Does proactive cyclic usage of a footrest prevent the development of standing induced low back pain?

Fewster, Kayla M.; Riddell, Maureen F.; Gallagher, Kaitlin M.; Callaghan, Jack P.

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2019.03.013

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LBD seemed to increase more rapidly in the final 30 min in the no footrest condition. In contrast, Fewster et al 16 reported that using footrest in an 80-min 3–1–3–1 protocol cycling through level ground standing and one-min leg raise resulted in re-classification of almost all previously categorized PDs as NPDs (except one PD).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In many interventional studies, significant decrease of standing-induced LBP was concomitant with changes in posture. Using footrest increased lumbar spine flexion in comparison to level standing during both the intervals of elevated leg standing and even level standing over time 16 and could maintain UL lordosis as it moved away from usual standing posture without a footrest and became slightly less lordotic 30 . Furthermore, using side-lying, repetitive (dominant) leg raising exercise before prolonged standing, Viggiani and Callaghan 54 reported that females’ reductions began after 90 min while males’ reductions began after 120 min.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the definition of a risk factor 68 , GMed co-activation is a correlate of standing-induced LBP 39 that has been shown to exist prior to prolonged standing exposure 14 and consistently during standing 9 , 32 , 44 and before pain emergence 39 . From the intervention that could successfully result in lasting decrease of standing-induced LBP, although PDs’ usual GMed activation pattern has changed concurrently with pain reduction in some interventions 16 , 40 , 54 , in some other intervention studies, usual GMed co-activation pattern related to LBP remained unchanged irrespective of significant reductions in standing-induced LBP 9 , 34 , 38 highlighting the possible hypothesis that the increase in muscle co-activation may serve as a compensatory mechanism for poor postural control during level standing, leading to pain in areas of the low back 16 . On the whole, the findings support the notion that LBP development is not simply a response of GMed muscle activation patterns.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prolonged standing pain developers (PDs) have shown many common characteristics with patients suffering from LBP 15 , 21 , 24 , 29 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 42 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 55 , 62 . In other words, they have been compared either directly to patients with “non-specific” 62 , chronic 36 , and recurrent LBP 16 , or indirectly to non-pain developers (NPDs) based on distinctive characteristics previously reported for patients with LBP in the literature. PDs have displayed altered muscle activation 9 , 14 , 24 , 32 , 33 , 39 , 41 , 44 , alignment 20 , 26 , 35 , 51 , 56 , and movement patterns 13 , 20 , 29 , 35 , 37 , 45 , 47 , 50 , 52 , 56 that make them susceptible to LBP based on kinesiopathologic model of LBP 63 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Distinctive characteristics of prolonged standing low back pain developers’ and the associated risk factors: systematic review and meta-analysis

Khoshroo

Seidi

Bayattork

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pain developers (PDs) are considered a pre-clinical low back pain (LBP) population at risk of clinical LBP development and thus exacting great social and economic costs. Therefore, it is necessary to comprehensively investigate their distinctive characteristics and the risk factors of standing-induced LBP based on which appropriate preventive measures can be planned. Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases as well as Google Scholar and ProQuest were systematically searched from inception through 14 July 2022 using a combination of terms relevant to ‘standing’ and ‘LBP’. Studies with low risk of bias in English and Persian using a methodological quality scoring system were deemed eligible for inclusion if they were laboratory studies using prolonged standing duration greater than 42 min to classify adult PDs and non-pain developers (NPDs) without a history of LBP. PDs were compared with NPDs in demographics, biomechanical, and psychological outcomes. Weighted or standardized mean differences, and Hedge’s g were generated to determine the pooled effect sizes using STATA software version 17. 52 papers and theses involving 1070 participants (528 PDs and 542 NPDs) were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review 33 of which were used in meta-analyses. Significant differences between PDs and NPDs in terms of movement patterns, muscular, postural, psychological, structural, and anthropometric variables were evidenced. The following factors were found to have a statistically significant association with standing-induced LBP: lumbar fidgets (Hedge’s g − 0.72, 95% CI − 1.35 to − 0.08, P = 0.03), lumbar lordosis in participants over 25 years (Hedge’s g 2.75, 95% CI 1.89–3.61, P < 0.001), AHAbd test (WMD 0.7, 95% CI 0.36–1.05, P < 0.001), GMed co-activation (Hedge’s g 4.24, 95% CI 3.18–5.3, P < 0.001), and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (WMD 2.85, 95% CI 0.51–5.19, P = 0.02). Altered motor control displayed in AHAbd test and higher lumbar lordosis in individuals over 25 years seem to be probable risk factors for standing-induced LBP. In order to detect standing-induced LBP risk factors, future researchers should investigate the association of the reported distinctive characteristics to the standing-induced LBP and that whether they are manipulable through various interventions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distinctive characteristics of prolonged standing low back pain developers’ and the associated risk factors: systematic review and meta-analysis

Khoshroo

Seidi

Bayattork

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The movement can combat the back pain? (Avman et al, 2019, Fewster et al, 2019. The specific academic training on exercise and sport sciences could give a contribution on the issue (D'elia, 2019(D'elia, , Sanseviero et al, 2019 because it is the fundamental basis of the scientific identity of physical activity (Tiziana, 2019.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Back pain start with physical activity

Macrì

Tore

Fattore

2019

Journal of Human Sport and Exercise - 2019 - Spring Conferences of Sports Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Back Pain is the most frequent osteoarticular disorder, representing, after the common cold, the most frequent human disease. Nearly 80% of the population is destined for a certain point of life to an entire low back pain. It affects men and women equally; it occurs more often between 30 and 50 years of age; it involves very high individual and social costs, in terms of diagnostic analyses and treatments, reduction in productivity and capacity to carry out daily activities. Over 95% of the problems have a mechanical cause underlying low back pain. The most common causes are the degenerative processes related to eternity in the intervertebral discs and in the facet joints. The aim is, through a survey with a questionnaire, to highlight the differences between subjects who practice physical activity, non-practicing and subjects who attend a postural back gymnastics course. The results show that the subjects subjected to the test, and who practice physical activity, suffer from back pain rarely (61%), the sedentary suffer from it sometimes (50%) and usually (50%). In conclusion, it was shown that the best form of prevention of back pain is physical exercise. The practice of a sport adapted to age and physical conditions serves to maintain good muscle tone, to safeguard bone structures. The sport practice is also useful to learn the correct movements during everyday life such as knowing how to lift a weight correctly from the ground or assume a correct posture.

show abstract