BackgroundIndividuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) may demonstrate reduced ability to perform dynamic tasks due to fear of additional pain and injury in response to the movement. The Y-balance test (YBT) is a functional and inexpensive test used with various populations. However, the reliability and validity of the YBT used for assessing dynamic balance in young adults with CLBP have not yet been examined. PurposeTo determine the inter-rater reliability of the YBT and to compare dynamic balance between young adults with CLBP and an asymptomatic group. Study DesignReliability and validity study. MethodsFifteen individuals with CLBP (≥ 12 weeks) and 15 age-and gender-matched asymptomatic adults completed the study. Each group consisted of 6 males and 9 females who were 21-38 years of age (27.47 ± 5.0 years). The YBT was used to measure participant's dynamic balance in the anterior (ANT), posteromedial (PM) and posterolateral (PL) reach directions. The scores for each participant were independently determined and recorded to the nearest centimeter by two raters. Both the YBT reach distances and composite scores were collected from the dominant leg of asymptomatic individuals and the involved side of participants with CLBP and were used for statistical analysis. ResultsThe YBT demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability, with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.99 to 1.0 for the YBT scores of both asymptomatic and CLBP groups. The CLBP group had lower scores than those of the asymptomatic group in the reach distances of the ANT (p = 0.023), PM (p < 0.001), and PL (p = 0.001) directions, and the composite scores (p < 0.001). ConclusionsThe results demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability and validity of the YBT for assessing dynamic balance in the CLBP population. The YBT may be a useful tool for clinicians to assess dynamic balance deficits in patients with CLBP.

To curb the COVID-19 pandemic, the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of preventive measures play an essential role, and healthcare workers have had to endure a burden to care for COVID-19 patients. Thus, this study aimed to assess the weight of the KAP of physiotherapists in Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a cross-sectional study, where we circulated an online KAP questionnaire to 1179 physical therapists, and among those, 287 participated and completed the questionnaire. The collected responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, correlation, and regression analyses, and p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Both males and females participated in almost equal numbers; most of the participants were <40 years, had a bachelor’s level of education, and were from the central region of Saudi Arabia. Social media and the internet were the primary sources of COVID-19-related information (74.6%). Knowledge components A (92%) and B (73.9%) were excellent among most participants. Approximately half of the participants (50.5%) had a moderate attitude toward COVID-19, and regarding the practice component, most participants (74.6%) scored moderately. Correlation analysis showed a low positive relationship between knowledge A, attitude, and practice components. Still, there was a very low positive relationship between knowledge B, attitude, and practice components, but both were statistically significant. Our study showed that physical therapists in Saudi Arabia exhibit good knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19.

Background Dynamic balance is a vital aspect of everyday life. It is important to incorporate an exercise program that is useful for maintaining and improving balance in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, there is a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of spinal stabilization exercises (SSEs) on improving dynamic balance. Purpose To determine the effectiveness of SSEs on dynamic balance in adults with CLBP. Study Design A double-blind randomized clinical trial. Methods Forty participants with CLBP were assigned randomly into either an SSE group or a general exercise (GE) group, which consisted of flexibility and range-of-motion exercises. Participants attended a total of four to eight supervised physical therapy (PT) sessions and performed their assigned exercises at home in the first four weeks of the eight-week intervention. In the last four weeks, the participants performed their exercises at home with no supervised PT sessions. Participants’ dynamic balance was measured using the Y-Balance Test (YBT) and the normalized composite scores, Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire scores were collected at baseline, two weeks, four weeks, and eight weeks. Results A significant difference between groups from two weeks to four weeks (p = 0.002) was found, with the SSE group demonstrating higher YBT composite scores than the GE group. However, there were no significant between-group differences from baseline to two weeks (p =0.098), and from four weeks to eight weeks (p = 0.413). Conclusions Supervised SSEs were superior to GEs in improving dynamic balance for the first four weeks after initiating intervention in adults with CLBP. However, GEs appeared to have an effect equivalent to that of SSEs after 8-week intervention. Levels of Evidence 1b.

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is one of the most common complaints in individuals who seek medical care and is a leading cause of movement impairments. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS™) was developed to evaluate neuromuscular impairments during movement. However, the reliability and validity of the FMS™ have not yet been established for the LBP population because of a limitation of its original scoring system. PurposeThe purposes of this study were to determine the reliability and validity of the FMS™ with a modified scoring system in young adults with and without LBP. The FMS™ scores were modified by assigning a zero score only when there was an increase in LBP during the FMS™, not simply for the presence of pain, as in the original FMS™ scoring system. Study DesignReliability and validity study. MethodsTwenty-two participants with LBP (8 males and 14 females, 26.7 ± 4.68 years old) and 22 age-and gender-matched participants without LBP (26.64 ± 4.20 years old) completed the study. Each participant performed the FMS™ once while being scored simultaneously and independently by two investigators. In addition, each participant's FMS™ performance was video-recorded and then was scored by another two investigators separately. The video-recorded performance also was scored twice six weeks apart by the same investigator to determine intra-rater reliability. ResultsThe results showed excellent inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of the FMS™ composite score with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.93 to 0.99 for both groups. In addition, the LBP group scored significantly lower than the group without LBP (p = 0.008). ConclusionsThe results indicate that the FMS™ is able to distinguish between individuals with and without LBP, and that it could be a useful test for clinicians to quantify movement quality and to assess movement restrictions in individuals with LBP. Levels of Evidence2b.

Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is a musculoskeletal disorder that affects more than 80% of people in the United States at least once in their lifetime. LBP is one of the most common complaints prompting individuals to seek medical care. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of spinal stabilization exercises (SSEs) on movement performance, pain intensity, and disability level in adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Methods Forty participants, 20 in each group, with CLBP were recruited and randomly allocated into one of two interventions: SSEs and general exercises (GEs). All participants received their assigned intervention under supervision one to two times per week for the first four weeks and then were asked to continue their program at home for another four weeks. Outcome measures were collected at baseline, two weeks, four weeks, and eight weeks, including the Functional Movement ScreenTM (FMSTM), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and Modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (OSW) scores. Results There was a significant interaction for the FMSTM scores (p = 0.016), but not for the NPRS and OSW scores. Post hoc analysis showed significant between-group differences between baseline and four weeks (p = 0.005) and between baseline and eight weeks (p = 0.026) favor SSEs over GEs. Further, the results demonstrated that all participants, regardless of group, had significant improvements in movement performance, pain intensity, and disability level over time. Conclusion The results of the study favor SSEs over GEs in improving movement performance for individuals with CLBP, specifically after four weeks of the supervised SSE program.