Skip to content

Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Versus Therapeutic Resistance Exercise for the Treatment of Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain

Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Versus Medical Therapeutic Training (MTT) Resistance Exercise for the Treatment of Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain in Middle-Aged to Older Cohort With Low-Back Pain.

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06642350
Acronym
BackDFGET
Enrollment
26
Registered
2024-10-15
Start date
2024-07-01
Completion date
2025-03-31
Last updated
2026-01-30

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

Conditions

Low Back Pain

Keywords

Exercise, Whole-body electromyostimulation, non-specific chronic low-back pain, medical training therapy, outpatient clinic

Brief summary

Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCBP) is considered the leading cause of impairment of normal, symptom-free life (disability-adjusted life years - DALYs). NSCBP force more people out of work than diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, respiratory disease, asthma and cancer together. Strength and stability-oriented training programs in particular can lead to a significant improvement in NSCBP. However, back pain patients often cite time limitations and kinesiophobia (fear of movements) as the main reasons for their physical inactivity . The time-effective, joint-friendly and highly customizable whole-body electromyostimulation technology (WB-EMS) has been shown to be an effective alternative to conventional back training in two recently published clinical studies Following the successful implementation of this concept, dissemination of the positive results and testing of suitable settings for its implementation, the next step is to adapt and implement the concept as part of a knowledge transfer project in outpatient rehabilitation settings. The present project thus aimed to compare the effect of WB-EMS versus medical therapeutic therapy (MTT) using dedicated resistances devices as a recognized safe and effective treatment for low back pain.

Interventions

OTHERWhole-body electrostimulation

10 weeks of WB-EMS 1.5x 20 min/week

OTHERMedical Training Therapy

10 weeks of MTT 2x 45 min/week

Sponsors

University of Erlangen-Nürnberg Medical School
Lead SponsorOTHER
Rehamed Center Forchheim, Germany
CollaboratorUNKNOWN

Study design

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

Masking description

Outcome assessors are unaware of participant status (WB-EMS or MTT) and were not allowed to ask participants correspondingly

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* women and men 40-70 years old; * chronic pain in the lumbar spine (at least 50 percent of the days of the last 3 months, * average basal pain intensity (average 7 days) in the lumbar spine on NRS 0-10: ≥2.5

Exclusion criteria

* orthopedic diagnosis (i.e. specific type of LBP); * frequent intake of analgesics (\>4 days/week); * pharmacological therapy or diseases affecting muscle metabolism (e.g., glucocorticoids); * no contraindications for WB-EMS application (e.g., epilepsy, cardiac pacemaker, thrombosis, and total endoprosthesis)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes of non-specific low back pain from baseline to 10 week follow-up assessment as determined by the numeric rating scale 0-10From enrollment (baseline assessment) to the end of treatment at 10 weeks"Numeric rating scale 1-10: Zero is equivalent to no pain and 10 indicates the worst possible pain."

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes of disability from baseline to 10 week follow-up assessment as determine by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)From enrollment (baseline) to the end of treatment at 10 weeks"RMDQ: 24-item Score that scored physical ability and activities of daily living (yes vs. no). The higher the score, the worse the patient's back-related functional status.
Changes of back extension strength from baseline to 10 week follow-up assessment as determined by the Dr. Wolf back-check device"From enrollment (baseline assessment) to the end of treatment at 10 weeks"Dr. Wolf back-check: Isometric test device for trunk strength
Changes of trunk flexion strength from baseline to 10 week follow-up assessment as determined by the Dr. Wolf back-check deviceFrom enrollment (baseline assessment) to the end of treatment at 10 weeks"Dr. Wolf Back check: Isometric test device for trunk strength
Changes of lean body mass from baseline to 10 week assessment as determined by bio impedance assessment (BIA)From enrollment (baseline assessment) to the end of treatment at 10 weeksBIA: Assessment of lean body mass by direct-segmental multi-frequency bioimpedance analysis using InBody 770 (Seoul, Korea)
Changes of body fat from baseline to 10 week follow-up assessment as determine by bio impedance analysisFrom enrollment (baseline assessment) to the end of treatment at 10 weeksBIA: Assessment of lean body mass by direct-segmental multi-frequency bio impedance analysis using InBody 770 (Seoul, Korea)

Countries

Germany

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORWolfgang Kemmler, PhD

Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany

Outcome results

None listed

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