Does motion sensor biofeedback augment change in movement? A longitudinal study of lifting spinal kinematics in people with chronic low back pain undergoing Cognitive Functional Therapy with and without biofeedback

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-12 DOI:10.1016/j.msksp.2025.103286
Ivan Pui Hung Au , Anne Smith , Peter O'Sullivan , Leo Ng , Nic Saraceni , Amity Campbell
{"title":"Does motion sensor biofeedback augment change in movement? A longitudinal study of lifting spinal kinematics in people with chronic low back pain undergoing Cognitive Functional Therapy with and without biofeedback","authors":"Ivan Pui Hung Au ,&nbsp;Anne Smith ,&nbsp;Peter O'Sullivan ,&nbsp;Leo Ng ,&nbsp;Nic Saraceni ,&nbsp;Amity Campbell","doi":"10.1016/j.msksp.2025.103286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Lifting is a functional movement commonly assessed and targeted in the treatment of people with low back pain (LBP).</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To investigate changes in spinal range of motion (ROM) and velocity during lifting in people with lifting-related LBP over the course of Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT), and to compare these changes between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Longitudinal observational study.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>One hundred and forty-one people with lifting-related LBP received CFT and performed a lifting task prior to each treatment session. Measures included ROM and velocity from trunk and pelvis sensors independently and the intersensor angle. Multilevel models estimated the average amount of change and inter-individual variability. Time-group interaction was used to test the differences in the mean change between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>During the 13-week intervention period, the average trunk and pelvis ROM increased significantly between week 1 and week 8 (10.6°, 95% CI: 5.9, 15.4; 10.4°, 95% CI: 6.9, 14.0), while the average intersensor ROM did not change over 13 weeks (−0.79°, 95% CI: −3.74, 2.16). The average trunk, pelvis and intersensor velocity increased significantly up to weeks 9 or 10 (17.8°/sec, 95% CI: 14.0, 21.6; 10.8°/sec, 95% CI: 8.3, 13.4; 6.0°/sec, 95% CI: 3.7, 8.3). There was no evidence for differences in change in ROM or velocity measures between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback (<em>P</em> = 0.14–0.64).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>People with lifting-related LBP demonstrated increases in trunk and pelvis ROM and all velocity measures but not intersensor ROM during lifting over the course of CFT. Biofeedback did not augment changes in lifting kinematics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56036,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 103286"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468781225000347","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Lifting is a functional movement commonly assessed and targeted in the treatment of people with low back pain (LBP).

Objective

To investigate changes in spinal range of motion (ROM) and velocity during lifting in people with lifting-related LBP over the course of Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT), and to compare these changes between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback.

Design

Longitudinal observational study.

Method

One hundred and forty-one people with lifting-related LBP received CFT and performed a lifting task prior to each treatment session. Measures included ROM and velocity from trunk and pelvis sensors independently and the intersensor angle. Multilevel models estimated the average amount of change and inter-individual variability. Time-group interaction was used to test the differences in the mean change between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback.

Results

During the 13-week intervention period, the average trunk and pelvis ROM increased significantly between week 1 and week 8 (10.6°, 95% CI: 5.9, 15.4; 10.4°, 95% CI: 6.9, 14.0), while the average intersensor ROM did not change over 13 weeks (−0.79°, 95% CI: −3.74, 2.16). The average trunk, pelvis and intersensor velocity increased significantly up to weeks 9 or 10 (17.8°/sec, 95% CI: 14.0, 21.6; 10.8°/sec, 95% CI: 8.3, 13.4; 6.0°/sec, 95% CI: 3.7, 8.3). There was no evidence for differences in change in ROM or velocity measures between CFT-only and CFT-with-biofeedback (P = 0.14–0.64).

Conclusions

People with lifting-related LBP demonstrated increases in trunk and pelvis ROM and all velocity measures but not intersensor ROM during lifting over the course of CFT. Biofeedback did not augment changes in lifting kinematics.
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
运动传感器生物反馈增强运动变化吗?一项对慢性腰痛患者进行认知功能治疗(有或没有生物反馈)的脊柱运动学的纵向研究
背景:举重是一种功能性运动,通常用于治疗腰痛(LBP)。目的探讨在认知功能治疗(CFT)过程中,与举重相关的腰痛患者在举重过程中脊柱运动范围(ROM)和速度的变化,并比较单纯认知功能治疗和生物反馈的CFT治疗的变化。设计纵向观察研究。方法141例与抬举相关的腰痛患者接受CFT治疗,并在每次治疗前执行抬举任务。测量分别来自躯干和骨盆传感器的ROM和速度以及传感器间的角度。多层模型估计了平均变化量和个体间变异性。使用时间-群体交互作用来检验CFT-only和cft -带生物反馈的平均变化的差异。结果在13周的干预期内,第1周至第8周,躯干和骨盆的平均ROM显著增加(10.6°,95% CI: 5.9, 15.4;10.4°,95% CI: 6.9, 14.0),而平均传感器间ROM在13周内没有变化(- 0.79°,95% CI: - 3.74, 2.16)。平均躯干、骨盆和传感器间速度在第9周或第10周显著增加(17.8°/秒,95% CI: 14.0, 21.6;10.8°/秒,95% CI: 8.3, 13.4;6.0°/秒,95% CI: 3.7, 8.3)。没有证据表明CFT-only和cft -带生物反馈之间ROM或速度测量的变化有差异(P = 0.14-0.64)。结论:在CFT过程中,与举重相关的腰痛患者在举重过程中表现出躯干和骨盆ROM以及所有速度测量的增加,但没有传感器间ROM。生物反馈并没有增加升降运动学的变化。
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
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice Health Professions-Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
152
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Science & Practice, international journal of musculoskeletal physiotherapy, is a peer-reviewed international journal (previously Manual Therapy), publishing high quality original research, review and Masterclass articles that contribute to improving the clinical understanding of appropriate care processes for musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes articles that influence or add to the body of evidence on diagnostic and therapeutic processes, patient centered care, guidelines for musculoskeletal therapeutics and theoretical models that support developments in assessment, diagnosis, clinical reasoning and interventions.
期刊最新文献
The effects of running on systemic inflammatory markers in chronic low back pain: a secondary analysis of the ASTEROID randomised controlled trial Model development of a multivariable prediction model for long-term work-related neck disability among high risk occupations: A prospective cohort study To what extent are work-related factors integrated into physiotherapy practice? Insights from a survey of Canadian physiotherapists Addressing fear-related barriers in ACL rehabilitation: Sports physiotherapists’ experiences and needs Pre-treatment risk factor assessment and safe management of the cervical spine: a survey among physical therapists
×
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:604180095
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