Challenges in the Use of the Treat-to-Target Strategy in Atopic Dermatitis in Latin America: A Case Series Review.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing-remitting illness. In moderate-to-severe instances, recommendations urge patient-centered systemic therapy. Existing standards lack long-term treatment success requirements. A treat-to-target methodology was proposed for systemic therapy patients that requires global improvements to prompt decisions about treatment. METHODS: We conducted an observational study between May 2021 and June 2022 in three Ecuadorian patients with severe AD who were treated with dupilumab to assess the clinical evolution and behavior of the subdomains evaluated by clinimetric tools. RESULTS: Patients A and C satisfied disease-domain response criteria to dupilumab at 12 and 24 weeks, but B did not complete the algorithm objectives. Nonetheless, patient A improved AD severity, itching, bleeding, desquamation, sleep, daily activities, mood, emotions, sexual troubles, clothing, and sports subdomains. Patient B experienced reduced symptomatology, AD aggravation, daily activities impact, and work/study impairment. Patient C improved from severe to mild desquamation, itching, exudate, lichenification, and rough/dry skin. Sleep, shame, and study subdomains improved the most. CONCLUSION: We provide a new operational construct for analyzing current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinician-reported outcome measures (CROMs) based on subdomains to widen our understanding of the state of disease activity and make clinical decisions when the treat-to-target strategy is not attained.

Sex-related differences in motor control strategies during isometric contractions in the Sorensen test posture with different external loading.

BACKGROUND: There is a sex-related difference in strength and endurance in trunk muscles: males have more strength while females have more endurance. OBJECTIVE: Investigate sex-related differences in motor control strategies in back muscles during isometric contractions (IC) in the Sorensen test posture. METHODS: Thirty-six healthy and young volunteers performed different tasks: three maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) tests recorded with a bio-feedback force sensor, and followed by five loaded IC (LIC) tests using bodyweight and loads of 0 to 8 kg with a 2-kg step. Surface electromyography was used to measure the activity of bilateral lumbar paravertebral (LP) and quadratus lumborum (QL) muscles. RESULTS: Sex-related and load-related differences in EMG amplitudes were highlighted during LIC tests. Females showed significantly (p-value = 0.02) greater EMG amplitude for the highest load (8 kg) than males. Besides, significant differences between low (2 and 4 kg) and high (6 and 8 kg) loads for both LP and QL muscles and for both sexes were observed. Finally, for MVC tests, males produced significantly (p-value = 1.02e-4) greater strength during MVC tests (4.25 ± 1.37 N/kg vs 2.60 ± 0.78 N/kg). CONCLUSION: The results were clinically relevant to bring attention to load strategy during rehabilitation, particularly in females who seemed to recruit the QL muscle more.

Effectiveness of motor control exercises versus other musculoskeletal therapies in patients with pelvic girdle pain of sacroiliac joint origin: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic girdle pain represents a group of musculoskeletal pain disorders associated with the sacroiliac joint and/or the surrounding musculoskeletal and ligamentous structures. Its physical management is still a serious challenge as it has been considered the primary cause of low back pain. OBJECTIVE: This review sought to determine the effectiveness of motor control exercises for two clinically relevant measures; i.e., pain and disability, on patients with pelvic girdle pain of sacroiliac joint origin. METHODS: This review covered only randomized controlled studies. Online databases, such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, were searched from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2019. PEDro scale was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies, while Review Manager was employed to synthesize data in view of meta-analysis. The PRISMA guidelines were applied for this review. RESULTS: Twelve randomized controlled trials of moderate-to-high quality were included in this review. The studies involved 1407 patients with a mean age ranging from 25.5 to 42.1 years as well as intervention and follow-up durations from 1 week to 2 years. Motor control exercises alone for pelvic girdle pain of sacroiliac joint origin were not effective in terms of pain reduction (SMD = 0.29 [-0.64,1.22]) compared to control interventions whereas they were slightly effective in terms of disability reduction (SMD =-0.07 [-0.67, 0.53]) at short-term. The combination of motor control exercises with other musculoskeletal therapies, however, revealed to be more effective than control interventions in terms of pain reduction (SMD =-1.78 [-2.49, -1.07]; 95%CI) and lessened disability (SMD =-1.80 [-3.03, -0.56]; 95%CI) at short-term. CONCLUSION: Motor control exercises alone were not found to be effective in reducing pain at short-term. However, their combination with other musculoskeletal therapies revealed a significant and clinically-relevant decrease in pain and disability at short-term, especially in peripartum period.

