Low back pain (LBP) is widespread in all populations and is a worldwide health problem, which poses substantial challenges for clinical management. Individuals with LBP may reduce their symptoms by implementing self-managed at-home interventions. The theoretical design of the LumbaCurve™ promotes the principles of a passive gravity-assisted traction (PGAT) stretch of the lumbar and sacral region in order to reduce LBP. This study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of the LumbaCurve™ in the management of LBP when compared to a control group of standardised care. Following a screening form using Red Flags and STarT Back tools, 60 individuals with LBP were recruited to the 4-week intervention. Eligible participants completed a pre-intervention questionnaire and were randomly allocated to either ‘standardised care’ or ‘standardised care PLUS LumbaCurve™’ group. Intervention material was trialled for 4 weeks consecutively, followed by a post-intervention questionnaire. Pre and post assessments applied the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMS).Background
Methods
Back Pain is a worldwide problem that often interferes with work, daily activities and sleep. The stress and disability experienced at night by individuals with Low Back Pain (LBP) could be reduced by targeted treatments designed specifically for this period. This study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of a spinal alignment cushion in the management of LBP when compared to a control group of standardised care. 71 individuals (30 males, 41 females) with LBP were recruited to the 4-week intervention after screening using the Red Flags and STarT Back tools. Participants were randomly assigned to either the control (standardised care) or intervention group (standardised care plus spinal alignment cushion). Pre and post assessments were taken using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) (0–24), the Core Outcomes Measure Index (COMI) (0–10), and a Pain and Comfort during Sleep VAS Assessment. Each post assessment was analysed using ANCOVA with corresponding pre-assessment as covariate. Significant differences were seen in the RMDQ in favour of the intervention group (P = 0.034) over the four week period. Significant differences were also seen in favour of the intervention group in the COMI score (P=0.008), the frequency (P=0.004) and intensity of back pain (P=0.000), joint/muscle stiffness (P=0.046) and intensity of back stiffness (P=0.022).Background
Methods & Results
