained at different instances on the same day and between 2 different days. METHODS: A sample composed of 24 healthy adult individuals of both sexes was submitted to photogrammetric postural assessment. From 35 seconds of filming, 7 photographs (of time instance at 0 second, 05 seconds, 10 seconds, 15 seconds, 20 seconds, 25 seconds, and 30 seconds) were extracted and digitalized on digital image-based postural assessment software. One factor repeated-measures analysis of variance quantified the alterations in the magnitude of the variables within and between sessions (factor time and factor day, respectively). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) were calculated to verify the repeatability and reproducibility. RESULTS: The repeatability shows that postural variables did not present significant differences in the comparison among the 7 instances; all the variables had excellent and significant ICCs, and SEM and MDC values indicated measurement errors lower than 5%. The intrarater reproducibility shows that postural variables did not present significant differences between 2 days of evaluation; most of the variables had excellent and significant ICCs, and SEM and MDC values were between 0.9% and 12.5%. CONCLUSION: The results for repeatability and reproducibility show that most of the variables have excellent and significant ICCs. Postural evaluation by photogrammetry can be performed at any time within a 30-second interval counting from the positioning of the participant for assessment. Therefore, we conclude that a single photograph can represent the static posture of an individual in the postural evaluation, which is reliable enough and useful to determine the effects of an intervention either in clinical practice or in research.