Skip to content

New Technologies in the Management of Lumbopelvic Pain

Tele-rehabilitation Versus Face-to-face in the Approach to Non-specific Subacute Low Back Pain

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04685837
Enrollment
70
Registered
2020-12-28
Start date
2020-12-21
Completion date
2021-06-15
Last updated
2021-07-21

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Exercise, Low Back Pain, Rehabilitation

Brief summary

Lumbopelvic pain represents one of the leading causes of disability and pain in the world population. It is estimated that 84% of the world's population will suffer from lumbar pelvic pain in their lifetime. This high prevalence causes it to be classified as a public health problem. Traditional primary care measures have failed to reduce the prevalence, recurrences and costs of this pathology. In the search for treatments focused on reducing public spending, the concept of tele-rehabilitation appears. It is a tool, via telematics, that provides knowledge on rehabilitation and education in neurobiology of pain, demonstrated in cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. It has been suggested that the use of this instrument could help improve the patient's quality of life at the biopsychosocial level.

Interventions

OTHERtherapeutic exercise

As soon as the study investigators have obtained a significant sample of patients with non-specific sub-acute low back pain, the intervention will begin. The principal investigator will perform an individual assessment of the patients. At the end of the assessment, he will randomly distribute them into two groups. Tele-rehabilitation group and face-to-face group. On the one hand, the main researcher will explain the application works to the tele-rehabilitation group. For 8 weeks, they have to perform 2 therapy exercise training sessions following the instructions on the application. On the other hand, the researcher will explain the protocol to be followed by the group face to face. In addition, he will provide a schedule to follow a correct development of the protocol. Like the tele-rehabilitation group, they will carry out 16 sessions over 8 weeks. At the end of the protocol, the principal investigator will perform an individualized assessment of each of the study participants.

Sponsors

Alexander Achalandabaso
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Age between 18-65 years. * Non-specific low back pain less than 12 weeks of evolution. * Knowledge of new information and communication technologies. * Internet access.

Exclusion criteria

* Inflammatory pathologies of the locomotor system. * Infectious processes. * Oncological processes. * Neurodegenerative diseases. * Pain with neuropathic characteristics. * Fractures. * Lack of fluency in Spanish.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Quality of LifeBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the SF-12 Questionnaire

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in DisabilityBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire
Change in Physical ActivityBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Baecke Physical Activity Questionnaire
Change in KinesiophobiaBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale (TSK-11) form 11 to 44
Change in Sleep QualityBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Change in Pain perceptionBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) from 0 to 10
Change in Lumbar motor controlBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint).Using the Rocking backward test.
Change in Intramuscular contraction capacity erector musclesBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint).Using the Double straight-leg raise test.
Change in Intramuscular contraction capacity hip flexor musclesBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint).Using the Hip flexion test supine position and sitting position
Change in Intramuscular contraction capacity extensor flexor musclesBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint).Using the Hip extension test prone position
Change in CatastrophismBaseline, 2 months (primary timepoint), 3 months after intervention commencement.Using the Pain catastrophizing scale from 0 to 56

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026