Background. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have evaluated the effects of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on recovered COVID-19 patients after weaning from mechanical ventilation. Therefore, this study assessed the efficacy of IMT on recovered COVID-19 patients following mechanical ventilation. Methods. Forty-two recovered COVID-19 patients (33 men and 9 women) weaned from mechanical ventilation with a mean age of 48.05 ± 8.85 years were enrolled in this pilot control clinical study. Twenty-one patients were equipped to 2-week IMT (IMT group) and 21 matched peers were recruited as a control (control group). Forced vital capacity (FVC%), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1%), dyspnea severity index (DSI), quality of life (QOL), and six-minute walk test (6-MWT) were assessed initially before starting the study intervention and immediately after intervention. Results. Significant interaction effects were observed in the IMT when compared to control group, FVC% ( F = 5.31, P = .041, η P 2 = 0.13), FEV1% ( F = 4.91, P = .043, η P 2 = 0.12), DSI ( F = 4.56, P = .032, η P 2 = 0.15), QOL ( F = 6.14, P = .021, η P 2 = 0.17), and 6-MWT ( F = 9.34, P = .028, η P 2 = 0.16). Within-group analysis showed a significant improvement in the IMT group (FVC%, P = .047, FEV1%, P = .039, DSI, P = .001, QOL, P < .001, and 6-MWT, P < .001), whereas the control group displayed nonsignificant changes ( P > .05). Conclusions. A 2-week IMT improves pulmonary functions, dyspnea, functional performance, and QOL in recovered intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients after consecutive weaning from mechanical ventilation. IMT program should be encouraged in the COVID-19 management protocol, specifically with ICU patients.

Objectives. Chronic nonspecific low back pain (chronic nsLBP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders leading to disabilities and physical inactivity. Laser therapy was used in chronic nsLBP treatment; however, no previous studies have assessed the impacts of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) versus low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on chronic nsLBP. This study compared the effects of HILT versus LLLT on individuals suffering from chronic nsLBP. Methods. The study was a randomized control trial. Sixty individuals with chronic nsLBP were enrolled in this study between May and November 2019. All participants were clinically diagnosed with chronic nsLBP. They were assigned randomly into three groups, 20 in each group. The first group received a program of LLLT, the second group received a program of HILT, and the third did not receive laser therapy (control group). Pain severity, disability, lumbar mobility, and quality of life were assessed before and after 12-week intervention. Results. Both LLLT and HILT groups showed a significant improvement of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS), lumbar range of motion (ROM), and European Quality of Life (EuroQol) scores ( p > 0.05 ), while the control group did not show significant changes ( p > 0.05 ). Comparison among the three study groups postintervention showed significant differences in the outcome measures ( p > 0.05 ), while comparison between the LLLT and HILT groups showed nonsignificant differences ( p > 0.05 ). Conclusion. There are no different influences of LLLT versus HILT on chronic nsLBP patients. Both LLLT and HILT reduce pain and disability and improve lumbar mobility and quality of life in chronic nsLBP patients.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the latest technologies in rehabilitation for reducing pain and altering serum stress hormones in low back pain (LBP) was lacking. OBJECTIVE: To find the clinical and hormonal effects of virtual reality training (VRT) and isokinetic training (IKT) in chronic LBP patients. METHODS: Through the simple random sampling method, 60 university football players with chronic LBP were allocated into three groups: NVRT= 20, NIKT= 20 and NCONTROL= 20. The three groups underwent different exercises for 4 weeks. Clinical (pain intensity and kinesiophobia) and hormonal (glucose, insulin, HOMA-IR, growth hormone, prolactin, ACTH and cortisol) values were measured at baseline, after 4 weeks and 6 months. RESULTS: Four weeks following training, the VRT and IKT groups showed significant changes in pain intensity and kinesiophobia in comparison to the control group (p< 0.05). Hormonal measures also showed significant improvement in the VRT group in comparison to the other two groups (p< 0.05). CONCLUSION: Training through virtual reality and isokinetic exercise is an effective approach in terms of pain and kinesiophobia. In terms of hormonal analysis, virtual reality shows slightly more improvements than isokinetic training in subjects with chronic LBP.