The Unmet Needs in Atopic Dermatitis Control in Latin America: A Multidisciplinary Expert Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Adoption of control tools for atopic dermatitis (AD) in Latin America (LA) is currently very limited. Clinical assessment tools represent a practical method to measure the impact of treatment on disease activity and on the quality of life of patients. However, the use of these tools in the LA clinical practice setting is limited. METHODS: A selected panel of Latin American experts in fields related to atopic dermatitis were provided with a series of relevant questions to address prior to the multi-day conference. Within this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group, through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion, until a consensus was achieved. RESULTS: The panel proposes specific and realistic recommendations for implementing control tools for AD care in LA. In creating these recommendations, the authors strove to address all barriers to the widespread use of these tools. CONCLUSION: This article includes a narrative analysis of barriers to AD control in LA and provides necessary recommendations to integrate and increase the use of validated AD control assessment tools throughout the region.

Effects of Mulligan Mobilization with Movement in Subacute Lateral Ankle Sprains: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial.

Objective: In a pragmatic and randomized clinical trial, patients with lateral ankle sprains were assessed, under blinded conditions, for their responsiveness and improvements during Mulligan mobilization-with-movement (MWM) therapy. Methods: Overall, 51 participants with subacute lateral ankle sprains (Grade I-II) were recruited. Following an MWM screening procedure, responders were randomized to either an intervention group (MWM) or a sham group. The MWM group received inferior tibiofibular, talocrural, or cubometatarsal MWM. The treatment or sham was administered upon three sessions, each 4 days apart. Changes from baseline were measured and compared between the sessions for dorsiflexion range of motion, pain, stiffness perception, and the Y-balance test. Results: In total, 43 participants were considered responders to MWM. Using a two-way repeated-measure ANOVA, a statistical and clinically meaningful improvement in dorsiflexion range of motion was revealed in the MWM group (p = 0.004, 1rst = +1.762 cm; 3rd = +2.714 cm), whereas no improvement following the first session occurred in the sham group (p = 0.454, 1rsttrial = +1.091 cm; 3rdtrial = +1.409 cm). Pain and stiffness significantly improved, yet below the clinically meaningful level. The MWM group demonstrated a significant improvement after three sessions for the Y-balance test (p = 0.001, +8.857 cm). Conclusion: More than 80% of participants with subacute lateral ankle sprains responded well to the MWM approach. Three sessions of pragmatically determined MWM provided a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in dorsiflexion range of motion and Y-balance test performance compared to a sham treatment.

Inferior tibiofibular joint mobilization with movement and taping does not improve chronic ankle dorsiflexion stiffness: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the modification of musculoarticular stiffness (MAS) and clinical outcomes after mobilization with movement (MWM) on the inferior tibiofibular joint and a placebo MWM. Moreover, injured and non-injured ankle MAS were compared after MWM therapy. METHODS: A single-blinded randomized trial was conducted on 75 participants (mean age: 22.3 ± 2.17 years) with chronic self-reported asymmetric perception of ankle dorsiflexion stiffness. Participants were allocated to one of three groups: inferior tibiofibular MWM (ITFMWM), placebo and non-injured. Sinusoidal oscillation methods were used for experimental quantification of the MAS and clinical outcomes were assessed using the weight-bearing lunge test (WBLT), pain and stiffness perception. Three assessments were made: one pre-treatment (T0), one after the manual technique (T1) and one after taping (T2). RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA showed no significant differences between the groups and no interaction effect for the outcome measures. However, a significant difference for the time effect (T0-T1-T2) was found in the three groups for WBLT dorsiflexion range of motion (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.21) and stiffness perception (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.54) but the minimal clinically important differences were not reached for either value. DISCUSSION: The results could not support that a single session of ITFMWM modifies MAS or the clinical outcomes compared to placebo treatment. Furthermore, injured MAS does not differ from non-injured MAS in chronic ankle dorsiflexion stiffness. Further studies should assess subjects' responsiveness concerning the Mulligan concept and focus on a medium- to long-term follow-up.

Urban Religious Congregations' Responses to Community Substance Use: An Exploratory Study of Four Cases.

