↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of blood flow restricted exercise compared with standard exercise in patients with recurrent low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
348 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of blood flow restricted exercise compared with standard exercise in patients with recurrent low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1214-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shinichi Amano, Arimi Fitri Mat Ludin, Rachel Clift, Masato Nakazawa, Timothy D. Law, Laura J. Rush, Todd M. Manini, James S. Thomas, David W. Russ, Brian C. Clark

Abstract

Low back pain is a highly prevalent condition in the United States and has a staggeringly negative impact on society in terms of expenses and disability. It has previously been suggested that rehabilitation strategies for persons with recurrent low back pain should be directed to the medial back muscles as these muscles provide functional support of the lumbar region. However, many individuals with low back pain cannot safely and effectively induce trunk muscle adaptation using traditional high-load resistance exercise, and no viable low-load protocols to induce trunk extensor muscle adaptation exist. Herein, we present the study protocol for a randomized controlled trial that will investigate the "cross-transfer" of effects of a novel exercise modality, blood flow restricted exercise, on cross-sectional area (primary outcome), strength and endurance (secondary outcomes) of trunk extensor muscles, as well as the pain, disability, and rate of recurrence of low back pain (tertiary outcomes). This is a single-blinded, single-site, randomized controlled trial. A minimum of 32 (and up to 40) subjects aged 18 to 50 years with recurrent low back pain and poor trunk extensor muscle endurance will be recruited, enrolled and randomized. After completion of baseline assessments, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a 10-week resistance exercise training program with blood flow restriction (BFR exercise group) or without blood flow restriction (control exercise group). Repeat assessments will be taken immediately post intervention and at 12 weeks after the completion of the exercise program. Furthermore, once every 4 weeks during a 36-week follow-up period, participants will be asked to rate their perceived disability and back pain over the past 14 days. This study will examine the potential for blood flow restricted exercise applied to appendicular muscles to result in a "cross-transfer" of therapeutic effect to the lumbar musculature in individuals with low back pain. The results of this study will provide important insights into the effectiveness of this novel exercise modality, which could potentially provide the foundation for a cost-effective and easy-to-implement rehabilitation strategy to induce muscle adaptation in the absence of high mechanical and compressive loading on the spine. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number: NCT02308189 , date of registration: 2 December 2014).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 348 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 347 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 17%
Student > Bachelor 52 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 8%
Researcher 22 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 4%
Other 66 19%
Unknown 107 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 68 20%
Sports and Recreations 55 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 53 15%
Neuroscience 7 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 31 9%
Unknown 128 37%