Low Back Pain
Conditions
Interventions
Experimental group aquapilates: 9 patients with chronic low back pain performed exercises in the pool for 8 weeks, 2 times a week on alternate days for 60 minutes.
Experimental group exercise in soil:
Other
E02.779.492
E02.779
Sponsors
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Eligibility
Age
50 Years to 70 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Age of 50 to 70 years; Present non-specific low back pain for more than 3 months; Have not undergone any surgery in the spine or other surgeries that make the exercises impossible; Do not present any infection or neoplasms;
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Individuals who had surgery on the spine; Have heart failure or any other heart disease; Chlorine allergy; Hydrophobia; Absence of sphincter control; Neurological disorders;
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1 Improvement in pain. Measured through the Visual Analogue Scale, being considered improvement of pain, the 2-point reduction in VAS.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol.;Result Found 1 Reduction of pain, evaluated through the Visual Analogical Scale, considered improvement of pain reduction of 2 points.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol. Significant difference in pain - VAS, comparing Pool Group and Control Group (p = 0.004), and Solo Group and Control Group (p = 0.05).;Expected outcome 2 Improvement in function. Measured through the functional disability questionnaires Roland Morris and Oswestry, considering improvement the decrease of 2.5 points and 4.45 points, respectively.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol.;Result Found 2 Improvement of functionality, evaluated by the Roland Morris and Oswestry functional incapacity questionnaires, considering improvement the decrease of 2.5 points and 4.45 points, respectively.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol. Significant difference regarding pre-treatment in disability - Roland Morris (p = 0.03) in the Pool Group and a significant clinical improvement over Oswestry in the Pool Group (10%).;Expected outcome 3 Increased physical performance. Measured through the 6-minute walk test.To be considered performance increase participants should walk longer than expected, which is calculated through a specific formula.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol.;Result Found 3 Regarding physical performance, there was no significant difference between the groups(p=0,64), but in the pre- and post-treatment comparison, a difference was observed in the distance traveled in the Group Pool (p = 0.01), Solo Group (p = 0.06) and Group control (p = 0.01). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 1 Improvement of the quality of life, evaluated through the SF-36 quality of life questionnaire. Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol. ;Result Found 1 Improvement of the quality of life, evaluated through the SF-36. Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol. Significant improvement in social aspects (p = 0.02) was observed comparing the Solo Group and the Control Group. And in relation to the pre-treatment in the Pool Group there was a significant improvement in the general health status (p = 0.04) and pain (p = 0.01).;Expected outcome 2 Improvement of the quality of sleep, assessed through the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol.;Result Found 2 There was no improvement in sleep quality between the groups (p = 0.54) and neither in relation to the pre and post treatment, Pool Group (p = 0.20), Solo Group (p = 0.10), and Control Group (p = 0.34).;Expected outcome 3 Improvement of the flexibility and range of motion, evaluated by the Schober test, fingers to the floor and goniometry.Evaluated at baseline and after exercise protocol.;Result Found 3 There was no difference in the variables Schober flexibility (p = 0.34), Fingers to the ground (p = 0.17) and range of motion between groups (Extension p = 0.86, Flexion p = 0.17) and neither (p = 0.16), Fingers on the floor (p = 0.15), Extension (p = 0.16), Schober Solo Group (p = 0,16) (p = 0.31), Fingers to the floor (p = 0.18), Extension (p = 0,31), Flexion (p = 0.18) and Schober Control Group p = 0.83), Extension (p = 0.46) Flexion (p = 0.91). | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactAlessandro;Núbia Haupenthal;Avelar
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina;Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
Outcome results
None listed