Faith-based drug treatment programs are common, and many are implemented through congregations; however, little is documented about how congregations conceptualize and implement these programs. We use case study analysis to explore congregational approaches to drug treatment; qualitative findings emerged in three areas: (1) religion's role in congregational responses to substance use, (2) relationships between program participants and the broader congregation, and (3) interactions between congregational programs and the external community. Congregational approaches to drug treatment can be comprehensive, but work is needed to evaluate such efforts. Congregants' attitudes may influence whether program participants become members of a sustaining congregational community.

Effects of ankle dorsiflexion limitation on lower limb kinematic patterns during a forward step-down test: A reliability and comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Altered lower limb movement patterns (LLMP) during the forward step down (FSD) test have been studied in people suffering from knee instability. However, ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ADROM) seems to be related to LLMP but no causal inference has been defined between those variables. OBJECTIVE: Our goals were to evaluate (1) psychometric quality of the FSD test in healthy people and (2) the influence of experimental restricted ADROM on LLMP. METHODS: Kinematics were measured by a motion capture system. Angular displacement and speed were calculated as well as center of mass (COM) and knee linear displacement. Forty-two healthy participants; firstly, performed the test three times to assess reliability, and secondly the same test in an experimental condition limiting the ADROM. RESULTS: Reliability was excellent for all parameters (ICC: 0.75-0.99, SEM%: 2.0-34.0%). ADROM limitation significantly decreased Knee flexion range of motion (ROM) (-3.8∘), increased Hip flexion ROM (6∘), Hip adduction ROM (6.1∘), Pelvis drop ROM (3.5∘), Pelvic rotation ROM (3.1∘). No significant effect was found for Hip rotation ROM. CONCLUSIONS: LLMP was affected by this experimental ADROM limitation in healthy people. As this limitation is often encountered in post-traumatic ankle sprain patients, clinicians should consider this point during FSD assessment test.

The immediate effects of two manual therapy techniques on ankle musculoarticular stiffness and dorsiflexion range of motion in people with chronic ankle rigidity: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Ankle rigidity is a common musculoskeletal disorder affecting the talocrural joint, which can impair weight-bearing ankle dorsiflexion (WBADF) and daily-life in people with or without history of ankle injuries. Our objective was to compare the immediate effects of efficacy of Mulligan Mobilization with Movement (MWM) and Osteopathic Mobilization (OM) for improving ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM) and musculoarticular stiffness (MAS) in people with chronic ankle dorsiflexion rigidity. DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial with two arms. METHODS: Patients were recruited by word of mouth and via social network as well as posters, and analyzed in the neuro musculoskeletal laboratory of the "Université Catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve", Brussels, Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: 67 men (aged 18-40 years) presenting with potential chronic non-specific and unilateral ankle mobility deficit during WBDF were assessed for eligibility and finally 40 men were included and randomly allocated to single session of either MWM or OM. INTERVENTIONS: Two modalities of manual therapy indicated for hypothetic immediate effects in chronic ankle dorsiflexion stiffness, i.e. MWM and OM, were applied during a single session on included patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comprised blinding measures of MAS with a specific electromechanical device (namely: Lehmann's device) producing passive oscillatory ankle joint dorsiflexion and with clinical measures of WBADF-ROM as well. RESULTS: A two-way ANOVA revealed a non-significant interaction between both techniques and time for all outcome measures. For measures of MAS: elastic-stiffness (p= 0.37), viscous-stiffness (p= 0.83), total-stiffness (p= 0.58). For WBADF-ROM: toe-wall distance (p= 0.58) and angular ROM (p= 0.68). Small effect sizes between groups were determined with Cohen's d ranging from 0.05 to 0.29. One-way ANOVA demonstrated non-significant difference and small to moderate effects sizes (d= 0.003-0.58) on all outcome measures before and after interventions within both groups. A second two-way ANOVA analyzed the effect of each intervention on the sample categorized according to injury history status, and demonstrated a significant interaction between groups and time only for viscous stiffness (p= 0.04, d=-0.55). CONCLUSION: A single session of MWM and OM targeting the talocrural joint failed to immediately improve all measures in.

