Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud

Study design: Double-blind, randomized parallel sham-controlled trial with concealed allocation and intention-to treat analysis. Objective: To investigate the effects of an isolate myofascial release (MFR) protocol on pain, disability, and fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Summary of background data: MFR is a form of manual medicine widely used by physiotherapists in the management of different musculoskeletal pathologies. Up to this moment, no previous studies have reported the effects of an isolated MFR treatment in patients with CLBP. Methods: Fifty-four participants, with nonspecific CLBP, were randomized to MFR group (n = 27) receiving four sessions of myofascial treatment, each lasting 40 minutes, and to control group (n = 27) receiving a sham MFR. Variables studied were pain measured by means Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and visual analog scale (VAS), disability measured with Roland Morris Questionnaire, and fear-avoidance beliefs measured with Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. Results: Subjects receiving MFR displayed significant improvements in pain (SF-MPQ) (mean difference -7.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -14.5 to -1.1, P = 0.023) and sensory SF-MPQ subscale (mean difference -6.1; 95% CI: -10.8 to -1.5, P = 0.011) compared to the sham group, but no differences were found in VAS between groups. Disability and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire score also displayed a significant decrease in the MFR group (P < 0.05) as compared to sham MFR. Conclusion: MFR therapy produced a significant improvement in both pain and disability. Because the minimal clinically important differences in pain and disability are, however, included in the 95% CI, we cannot know whether this improvement is clinically relevant.

Objective: To investigate the effects of an osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), which includes a diaphragm intervention compared to the same OMT with a sham diaphragm intervention in chronic nonspecific low back pain (NS-CLBP). Design: Parallel group randomized controlled trial. Setting: Private and institutional health centers. Participants: Participants (N=66) (18-60y) with a diagnosis of NS-CLBP lasting at least 3 months. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive either an OMT protocol including specific diaphragm techniques (n=33) or the same OMT protocol with a sham diaphragm intervention (n=33), conducted in 5 sessions provided during 4 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes were pain (evaluated with the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire [SF-MPQ] and the visual analog scale [VAS]) and disability (assessed with the Roland–Morris Questionnaire [RMQ] and the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]). Secondary outcomes were fear-avoidance beliefs, level of anxiety and depression, and pain catastrophization. All outcome measures were evaluated at baseline, at week 4, and at week 12. Results: A statistically significant reduction was observed in the experimental group compared to the sham group in all variables assessed at week 4 and at week 12 (SF-MPQ [mean difference −6.2; 95% confidence interval, −8.6 to −3.8]; VAS [mean difference −2.7; 95% confidence interval, −3.6 to −1.8]; RMQ [mean difference −3.8; 95% confidence interval, −5.4 to −2.2]; ODI [mean difference −10.6; 95% confidence interval, −14.9 to 6.3]). Moreover, improvements in pain and disability were clinically relevant. Conclusions: An OMT protocol that includes diaphragm techniques produces significant and clinically relevant improvements in pain and disability in patients with NS-CLBP compared to the same OMT protocol using sham diaphragm techniques.

The aim of the present clinical trial is to evaluate the efficacy of kinesio taping on patients with chronic low back pain, when the exploration identifies skin/fascia mobilization as a factor that could modify the treatment effect. This study is a randomized controlled trial with intention-totreat analysis. Sixty-two participants with chronic low back pain were therefore recruited from a tertiary referral hospital. Targeted kinesio taping, according to skin/fascia mobility exploration, was applied in the experimental group (17 female/13 male; 49.47 ± 11.15 years) once a week for four sessions. The control group (17 female/14 male; 48.87 ± 9.09 years) underwent a placebo taping application. At post-treatment time there was a statistically significant reduction both in disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) and pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) in the experimental group (disability: −2.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] −4.56 to −1.21, P < .001; pain: −1.58, 95% CI −2.67 to −0.54 P = .001) and the control group (disability: −1.82, 95% CI −3.46 to −0.17 P = .025; pain: −1.30, 95% CI −2.32 to −0.28 P = .008). However, at six months, these changes only remained significant in the experimental group (disability: −2.95, 95% CI −4.72 to −1.18, P < .001; pain: −1.06, 95% CI −2.07 to −0.04, P < .05). As a conclusion, the application of targeted kinesio taping produced a significant reduction in pain and disability, at 4 weeks and at 6 moths follow-up, although there were no differences between groups at any measurement time point.

