low back pain
Conditions
Interventions
Intervention group (N=34): weekly group program for six weeks lasting approximately 120 min in a Primary Care unit in Fortaleza. The group training had three components: educational, therapeutic exerc
Other
I02.233.332
G11.427.410.698.277
Sponsors
Universidade Federal do Ceará
Universidade Federal do Ceará
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Patients with low back pain as their primary musculoskeletal complaint (pain between the 12th thoracic vertebra to the gluteal fold) for three or more months; with or without irradiation of symptoms to lower limbs; aged 18 and over; both sexes; residents of the of Fortaleza, CE.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Patients with severe hearing or cognitive deficits that would prevent them from answering the questionnaires; those who present complaints of pain in the lumbar region with specific diagnosed origin (fracture, tumor, vertebral stenosis); severe associated systemic or neurological disease; history of spine surgery; in physical therapy treatments for DLC or who do not have a cell phone. Those who use medications with analgesic action were not excluded from the project, however the amount and type of medication used were recorded in the pre and post intervention periods.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 7:Difficulty in understanding the intervention(time frame: follow up assessment one week after the intervention): participants answered the question: "How difficult did you have to understand any information/content at the time of training?" on a 5-points Likert Scale: 1– none, 2- little, 3- moderate, 4- much, 5- extreme. The percentage of each answer was recorded. ;Outcome 7:Difficulty in understanding the intervention(time frame: follow up assessment one week after the intervention): participants answered the question: "How difficult did you have to understand any information/content at the time of training?" on a 5-points Likert Scale: 1– none, 2- little, 3- moderate, 4- much, 5- extreme. The percentage of each answer was recorded. ;Expected outcome 8: Difficulty in understanding and executing exercises (time frame: follow up assessment one week after the intervention): participants answered two questions: How much difficulty did you have to understand the exercises? and "How much difficulty did you have to perform the exercises at home?" The answers were displayed on a 5-points Likert scale: 1– “none”, 2- “little”, 3- “moderate”, 4- “much”, 5- “extreme”. The percentage of each answer was recorded. ;Outcome 8: Difficulty in understanding and executing exercises (time frame: follow up assessment one week after the intervention): participants answered two questions: How much difficulty did you have to understand the exercises? and "How much difficulty did you have to perform the exercises at home?" The answers were displayed on a 5-points Likert scale: 1– “none”, 2- “little”, 3- “moderate”, 4- “much”, 5- “extreme”. The percentage of each answer was recorded. ;Expected outcome 9: Acceptability of SMS and phone calls (time frame: follow up assessment one week after the intervention): Participants answered two questions: “Check the option that most represents what you think of the text messages” and “Check the option that most represents what you thi | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1: Pain intensity (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale, where 0 is pain-free, and 10 is the worst imaginable pain. ;Outcome 1: Pain intensity (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale, where 0 is pain-free, and 10 is the worst imaginable pain. ;Expected outcome 2: Low back pain-related disability (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): 0-24 Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, the greater the score, the greater the disability. ;Outcome 2: Low back pain-related disability (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): 0-24 Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, the greater the score, the greater the disability. ;Expected outcome 3: Self-efficacy for pain (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the 30-300 Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale, the higher the score, the better the self-efficacy. ;Outcome 3: Self-efficacy for pain (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the 30-300 Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale, the higher the score, the better the self-efficacy. ;Expected outcome 4: Kinesiophobia (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the 17-68 Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), the higher the score, the higher the kinesiophobia. ;Outcome 4: Kinesiophobia (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the 17-68 Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), the higher the score, the higher the kinesiophobia. ;Expected outcome 5: Physical activity levels (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the short form International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Its result is computed in METs, and individuals are classified as insufficiently active, moderately active, or very active. ;Outcome 5: Physical activity levels (Time Frame: before and one week after the intervention): assessed by the sh | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactFabianna Moraleida
Universidade Federal do Ceará
Outcome results
None listed