The efficacy of manual therapy and exercise for treating non-specific neck pain: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review and update the evidence for different forms of manual therapy (MT) and exercise for patients with different stages of non-specific neck pain (NP). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane-Register-of-Controlled-Trials, PEDro, EMBASE. METHOD: A qualitative systematic review covering a period from January 2000 to December 2015 was conducted according to updated-guidelines. Specific inclusion criteria only on RCTs were used; including differentiation according to stages of NP (acute - subacute [ASNP] or chronic [CNP]), as well as sub-classification based on type of MT interventions: MT1 (HVLA manipulation); MT2 (mobilization and/or soft-tissue-techniques); MT3 (MT1 + MT2); and MT4 (Mobilization-with-Movement). In each sub-category, MT could be combined or not with exercise and/or usual medical care. RESULTS: Initially 121 studies were identified for potential inclusion. Based on qualitative and quantitative evaluation criteria, 23 RCTs were identified for review. Evidence for ASNP: MODERATE-evidence: In favour of (i) MT1 to the cervical spine (Cx) combined with exercises when compared to MT1 to the thoracic spine (Tx) combined with exercises; (ii) MT3 to the Cx and Tx combined with exercise compared to MT2 to the Cx with exercise or compared to usual medical care for pain and satisfaction with care from short to long-term. Evidence for CNP: STRONG-evidence: Of no difference of efficacy between MT2 at the symptomatic Cx level(s) in comparison to MT2 on asymptomatic Cx level(s) for pain and function. MODERATE to STRONG-evidence: In favour of MT1 and MT3 on Cx and Tx with exercise in comparison to exercise or MT alone for pain, function, satisfaction with care and general-health from short to moderate-terms. MODERATE-evidence: In favour (i) of MT1 as compared to MT2 and MT4, all applied to the Cx, for neck mobility, and pain in the very short term; (ii) of MT2 using sof-tissue-techniques to the Cx and Tx or MT3 to the Cx and Tx in comparison to no-treatment in the short-term for pain and disability. CONCLUSION: This systematic review updates the evidence for MT combined or not with exercise and/or usual medical care for different stages of NP and provides recommendations for future studies. Two majors points could be highlighted, the first one is that combining different forms of MT with exercise is better than MT or exercise alone, and the second one is that mobilization need not be applied at the symptomatic level(s) for improvements of NP patients. These both points may have clinical implications for reducing the risk involved with some MT techniques applied to the cervical spine.

Evidence based orthopaedic manual therapy for patients with nonspecific low back pain: An integrative approach.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Orthopaedic manual therapy (OMT) should be based not only on the best available evidence but also on patient values and clinician expertise. Low back pain (LBP) is a complex issue as the majority of people who suffer from LBP cannot be given a specific diagnosis based on imaging studies but kinematic analyses appear to be useful to determine dysfunctional patterns. In physical therapy, various forms of OMT are currently used to manage LBP and there is growing evidence for its use. The underlying principles of OMT are to treat neuro-musculo-skeletal disorders, the aim of which is to reduce pain, as well as improve movement and function. Manual physical therapists use a range of treatment approaches including passive techniques (``hands on'') as well as different active techniques (``hands off'') and communication skills. Systems of stratification are available for classification of people with LBP into specific sub-groups (with sub-group specific OMT intervention). This approach has been shown to be more efficient than generic treatment, although subgroups are not mutually exclusive. Various mechanisms of action are reported in the literature concerning OMT effects. These effects may be biomechanical, neurophysiological and psychological. Moreover, it is essential that the treatment, regardless of the concept of OMT, is carried out on the basis of a systematic and valid clinical examination protocol aimed to correctly classify LBP. The use of pain provocative tests during combined movement examination provides confidence that examination findings are valid and can therefore be confidently used in clinical practice to manage patient. The integrative approach presented in this article is a mix of previously developed classification systems (i.e. based on pain mechanisms, prognosis, treatment responsiveness) and new tools, as kinematic analyses for LBP, and a novel validated combined movements examinationCONCLUSION: As LBP is a complex and multidimensional problem, the integrative approach may help clinicians and researchers to better understand and then to treat patients with non-specific LBP. The efficacy of OMT treatments using an integrative approach in specific patients subgroups should be objectively analyzed according to validated kinematic analyses in future studies.

