Musculoskeletal Diseases
Conditions
Interventions
Sponsors
olowe olajide olubanji
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: The main inclusion criteria will be patients with NSLBP of mechanical origin with no radicular symptoms. patients must be between 18 to 65 years old. The patients will be eligible irrespective of their educational status, in as much as they could read in either Hausa or English languages and consent to participating in the study. The patients must have the presence of 3 or more positive LFI provocation tests based on Hick’s Clinical prediction rules.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Patients with other painful conditions and systemic disorders will be triaged to screen for both yellow and red flags that constitute contraindications for participation in both exercise program and will be excluded from this study. Such yellow or red flags could include participants with a history of medical or surgical conditions which might hinder exercise performance. Recent fracture of the spine (over the past 12 months), History of operative intervention for the lower back problems. Pregnant women. Participants with metastatic disease and evidence of serious spinal pathology. History of neurosis, depressive symptomatology and any other specific pathology.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Modified Oswestry disability index (ODI), This will be the primary outcome for this study. The modified Oswestry Disability Index which is also known as the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire is an important tool that researchers and disability evaluators use to measure a patient's permanent functional disability. though several tools have been studied for measuring lumbar- related function in patients with low back pathology (Longo, Loppini, Denaro, & Maffulli, 2010 ; Chapman et al. 2011). ODI is the most commonly used and cited tool for this purpose, followed by the Roland Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ) (Chapman et al., 2011) This test is considered the ‘gold standard’ of low back functional outcome tools. This will be used to assess the level of disability among the participants. It has an internal consistency of 0.75 and test-retest reliability of 0.91 as reported by (Clement et al., 2015; P. Kent, Marks, Pearson, & Keating, 2005). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Fear-avoidance belief questionnaire (FABQ); FABQ will serve as a secondary outcome measure. The Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) will be used to quantify the patient’s fear of pain and beliefs about avoiding activity as earlier described by Wadell et al (1993). Previous studies have found a high level of test-retest reliability for both domains of the FABQ. This is a questionnaire based on the theories for fear avoidance behaviour. It has an internal consistency of 0.88 and test-retest reliability of 0.74 (Wadell et al, 1993). The FABQ consists of 2 subscales, which are reflected in the division of the outcome form into 2 separate sections. The first subscale (items 1-5) is the Physical Activity subscale (FABQPA), and the second subscale (items 6-16) is the Work subscale (FABQW). Interestingly, not all items contribute to the score for each subscale; however, the patient should still complete all items as these items were included when the reliability and validity of the scale was initially established. Each subscale is graded separately by summing the responses of respective scale items (0 – 6 for each item); for scoring purposes, only 4 of the physical activity scale items were scored (24 possible points) and only 7 of the work items (42 possible points).It is extremely important to ensure all items are completed, as there is no procedure to adjust for incomplete items. The FABQ has been demonstrated to be valid and reliable in a chronic LBP population (Waddell et al 1993) and appears to be a useful screening tool for identifying acute LBP patients who will not return to work by 4wks (Fritz et al, 2001).;SF-12 QoL;The box Numerical Pain Rating Scale (BNPRS), numerical scales with 11 or 21 response alternatives which have been proposed as good candidates for pain assessment in most clinical and research situations by some authors (Brunelli et al., 2010). A scale with 21 levels has been shown to provide a sufficient level of discrimination for chronic pa | — |
Countries
Nigeria
Contacts
Public ContactBashir Kaka
Head of Department physiotherapy Bayero university Kano
Outcome results
None listed