LUMBAR TRUNK MUSCLE ENDURANCE TESTING - AN INEXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVE TOA MACHINE FOR EVALUATION

Citation
T. Ito et al., LUMBAR TRUNK MUSCLE ENDURANCE TESTING - AN INEXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVE TOA MACHINE FOR EVALUATION, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 77(1), 1996, pp. 75-79
Citations number
24
Categorie Soggetti
Rehabilitation
ISSN journal
00039993
Volume
77
Issue
1
Year of publication
1996
Pages
75 - 79
Database
ISI
SICI code
0003-9993(1996)77:1<75:LTMET->2.0.ZU;2-2
Abstract
Objectives: The goals of this study were to verify the reliability and safety of new methods for evaluating trunk muscle endurance, and to c ompare the differences between healthy subjects and patients with chro nic low-back pain. Design: Randomized and controlled study. Setting: A referral center and institutional practice, and outpatient care. Subj ects: Ninety healthy subjects (37 men and 53 women average age 46.2 ye ars) and 100 patients with CLBP (40 men and 60 women; average age 45.3 years) participated in this study. Main Outcome Measures: During trun k flexor and extensor endurance tests, the subjects were asked to main tain the original positions for as long as possible, The performance t ime (seconds) for which subjects could maintain the position was compa red between two groups. Test-retest correlation (r) was also analyzed. The degree of lumbar lordosis was compared in conventional and new me thods.Results: All test-retest correlations were significantly high in both groups (p < .01). The performance time was much longer in the he althy subjects than in the patients with CLBP during any procedures (p < .01). Lumbar lordosis was significantly less in our method than in the Kraus-Weber test (p < .01). Conclusions: This study demonstrated t hat our methods for measuring trunk flexor and extensor endurance had high reliability, reproducibility, and safety, and were easy to perfor m, with no need for special equipment, This study also showed that tru nk muscles in patients with CLBP were more easily fatigued, compared w ith those in healthy subjects. (C) 1996 by the American Congress of Re habilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine an d Rehabilitation