ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Running has been one of the main choices of physical activity in people seeking an active lifestyle. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS™) is a screening tool that aims to discern movement competency. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to compare biomechanical characteristics between two groups rated using the composite FMS™ score, and to analyze the influence of specific individual tests. The hypothesis was that the group that scored above 14 would demonstrate better performance on biomechanical tests than the group that scored below 14. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-Sectional Study. METHODS: Runners were screened using the FMS™ and were dichotomized into groups based on final score: Functional, where the subjects scored a 14 or greater (G≥14, n = 16) and dysfunctional, when the subjects scored less than 14 (G < 14, n = 16). All runners were evaluated using measures for flexibility, postural balance, muscle strength, knee dynamic valgus during forward step down test and time for the electromyographic response of the transversus abdominis and fibularis longus muscles. All data were analyzed with SPSS (p ≤ 0.05) and the index of asymmetry (IS) was calculated with the mean score of nondominant limb divided by the mean score of the dominant limb, multiplied by 100. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in flexibility, muscle strength, knee dynamic valgus, or myoelectric response time of the transversus abdominis and long fibular muscles. Index of asymmetry (IS) of global stability was 3.26 ± 26.79% in G≥14 and 31.72 ± 52.69% in G<14 (p = 0.02). In-line lunge and active straight-leg raise tests showed no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there were no biomechanical differences between the groups of runners as classified by the FMS™. In addition, in-line lunge and active strength-leg raise tests did not influence on the FMS™ final score. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is one of the most common problematic health conditions worldwide and is highly associated with disability, quality of life, emotional changes, and work absenteeism. Graded activity programs, based on cognitive behavioral therapy, and exercises are common treatments for patients with low back pain. However, recent evidence has shown that there is no evidence to support graded activity for patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. AIM: to compare the effectiveness of graded activity and physiotherapy in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODS: A total of 66 patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain were randomized to perform either graded activity (moderate intensity treadmill walking, brief education and strength exercises) or physiotherapy (strengthening, stretching and motor control). These patients received individual sessions twice a week for six weeks. The primary measures were intensity of pain (Pain Numerical Rating Scale) and disability (Rolland Morris Disability Questionnaire). RESULTS: After six weeks, significant improvements have been observed in all outcome measures of both groups, with a non-significant difference between the groups. For intensity of pain (mean difference = 0.1 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.1-1.3) and disability (mean difference = 0.8 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.6-4.2). No differences were found in the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that graded activity and physiotherapy showed to be effective and have similar effects for patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.