Background: Flexion-relaxation response of the lumbar erector spinae has been previously studied after different interventions such as exercise programs or spinal manipulation, in subjects with chronic low back pain. The objective of the study was to investigate the effects of an isolate myofascial release protocol on erector spinae myoelectric activity and lumbar spine kinematics in chronic low back pain. Methods: Thirty-six participants, with nonspecific chronic low back pain, were randomized to myofascial release group (n=18) receiving four sessions of myofascial treatment, each lasting 40 minutes, and to control group (n=18) receiving a sham myofascial release. Electromyographic and kinematic variables as well as pain and disability questionnaires were analyzed. Findings: There was a bilateral reduction of the flexion relaxation ratio in individuals receiving myofascial release and who did not show myoelectric silence at baseline (right difference M = .34, 95% CI [0.16, 0.33], p ≤ .05 and left difference M = .45, 95% CI [0.16, 0.73], p ≤ .05). There was also a significant reduction in pain in the myofascial release group (difference M = −9.1, 95% CI [−16.3, −1.8], p ≤ .05) and disability (difference M = −5.6, 95% CI [−9.1, −2.1], p ≤ .05), compared with control group. No significant differences between groups were found for the kinematic variables. Interpretation: The myofascial release protocol contributed to the normalization of the flexion- relaxation response in individuals who did not show myoelectric silence before the intervention, and also showed a significant reduction in pain and disability compared with the sham group.

Unstable shoe was developed as a walking device to strengthen the lower extremity muscles and reduce joint loading. A large number of studies have reported in asymptomatic adults increased electromyography (EMG) activity throughout the gait cycle in most of the lower limb muscles. However, no previous studies have explored the effects of wearing unstable shoes on trunk muscle activity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare trunk muscle activity during gait using an unstable shoe and a conventional flat control shoe in patients with CLBP. Thirty-five CLBP patients (51.1±12.4 yrs.; 26±3.8 kg/m2; 9.3±5.2 Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire score) were recruited from the Orthopedic Surgery Service at the Hospital to participate in this cross-sectional study. All participants underwent gait analysis by simultaneously collecting surface electromyography (EMG) data from erector spinae (ES), rectus abdominis (RA), obliquus internus (OI) and obliquus externus (OE) muscles, while walking on a treadmill with flat control shoes and experimental unstable shoes. The results showed significantly higher %EMG activity in ES (mean difference: 1.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3 to 2.2), RA (mean difference: 1.5%; 95% CI 0.3 to 2.7), and OI (mean difference: 1.5%; 95% CI 0.2 to 2.8) in the unstable shoes condition compared to the flat shoes condition. Based on these findings, the use of unstable shoes may have potential implications in promoting spine stability, particularly in improving neuromuscular control of trunk muscles in CLBP treatment.

Objective: To investigate the effects that wearing unstable shoes has on disability, trunk muscle activity, and lumbar spine range of motion (ROM) in patients with chronic lower back pain (CLBP). Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Orthopedic Surgery Service. Participants: We randomized 40 adults with nonspecific CLBP either to an unstable shoes group (n = 20) or to the control group (n = 20). Intervention: The participants in the unstable shoes group were advised to wear these shoes for a minimum of six hours a day for four weeks. Control group participants were asked to continue wearing their regular shoes. Outcome measures: Our primary outcome was measurement of back-related dysfunction, assessed using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included changes in electromyographic (EMG) activity of erector spinae (ES), rectus abdominis (RA), internus obliquus (IO), and externus obliquus (EO) muscles, and changes in lumbar spine ROM. Results: Between-group analysis highlighted a significant decrease in disability in the unstable shoes group compared to the control (−5, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −8.4 to −1.6). Our results revealed a significant increase in the percentage of RA, ES, IO, and EO EMG activity and in lumbar spine ROM in the unstable shoes group compared to the control group. Moreover, our results showed a significant negative correlation between disability and the percentage of ES, RA, and IO muscle activity at the end of the intervention.