Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT04786717 |
Other study ID # |
YM110027E(1) |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
November 14, 2021 |
Est. completion date |
June 1, 2022 |
Study information
Verified date |
September 2022 |
Source |
National Yang Ming University |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Lumbopelvic movement control is crucial for movement stability during weight loading
training, and also an important risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of low back
pain (LBP). Previous studies indicated that athletes with LBP had poorer lumbopelvic movement
control, and the deficits in lumbopelvic control could be remained after LBP remission.
However, there has been no study investigating the effect of LBP history (LBPH) on the
performance of the loaded squatting task, and lumbopelvic movement control in people who
practice regular weight training.
Therefore, the aims of this study are to examine the differences in lumbopelvic movement
control, kinematics and muscle activation during the loaded squatting task in weight training
practitioners with LBP, LBPH, and asymptomatic controls, to compare the cortical control
mechanisms between 3 types of motor control training strategies, and to investigate the
intervention effect of motor control training on restoring the lumbopelvic movement control
and squatting performance.
Description:
Lumbopelvic movement control is crucial for movement stability during high weight loading
training, and also an important risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of low back
pain (LBP). Previous studies indicated that athletes with LBP had poorer lumbopelvic movement
control, and for those athletes who have recovered from LBP, some research data still showed
that poor lumbopelvic control remained. However, there has been no study investigating the
effect of LBP history (LBPH) on the performance of the loaded squatting task, and lumbopelvic
movement control in people who practice regular weight training.
Therefore, the aims of this study are to examine the differences in lumbopelvic movement
control, kinematics and muscle activation during the loaded squatting task in weight training
practitioners with LBP, LBPH, and asymptomatic controls. In the next part of the study,
investigators will further investigate the intervention effect of motor control training on
restoring the lumbopelvic movement control and squatting performance. Methods: This is an
exploratory, cross-sectional, and intervention study. First part: investigators plan to
recruit 15 participants between 20-40 years old, practicing loaded squatting for 1 day a week
for at least one year, and having LBPH; 15 matched participants with current LBP, and 15
controls for the study. All subjects will undergo a series of squatting task (4 X 10
repetitions) and the kinematics and muscle activation of the rectus abdominus, transverse
abdominus/internal obliqus, eractor spinae, and gluteus maximus will be recorded and analyzed
using Noraxon myoRESEARCH (Noraxon U.S.A., Inc., Scottsdale, AZ, USA). A set of lumbopelvic
movement control tests will also be conducted. The kinematics, muscle activation, and
movement control test scores will be compared between groups. The second part, investigators
plan to recruit 45 weight training practitioners with LBPH, randomized into three groups
(core muscle training, movement control training, combined imagery and movement control
training), and compare the effect of 4-week training on squatting performance and lumbopelvic
movement control. Statistical analysis: Comparisons of all continuous variables are performed
using the analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the intervention effect will be assessed using
the repeated measures ANOVA. Chi squared test is used to examine the group differences in
lumbopelvic movement control testing. The significance level is set at 0.05.