Short-term effects of Mulligan mobilization with movement on pain, disability, and kinematic spinal movements in patients with nonspecific low back pain: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the immediate- and short-term effects of lumbar Mulligan sustained natural apophyseal glides (SNAGs) on patients with nonspecific low back pain with respect to 2 new kinematic algorithms (KA) for range of motion and speed as well as pain, functional disability, and kinesiophobia. METHODS: This was a 2-armed randomized placebo-controlled trial. Subjects, blinded to allocation, were randomized to either a real-SNAG group (n = 16) or a sham-SNAG group (n = 16). All patients were treated during a single session of real/sham SNAG (3 × 6 repetitions) to the lumbar spine from a sitting position in a flexion direction. Two new KA from a validated kinematic spine model were used and recorded with an optoelectronic device. Pain at rest and during flexion as well as functional disability and kinesiophobia was recorded by self-reported measures. These outcomes were blindly evaluated before, after treatment, and at 2-week follow-up in both groups. RESULTS: Of 6 variables, 4 demonstrated significant improvement with moderate-to-large effect sizes (ES) in favor of the real-SNAG group: KA-R (P = .014, between-groups ES Cliff δ = -.52), pain at rest and during flexion (visual analog scale, P < .001; ES = -.73/-.75), and functional-disability (Oswestry Disability Index, P = .003 and ES = -.61). Kinesiophobia was not considered to be significant (Tampa scale, P = .03) but presented moderate ES = -.46. Kinematic algorithms for speed was not significantly different between groups (P = .118) with a small ES = -.33. All 6 outcome measures were significantly different (P ≤ .008) during within-group analysis (before and after treatment) only in the real-SNAG group. No serious or moderate adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: This study showed evidence that lumbar spine SNAGs had a short-term favorable effect on KA-R, pain, and function in patients with nonspecific low back pain.

The efficacy of manual therapy and exercise for different stages of non-specific low back pain: an update of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: to review and update the evidence for different forms of manual therapy (MT) for patients with different stages of non-specific low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane-Register-of-Controlled-Trials, PEDro, EMBASE. METHOD: A systematic review of MT with a literature search covering the period of January 2000 to April 2013 was conducted by two independent reviewers according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. A total of 360 studies were evaluated using qualitative criteria. Two stages of LBP were categorized; combined acute-subacute and chronic. Further sub-classification was made according to MT intervention: MT1 (manipulation); MT2 (mobilization and soft-tissue-techniques); and MT3 (MT1 combined with MT2). In each sub-category, MT could be combined or not with exercise or usual medical care (UMC). Consequently, quantitative evaluation criteria were applied to 56 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and hence 23 low-risk of bias RCTs were identified for review. Only studies providing new updated information (11/23 RCTs) are presented here. RESULTS: Acute-subacute LBP: STRONG-evidence in favour of MT1 when compared to sham for pain, function and health improvements in the short-term (1-3 months). MODERATE-evidence to support MT1 and MT3 combined with UMC in comparison to UMC alone for pain, function and health improvements in the short-term. Chronic LBP: MODERATE to STRONG-evidence in favour of MT1 in comparison to sham for pain, function and overall-health in the short-term. MODERATE-evidence in favour of MT3 combined with exercise or UMC in comparison to exercise and back-school was established for pain, function and quality-of-life in the short and long-term. LIMITED-evidence in favour of MT2 combined with exercise and UMC in comparison to UMC alone for pain and function from short to long-term. LIMITED-evidence of no effect for MT1 with extension-exercise compared to extension-exercise alone for pain in the short to long-term. CONCLUSION: This systematic review updates the evidence for MT with exercise or UMC for different stages of LBP and provides recommendations for future studies.

Use of kinematic algorithms to distinguish people with chronic non-specific low back pain from asymptomatic subjects: a validation study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether kinematic algorithms can distinguish subjects with chronic non-specific low back pain from asymptomatic subjects and subjects simulating low back pain, during trunk motion tasks. DESIGN: Comparative cohort study. SUBJECTS: A total of 90 subjects composed 3 groups; 45 chronic non-specific low back pain patients in the CLBP group; 45 asymptomatic controls people in the asymptomatic controls group. 20/45 subjects from the asymptomatic controls group composed the CLBP simulators group as well. METHOD: During performance of 7 standardized trunk motion tasks 6 spinal segments from the kinematic spine model were recorded by 8 infrared cameras. Two logit scores, for range of motion and speed, were used to investigate differences between the groups. Group allocation based on logit scores was also calculated, allowing the assessment of sensitivity and specificity of the algorithms. RESULTS: For the 90 subjects (pooled data), the logit scores for range of motion and speed demonstrated highly significant differences between groups (p < 0.001). The logit score means and standard deviation (SD) values in the asymptomatic group (n = 45) and chronic non-specific low back pain group (n = 45), respectively, were -1.6 (SD 2.6) and 2.8 (SD 2.8) for range of motion and -2.6 (SD 2.5) and 1.2 (SD 1.9) for speed. The sensitivity and specificity (n = 90) for logit score for range of motion were 0.80/0.82 and for logit score for speed were 0.80/0.87, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results support the validity of using 2 movement algorithms, range of motion and speed, to discriminate asymptomatic subjects from those with low back pain. However, people simulating low back pain cannot be distinguished from those with real low back pain using this method.

