Skip to content

Effects of Hamstring Stretching Using Pressure Biofeedback Unit in Patients With Low Back Pain.

Effects of Hamstring Stretching Using Pressure Biofeedback Unit in Patients With Low Back Pain.

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05059496
Enrollment
38
Registered
2021-09-28
Start date
2020-10-13
Completion date
2022-02-28
Last updated
2021-09-28

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

Conditions

Low Back Pain

Keywords

Hamstring length, Low back Pain, Pressure Biofeedback unit

Brief summary

To determine the effects of Hamstring stretching using a pressure Biofeedback unit on muscle length, pain, and functional status in patients with low back pain.

Detailed description

Several studies have been conducted regarding hamstring stretching with the pelvis anteriorly tilted for treating low back pain but there is very little evidence regarding the use of a pressure biofeedback unit for maintaining anterior pelvic tilt so this study aims to find out whether the hamstring stretching while maintaining anterior pelvic tilt using pressure biofeedback is more effective than hamstring stretching without using pressure biofeedback in patients with low back pain.

Interventions

OTHERHamstring stretching with Pressure Biofeedback Unit

Hot Pack 15 mins/1 set/ (3 days/week), Hamstring stretching with Pressure Biofeedback Unit 30 secs hold/ 15 secs rest/ 3 sets/ (3 days/week), TENS 15 mins/ 1 set/ (3 days/week). A total of 4 weeks (12 sessions, 3 days/ week) were given each consisting of 35 mins.

OTHERHamstring stretching with out Pressure Biofeedback Unit

Hot Pack 15 mins/1 set/ (3 days/week), Hamstring stretching without Pressure Biofeedback Unit 30 secs hold/ 15 secs rest/ 3 sets/ (3 days/week), TENS 15 mins/ 1 set/ (3 days/week). A total of 4 weeks (12 sessions, 3 days/ week) were given each consisting of 35 mins.

Sponsors

Riphah International University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
25 Years to 40 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients with non-specific low back pain * Chronic pain \> 3 months * Participants having (ODI) score minimum 20% to 40% * Participants with hamstrings shorter than 70 degrees bilaterally * Participants who scored 3 or more than 3 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)

Exclusion criteria

* History of fracture and surgery * Patients with osteoarthritis and spondylolisthesis * Patients with systemic disease except for diabetes mellitus and hypertension * Patients with disc herniation and leg length discrepancy * Pregnant females * Participants with severe back pain or excessive lumber lordosis

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Hamstring Length12 daysChanges from baseline, Hamstring length was measured through Goniometer. Normal value of Active knee extension is 90 degree with 90 degree hip flexion. Values less than 70 degree knee extension represents hamstring tightness.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain through NPRS12 daysChanges from baseline, Pain was measured through Numeric pain rating scale. 0 represents no pain and 10 worst pain possible.
Functional Status12 daysChanges from baseline, Functional status was measured through Oswestry Disability Index. 0-20 shows minimal disability, 21-40 moderate disability, 41-60 severe disability, 61-80 crippled and 81-100 bed bound patients.

Countries

Pakistan

Contacts

Primary ContactMomena Shahzad, MS
momena.shahzad@riphah.edu.pk+92-334-2848148
Backup ContactImran Amjad, Phd
Imran.amjad@riphah.edu.pk03324390125

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 6, 2026