RESUMEN
Background: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is one of the most prevalent spinal abnormalities, appearing far into puberty. Schroth's exercises (SE) and core-stabilization exercises (CE) have become very prominent among the specialized and general methods to scoliosis treatment. However, their effects are still unclear and there is insufficient evidence of superiority between them. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of these methods on Cobb angles (CA) in AIS. Methods: A systematic review was performed on SE and CE papers. The databases included PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Google Scholar from January 2005 to June 2022. The physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) scale assessed the quality and provided internal validity and the statistical information of the papers. Results: After screening 410 papers, nine papers (SE=5, CE=3 and SE vs. CE=1), with 339 participants, were admitted for review (PEDro=6). Among them, three (SE=moderate evidence) and two papers (CE=limited evidence) reported clinically significant reductions in CA>5°, alone or compared to control or other exercise methods, while only one paper (very limited evidence) showed the relative superiority of SE (-7.16°) compared to CE (-3.27°). However, three papers did not show clinically significant results (CA<5°). Conclusion: Moderate and limited evidence suggests that both SE and CE can effectively improve CA, respectively. There is very limited evidence to suggest that SE is more effective than CE in treating AIS. Thus, the definitive answers to the questions, especially concerning the superiority between these two methods, remained unclear. Further high-quality studies must be conducted in the future.
RESUMEN
Background: Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) is a prevalent condition that affects 90% of individuals experiencing low back pain. Core stabilization exercises (CSE) stand out as the most commonly employed therapeutic approach for managing NSCLBP. Nevertheless, there remains uncertainty regarding the superior effectiveness between isometric (ISOM) and isotonic (ISOT) types of CSE in the treatment of NSCLBP. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of ISOM and ISOT exercises concerning pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. Additionally, the study aimed to assess the effectiveness of both ISOM and ISOT in comparison to no intervention concerning these variables in these patients. Methods: This study was a randomized controlled trial that involved 41 men and women experiencing NSCLBP. Participants were randomly allocated to three groups: ISOM CSE (n = 13), ISOT CSE (n = 14), and a waitlist control (n = 14). The exercise training was administered for 40 - 60 minutes three times a week over a period of up to 8 weeks. Pain (assessed using the Visual Analog Scale or VAS) and disability (evaluated through the Oswestry Disability Index or ODI) variables were measured before and after the interventions. Results: Based on the results, there was no significant difference between the 2 exercise groups (ISOM and ISOT) regarding pain and disability. However, the ISOM group demonstrated numerically better results than the ISOT group. Both the ISOM and ISOT groups exhibited a significant decrease in pain levels, with the VAS score decreasing from 5.5 to 2.7 for ISOM and from 5.8 to 3.7 for ISOT, as compared to the control group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Additionally, the average disability showed a significant improvement in both the ISOM (ODI score from 17 to 11) and ISOT (ODI score from 15.4 to 11) groups compared to the control group (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Both ISOM and ISOT methods are effective in alleviating pain and disability in patients with NSCLBP. However, there is no significant difference in the benefits between them. Numerically, ISOM exercises were found to be superior. Further studies are needed to obtain a more accurate answer regarding their superiority.
RESUMEN
Objectives: The available evidence on the efficiency of well-known Schroth's exercises (SE) for correcting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is limited, especially in combination with the asymmetric spinal stabilization exercises (ASSE) method. Therefore, we hypothesized that, first, there is no difference in the efficiency of the combined exercises (SE+ASSE) and SE alone in improving Cobb angle, angle of trunk rotation (ATR), and quality of life (QoL) in AIS. Second, there is no difference in the efficiency of SE and no intervention on corresponding variables in treating AIS. Methods: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) consisted of 40 patients with mild AIS (10-18-year-old boys) divided into three groups: SE (n=15), SE+ASSE (n=15), and a waitlist control group (n=10). For 12 weeks (three days a week), both experimental groups performed SE, the combined group additionally received ASSE, and the control group received no intervention. The assessment included Cobb angle (photogrammetry), ATR (Adam's test), and QoL (Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire). Results: It was found that Cobb angle, ATR, and QoL improved significantly in the combined SE+ASSE group (Cobb=16.45° to 9.01°; ATR=4.93° to 1.33°) compared to the SE group (P<.001). In addition, the SE group showed significant amelioration in the mentioned variables (Cobb=15.09° to 9.77°; ATR=4.23° to 2.17°) compared to the control group (P<.001), whereas the control group remained almost unchanged. Conclusion: Based on the obtained results, the combination of SE and ASSE provided more benefits than SE alone, and the SE results were efficient compared to the no-intervention group regarding the correction of scoliosis and related problems. However, patients with moderate to severe scoliosis should also be investigated in longer treatment periods in future.
RESUMEN
Objectives: Sport is one of the best ways to prevent osteoporosis; however, not all sports have the same impact on bones, for instance, swimming (SW) may have no effect or be harmful. Elite athletes are the best choice to detect the effects of any sport. Thus, this study was conducted firstly to compare the bone mineral density (BMD) and bone mineral content (BMC) of elite athletes in volleyball (VB), basketball (BB), and long-distance running (LR) together, and secondly to compare those corresponding values in SW athletes with those of non-athletes (NA). Methods: The subjects (n=58) of this cross-sectional study included elite male athletes (members of Iran's national teams, with a minimum of 12-15 hours of training per week) and NA (control; C) who were divided into BB, VB, LR, SW (n=12 for each), and C (n=10) groups. The DEXA scan measured the amount of BMD and BMC values in the lumbar spine (LS; L2-L4) and proximal femur (PF; neck, trochanter, and Ward's triangle) areas. Results: In the LS areas, LR had significantly higher BMD than the BB, VB, SW, and C groups (P<0.001), while for BMC, both LR and VB were significantly superior to other groups (P<0.001). Moreover, the BMD and BMC of the PF areas of VB and BB were significantly higher than those of the LR, SW, and C groups (P<0.001). Finally, in all areas, SW showed significantly higher BMD and BMC, compared to the C group (except for trochanter and femur neck BMC) (P<0.05). Conclusion: LR athletes showed the most bone acquisition in the LS areas and VB players in the PF areas, while BB players ranked third in osteoporosis prevention in the mentioned regions. Unexpectedly, SW athletes also had better BMD and BMC than NA; therefore, after weight-bearing sports, this type of sport can be effective in bone acquisition.