Intertester agreement and validity of identifying lumbar pain provocative movement patterns using active and passive accessory movement tests.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the interexaminer agreement and validity of active and passive pain provocation tests in the lumbar spine. METHODS: Two blinded raters examined 36 participants, 18 of whom were asymptomatic and 18 reported subacute nonspecific low back pain (LBP). Two types of pain provocation tests were performed: (1) physiological movements in single (flexion/extension) and, when necessary, combined planes and (2) passive accessory intervertebral movement tests of each lumbar vertebra in prone with the lumbar spine in neutral, flexion, and extension position. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement in both groups was good to excellent for the identification of flexion (κ = 0.87-1) or extension (κ = 0.65-0.74) as the most painful pattern of spinal movement. In healthy participants, 0% was identified as having a flexion provocative pattern and 8.8% were identified as having an extension provocative pattern. In the LBP group, 20% were identified as having a flexion provocative pattern vs 60% with an extension provocative pattern. The average interexaminer agreement for passive accessory intervertebral movement tests in both groups was moderate to excellent (κ = 0.42-0.83). The examiners showed good sensitivity (0.67-0.87) and specificity (0.82-0.85) to distinguish participants with LBP using this combined examination procedure. CONCLUSION: The use of a combination of pain provocative tests was found to have acceptable interexaminer reliability and good validity in identifying the main pain provocative movement pattern and the lumbar segmental level of involvement. These pain provocation tests were able to distinguish participants with LBP from asymptomatic participants and may help clinicians in directing manual therapy treatment.

Effects of proprioceptive disruption on lumbar spine repositioning error in a trunk forward bending task.

BACKGROUND: Various inputs of proprioception have been identified and shown to influence low back proprioception sense. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of disrupting proprioception on lumbar spine repositioning error during forward bending. METHOD: Healthy-subjects (n=28) and patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain (n=10) aged between 20-50 years. Subjects performed 5 repetitions of a lumbar repositioning task targeting 30° of trunk-forward-bending from a seated-position with different proprioceptive disturbances administered to the low back. Video analysis of skin reflective markers measured lumbar spine range-of-motion. A control-task was performed without any proprioceptive disturbance, while the remaining 4 tasks were electro-stimulation, vibration, taping and sitting on an unstable surface. RESULTS: The healthy group showed significantly altered repositioning error when compared with the control task (p=0.004): control-task vs. taping-task, vibration-task and unstable-sitting. In the NS-CLBP group, one motor-task showed significant difference in control-task vs. taping-task (p=0.004). Comparison between the NS-CLBP and matched-healthy groups revealed that the NS-CLBP subjects had larger repositioning-error (p=0.009) for control, taping and vibration tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Proprioceptive disturbances had the most significant effect in increasing repositioning-error among healthy subjects. The between-groups analysis confirmed evidence consistent with the literature of greater repositioning-error in people with NS-CLBP than healthy subjects.

Reliability and validity of a kinematic spine model during active trunk movement in healthy subjects and patients with chronic non-specific low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardized, reliable, valid spine model of active trunk movements that accurately discriminates kinematic patterns of patients with chronic non-specific low back pain from those of healthy subjects. DESIGN: Comparative cohort study. SUBJECTS: Healthy subjects (n = 25) and patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (n = 25) aged 30-65 years. METHODS: Subjects performed 7 trunk movements from a seated position at non-imposed speed during 2 sessions. Nine markers on bony landmarks measured range of motion and speed of 5 spinal segments, recorded by 8 optoelectronic cameras. RESULTS: Both groups showed good-excellent reliability in all movements for range of motion and speed of all spinal segments (intraclass correlation (ICC), 0.70-0.96; standard error of measurement, expressed as a percentage, 19.4-3.3%). The minimal detectable change in the patient group was 16.7-53.7%. Range of motion and speed in all spinal segments for trunk flexion, rotation, and flexion with rotation differed significantly between groups (p < 0.001), with large/very large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 1.2-2). Binary logistic regression yielded sensitivities/specificities of 92%/84% for range of motion and 92%/80% for speed. CONCLUSION: Kinematic variables are valid, reliable measures and can be used clinically to diagnose chronic non-specific low back pain, manage treatment, and as quantitative outcome measures for clinical trial interventions.