Cargando…
Influence of Motion Therapy in the Prevention of Lumbar Pain Syndrome Relapse
INTRODUCTION: Lumbar pain syndrome is one of the most common conditions in clinical practice, more common than 290 other pathological conditions, which affect up to 84% of adults in a certain period of their life. The origin of the lower back pain can be classified as mechanical, neuropathic and sec...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6194967/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30514992 http://dx.doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2018.72.267-271 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Lumbar pain syndrome is one of the most common conditions in clinical practice, more common than 290 other pathological conditions, which affect up to 84% of adults in a certain period of their life. The origin of the lower back pain can be classified as mechanical, neuropathic and secondary due to another illness. Patient education and information, muscle strengthening exercises, maintenance of routine daily physical activity and pain therapy are the basis of acute non-specific pain syndrome therapy. AIM: To determine the success of the motion therapy procedure in the prevention of lumbar pain syndrome relapse. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The research is prospective, longitudinal, manipulative and controllable. It was conducted in the private practice “Praxis - dr. Pecar” in the period from June 20, 2014 to June 1, 2016, and included 200 respondents with symptoms of lumbar pain syndromes divided into the experimental (n=100) and control (n=100) groups. The presence of lumbar pain syndrome relapse in respondents experimental and control group was recorded in the second and third clinical examination. RESULTS: In the second examination, 4 (4%) of the respondents from experimental group and 37 (37%) of the control group responded had LBS relapse. In the third examination, the number of respondents with recurrent LBS in the experimental group was 4 (4%), while in the control group was 17 (17%). After the study, no statistically significant difference was observed in the mean age of respondents who had LBS relapse compared to respondents without LBS relapse, as well as significant influence of sex structure on relapse in the experimental and control group during the second and third examination. CONCLUSION: After the second examination, the relapse rate in the experimental group was statistically significantly higher in the respondents withstanding jobs, while there was no statistically significant difference in the control group and both groups after the third examination. |
---|