Is online exercise at home more effective than hydrotherapy and physiotherapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain? A randomized clinical trial

Mohammad Bayattork, Arash Khaledi
{"title":"Is online exercise at home more effective than hydrotherapy and physiotherapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain? A randomized clinical trial","authors":"Mohammad Bayattork, Arash Khaledi","doi":"10.32598/ptj.12.1.517.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Many non-pharmaceutical methods have been proposed for the treatment of non-specific chronic low back pain (NCLBP), including Online Exercise at Home (OEH), Hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy approaches that have shown significant effects. Nevertheless, there are ambiguities in choosing the best option. Therefore, the present study was designed to compare these methods. Methods: This randomized clinical trial included 60 patients with NCLBP (25-45 yrs). After selection, they were randomly divided into three groups (20 patients in each) of OEH (including core stability exercises and education), Hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy (including hot pack, ultrasound, and TENS), then received interventions for 12 weeks. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain before and after treatment. ANOCOVA and paired t-test were used to analyze the data and a significant level of P <0.05. Results: The results showed that all three treatments used in this study had a significant effect (p <0.05) on reducing the pain intensity for the patients after the intervention. There was no significant difference between the three treatments in reducing pain; however, OEH method could reduce the pain to a greater extent (32.79%). Conclusion: Although the present study reaffirms the effectiveness of all three-treatment approaches, no significant differences were found in the selection of the best option. However, depending on the patient's condition, one of these methods can be selected. Therefore, we introduce hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy methods for the elderly, severe pain and disability, and OEH as an available method to save money, time and, most importantly, prevent Covid-19 disease.","PeriodicalId":436083,"journal":{"name":"Physical Treatments: Specific Physical Therapy Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Treatments: Specific Physical Therapy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32598/ptj.12.1.517.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Many non-pharmaceutical methods have been proposed for the treatment of non-specific chronic low back pain (NCLBP), including Online Exercise at Home (OEH), Hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy approaches that have shown significant effects. Nevertheless, there are ambiguities in choosing the best option. Therefore, the present study was designed to compare these methods. Methods: This randomized clinical trial included 60 patients with NCLBP (25-45 yrs). After selection, they were randomly divided into three groups (20 patients in each) of OEH (including core stability exercises and education), Hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy (including hot pack, ultrasound, and TENS), then received interventions for 12 weeks. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain before and after treatment. ANOCOVA and paired t-test were used to analyze the data and a significant level of P <0.05. Results: The results showed that all three treatments used in this study had a significant effect (p <0.05) on reducing the pain intensity for the patients after the intervention. There was no significant difference between the three treatments in reducing pain; however, OEH method could reduce the pain to a greater extent (32.79%). Conclusion: Although the present study reaffirms the effectiveness of all three-treatment approaches, no significant differences were found in the selection of the best option. However, depending on the patient's condition, one of these methods can be selected. Therefore, we introduce hydrotherapy, and Physiotherapy methods for the elderly, severe pain and disability, and OEH as an available method to save money, time and, most importantly, prevent Covid-19 disease.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对于非特异性慢性腰痛患者,在家在线运动是否比水疗和理疗更有效?一项随机临床试验
目的:许多非药物方法已被提出用于治疗非特异性慢性腰痛(NCLBP),包括在家在线锻炼(OEH),水疗和物理治疗方法已显示出显著效果。然而,在选择最佳方案时存在模糊性。因此,本研究旨在比较这些方法。方法:该随机临床试验纳入60例NCLBP患者(25-45岁)。经选择后,随机分为OEH组(包括核心稳定性训练和教育)、水疗组和物理治疗组(包括热敷、超声和TENS),每组20例,接受干预12周。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评价治疗前后疼痛程度。采用ANOCOVA和配对t检验对数据进行分析,P <0.05为显著水平。结果:本研究采用的三种治疗方法在干预后减轻患者疼痛强度方面均有显著效果(p <0.05)。三种治疗方法在减轻疼痛方面无显著差异;而OEH法能更大程度地减轻疼痛(32.79%)。结论:虽然本研究重申了所有三种治疗方法的有效性,但在选择最佳方案方面没有发现显着差异。然而,根据病人的情况,可以选择其中一种方法。因此,我们推出了针对老年人、严重疼痛和残疾以及OEH的水疗和物理治疗方法,作为节省资金、时间,最重要的是预防Covid-19疾病的可行方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is online exercise at home more effective than hydrotherapy and physiotherapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain? A randomized clinical trial The effect of the neuromuscular, strength and combined training on balance and performance in female basketball players Comparing the relations of demographic indicators, health status and physical fitness, socioeconomic indicators and sexual function with quality of life in women with chronic non-specific low back pain Tele-rehabilitation the benefits and drawbacks Do patellofemoral pain patients have higher loading rate compared to healthy indivalues? A systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1