Post-COVID-19
Conditions
Keywords
Pain, Post-COVID-19 patients, Mild symptoms, Quality of life, Functional capacity
Brief summary
Aimed to understand if yoga exercises are superior to posture exercises as an alternative exercise therapy for relieving musculoskeletal pain, improving functional status, and improving quality of life during the post- corona virus disease (COVID-19) period?
Detailed description
Eighty five of 200 post- COVID-19 patients, who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria obtained from the records of the State Hospital. The participants were divided into video-based (VB) yoga (n=40), home-based (HB) posture exercise (n=28), and control (n=17) groups. The socio-demographic characteristics, pain status, walking and balance, and quality of life were evaluated twice, once before and eight weeks after the exercises.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALVideo-based Yoga Exercises
They were trained face-to-face with social distancing and a maximum of three participants. They were observed while practicing and necessary alerts and corrections were made. Documents related to the videos for yoga exercises and posture exercises specially prepared for this study by the qualified physiotherapist (MD) were provided to the participants
Sponsors
Istinye University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Semi-randomized controlled prospective study.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* recently diagnosed with Covid-19 and discharged from the hospital; * being at level 0: neglected functional limitation or level 1: negligible functional limitation on the Post-Covid-19 Functional Status Scale, * referred for physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain.
Exclusion criteria
* having any type of surgery in the last six months, * being pregnant, * being level 2 or above on the Post-Covid-19 Functional Status Scale
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pain Assessment by McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire | Baseline | Assessment of pain by McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire: The localization (deep-D; superficial-S) of the pain was determined by a question in the first section of the questionnaire. Subsequently, the features (20 words and 2-6 sub words of each) and severity (mild to unbearable pain, Likert scale-5) of the pain were determined by questions in the second and third section of the questionnaire. In the fourth section, the relationship between pain, time, frequency, and the affecting factors was determined. Scores (total 0-112) obtained from the sections of the survey were collected. The pain level of the patients indicated that the higher the pain, the higher the score. |
| Balance and gait assessment | At the beginning of the interventions | Balance and Gait Assessment: The total scores for balance and walking were 0-29 and 0-9, respectively. These scores aimed to reflect the fear of falling. There was no specific cutoff score. As the score increased, the fear of falling decreased. |
| Quality of life assessment by WHOQOL-BREF | Baseline | The WHOQOL-short form consists of 26 questions and measures the physical, mental, social, and environmental well-being of the adult population. The Turkish version has 27 questions. The 27th is termed the Environment-Turkish. Each area refers to the quality of life in a respective field independently. The area scores are calculated between 1 and 100 by The World Health Organization Quality of Life-short form: The higher the score, the higher the quality of life. |
| Muscle Power assessment by handheld dynamometer (MicroFet 2; kgm, Hoggan Scientific, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) | Baseline | The participants performed maximal isometric voluntary contractions (for lower extremity: M. quadriceps femoris, hamstring group muscles, M. tibialis anterior, M. gastrocnemius, and M. soleus; for upper extremity: M. triceps brachii, M. biceps brachii, and M. deltoideus: anterior, middle, and posterior heads) forcefully against the dynamometer. The dynamometer was held stationary by the physical therapist. |
| Pain Assessmentby McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire | Baseline | Assessment of pain by McGill-Melzack Pain Questinnaire: The localization (deep-D; superficial-S) of the pain was determined by a question in the first section of the questionnaire. Subsequently, the features (20 words and 2-6 sub words of each) and severity (mild to unbearable pain, Likert scale-5) of the pain were determined by questions in the second and third section of the questionnaire. In the fourth section, the relationship between pain, time, frequency, and the affecting factors was determined. Scores (total 0-112) obtained from the sections of the survey were collected. The pain level of the patients indicated that the higher the pain, the higher the score. |
| Balance and gait assessment by TBGA | Balance | Tinetti Balance and Gait Assessment: The total scores for balance and walking were 0-29 and 0-9, respectively. These scores aimed to reflect the fear of falling. There was no specific cutoff score. As the score increased, the fear of falling decreased. |
| Quality of life assessment of WHOQOL-BREF | Baseline | The WHOQOL-short form consists of 26 questions and measures the physical, mental, social, and environmental well-being of the adult population. The Turkish version has 27 questions. The 27th is termed the Environment-Turkish. Each area refers to the quality of life in a respective field independently. The area scores are calculated between 1 and 100. by The World Health Organization Quality of Life-short form: The higher the score, the higher the quality of life. |
| Muscle Power assessment by handheld dynamometer (MicroFet 2; kgm; Hoggan Scientific, Salt Lake City, USA) | Baseline | The participants performed maximal isometric voluntary contractions (for lower extremity: M. quadriceps femoris, hamstring group muscles, M. tibialis anterior, M. gastrocnemius, and M. soleus; for upper extremity: M. triceps brachii, M. biceps brachii, and M. deltoideus: anterior, middle, and posterior heads) forcefully against the dynamometer. The dynamometer was held stationary by the physical therapist. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed