The effects of upper- vs. lower-body aerobic exercise on perceived pain in individuals with chronic knee pain: a randomised crossover trial

Rachel Deere, Enhad A. Chowdhury, Abby Tabor, Dylan Thompson, J. Bilzon
{"title":"The effects of upper- vs. lower-body aerobic exercise on perceived pain in individuals with chronic knee pain: a randomised crossover trial","authors":"Rachel Deere, Enhad A. Chowdhury, Abby Tabor, Dylan Thompson, J. Bilzon","doi":"10.3389/fpain.2023.1277482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Some patients with chronic knee pain experience an increase in knee pain following a single bout of exercise involving their knee joint, which can negatively affect exercise adherence and thus result in reduced overall health and lack of disease management. We want to determine whether a single bout of upper-body (UB) aerobic arm-ergometry exercise is effective in reducing the experience of pain in those with chronic knee pain compared with lower-body (LB) aerobic leg ergometry exercise.A total of 19 individuals (women = 11, men = 8; age = 63 ± 8 years; body mass index = 24 ± 3 kg/m2) who suffered from chronic knee pain for ≥3 months took part in this study. Arm-ergometry and cycle-ergometry exercises were performed for 30 min at a moderate intensity, separated by 7 days. Pain intensity was assessed by means of a visual analogue scale (VAS) pre- and post-exercise and for 7 days post-exercise. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) and mechanical detection threshold (MDT) were measured pre- and post-exercise at both local and distal anatomical sites. Data are presented as mean ± SD.VAS pain was significantly reduced (p = 0.035) at 1 day post-exercise following the UB exercise trial (−1.4 ± 0.8) when compared with the LB exercise trial (+0.1 ± 2.1). Both UB and LB exercises were effective in reducing local and distal PPT. MDT responses were heterogeneous, and no differences between the UB and LB exercise conditions were noted.An acute bout of upper-body aerobic arm-ergometry exercise evoked a significant decrease in the affected knee joint pain in individuals with chronic knee pain of up to 24 h/1 day post-exercise compared with lower-body aerobic exercise. While the exact mechanisms remain unclear, upper-body exercise may offer a viable, novel therapeutic treatment for patients with chronic knee pain.","PeriodicalId":12641,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pain Research","volume":"34 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2023.1277482","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

Some patients with chronic knee pain experience an increase in knee pain following a single bout of exercise involving their knee joint, which can negatively affect exercise adherence and thus result in reduced overall health and lack of disease management. We want to determine whether a single bout of upper-body (UB) aerobic arm-ergometry exercise is effective in reducing the experience of pain in those with chronic knee pain compared with lower-body (LB) aerobic leg ergometry exercise.A total of 19 individuals (women = 11, men = 8; age = 63 ± 8 years; body mass index = 24 ± 3 kg/m2) who suffered from chronic knee pain for ≥3 months took part in this study. Arm-ergometry and cycle-ergometry exercises were performed for 30 min at a moderate intensity, separated by 7 days. Pain intensity was assessed by means of a visual analogue scale (VAS) pre- and post-exercise and for 7 days post-exercise. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) and mechanical detection threshold (MDT) were measured pre- and post-exercise at both local and distal anatomical sites. Data are presented as mean ± SD.VAS pain was significantly reduced (p = 0.035) at 1 day post-exercise following the UB exercise trial (−1.4 ± 0.8) when compared with the LB exercise trial (+0.1 ± 2.1). Both UB and LB exercises were effective in reducing local and distal PPT. MDT responses were heterogeneous, and no differences between the UB and LB exercise conditions were noted.An acute bout of upper-body aerobic arm-ergometry exercise evoked a significant decrease in the affected knee joint pain in individuals with chronic knee pain of up to 24 h/1 day post-exercise compared with lower-body aerobic exercise. While the exact mechanisms remain unclear, upper-body exercise may offer a viable, novel therapeutic treatment for patients with chronic knee pain.
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
上半身与下半身有氧运动对慢性膝关节疼痛患者疼痛感的影响:随机交叉试验
一些患有慢性膝关节疼痛的患者在一次涉及膝关节的运动后,膝关节疼痛会增加,这可能会对运动的坚持产生负面影响,从而导致整体健康状况下降和缺乏疾病管理。我们想确定与下肢有氧运动相比,单次上肢有氧运动是否能有效减少慢性膝关节疼痛患者的疼痛体验。共19人(女11人,男8人;年龄= 63±8岁;体重指数= 24±3kg /m2)慢性膝关节疼痛≥3个月的患者参加本研究。进行中等强度的手臂运动和周期运动,每次30分钟,间隔7天。通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估运动前后和运动后7天的疼痛强度。在局部和远端解剖部位测量运动前和运动后的压力疼痛阈值(PPT)和机械检测阈值(MDT)。数据以mean±SD表示。与LB运动试验(+0.1±2.1)相比,UB运动试验后1天VAS疼痛显著减少(p = 0.035)(- 1.4±0.8)。UB和LB锻炼均可有效减少局部和远端PPT。MDT反应是异质性的,UB和LB运动条件之间没有差异。与下肢有氧运动相比,急性上肢有氧运动可显著减轻慢性膝关节疼痛患者运动后24小时/1天的膝关节疼痛。虽然确切的机制尚不清楚,但上肢运动可能为慢性膝关节疼痛患者提供一种可行的、新颖的治疗方法。
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
Intrauterine transfusion under fetal analgesia: the evaluation of perinatal outcomes Preserved tactile distance estimation despite body representation distortions in individuals with fibromyalgia The effect of dysmenorrhea severity and interference on reactions to experimentally-induced pain Co-producing research study recruitment strategies with and for children and young people for paediatric chronic pain studies A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multi-center study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a blue light device for the treatment of chronic back pain
×
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