Non-specific chronic low back pain: differences in spinal kinematics in subgroups during functional tasks.

Summaries 3 min 116

Font Size

Created On: 15/02/2020

Non-specific chronic low back pain: differences in spinal kinematics in subgroups during functional tasks.

A multidimensional classification strategy recommends that motor control impairment subgroups are present in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP).

See All

Key take away

Impairment in motor control can occur in non-specific low back pain (NSCLBP). The study results suggested that there are differences in the lower thoracic region between spinal kinematics in NSCLBP subgroups and healthy participants. It was observed that during functional tasks the thoraco-lumbar spine exhibited a marked difference between FP and AEP, and FP and healthy groups.

Background

A multidimensional classification strategy recommends that motor control impairment subgroups are present in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). Variations in sitting lumbar posture have been recognised between healthy individuals and two such subgroups [active extension pattern (AEP) and flexion pattern (FP)]; although, the functional spinal movement had not been investigated. This study evaluated whether NSCLBP subgroups present regional spinal kinematic variations than healthy people during functional tasks.

Method

A total of 28 healthy and 50 NSCLBP individuals' spinal kinematics were assessed using the 3D motion analysis during functional tasks like stand-to-sit, sit-to-stand, reaching upwards, lifting, bending to retrieve, replacing a box, step down, and step up. Groups compared for mean sagittal angle for the total thoracic, upper thoracic, lower lumbar, total lumbar, lower thoracic, and upper lumbar regions.

Result

Considerable differences were seen in upper lumbar and lower thoracic regions within NSCLBP subgroups while most tasks. Notable differences were recorded within the FP and healthy group in the lower thoracic region while bending and stand-to-sit-to-stand tasks to bring back a pen from the floor. All notable findings displayed the FP group to work in relatively higher flexion.

Conclusion

During functional tasks the thoraco-lumbar spine had distinct results for FP and healthy, and FP and AEP groups. People with FP displayed more kyphotic thoraco-lumbar postures, that may be pain stimulating. No considerable variations were seen between AEP and healthy groups, recommending that alternative mechanisms may appear in AEP.