Does the Therapist's Assessment of Movement Control in Low Back Pain Patients Correspond to an Objective Kinematic Modification

Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age18-99
SponsorUniversity Hospital, Brest

About this trial

* Exercise-based treatment is part of the recommendations for good practice in the treatment of low back pain (acute, sub-acute and chronic). * The low back pain population is heterogeneous. This heterogeneity would cause the positive effects of a treatment to be canceled out by the negative effects of another part of the population. * This polymorphism has led several authors to classify low back pain into subgroups. These subgroups constitute more homogeneous clinical pictures and would facilitate the adaptation of treatments. * The recommendations of the American Physical Therapy Association suggest 5 subgroups of low back pain. One of them is "low back pain with movement coordination defect". In this subgroup, Luomajoki studied the reliability of different functional tests used in clinical practice. 6 out of 10 motion control fault tests show good reliability. * The quantified analysis of the movement of low back pain patients would make it possible to determine the sensitivity of detecting an anomaly in the 6 lumbar movement control tests.

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Aged more than 18 years

Common low back pain with medical prescription for rehabilitation

Signed consent

Be affiliated to a social security scheme

Disqualifiers

Body Mass Index greater than 30 (obesity)

Person who does not understand French

Pregnant woman

Refusal to participate

Trial design

Design model

Single group

Treatments tested in this trial

  • motion control fault tests

    Other intervention

    Patients make 6 motion control fault tests, in the same order. Each test is performed three times

Treatment groups

50 Participants
are divided into 1 treatment group
Group A: motion control fault testingOther 1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

Range of compensation motion : "waiters bow" test

Lumbar flexion measured for test number 1 "waiters bow". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal

Time frame
Day 0
2

Range of compensation motion : "pelvic tilt" test

thoracic flexion measured for test number 2 "pelvic tilt". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.

Time frame
Day 0
3

Range of compensation motion : "One leg stance" test

Pelvic shift measured for test number 3 "One leg stance ". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.

Time frame
Day 0
4

Range of compensation motion : "sitting knee extension" test

Lumbar flexion measured for test number 4 "sitting knee extension". Patients are filmed during the test. Videos are watched by three physiotherapists. They going to establish a diagnostic normal or abnormal.

Time frame
Day 0

Secondary outcomes

1

Speed of execution for test 1

It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.

Time frame
Day 0
2

Speed of execution for test 2

It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.

Time frame
Day 0
3

Speed of execution for test 3

It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.

Time frame
Day 0
4

Speed of execution for test 4

It is measured with a camera. The camera can film one hundred pictures per second. Speed of execution is measured in seconds.

Time frame
Day 0

Other outcomes

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.