Core Strength Training for Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain
Wen-Dien Chang, Assistant Professor, Ph.D.,
Department of Sports Medicine, China Medical University.
Present address: No. 91, Hsueh-Shih Road, Taichung, Taiwan (R.O.C)
E-mail: changwendien@mail.cmu.edu.tw
Hung-Yu Lin, Assistant Professor, Ph.D.,
Department of Occupational Therapy, I-Shou University,
Present address: No. 8, Yida Road, Jiaosu Village, Yanchao District, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
(R.O.C)
E-mail: otrlin@gmail.com
Ping-Tung Lai*, BS.
Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Da-Chien General Hospital
Present address: No. 6, Shin Guang Street, Miaoli, Taiwan (R.O.C)
E-mail: steven-mandy@yahoo.com.tw
* Correspondence author:
Ping-Tung Lai
Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Da-Chien General Hospital
Present address: No. 6, Shin Guang Street, Miaoli, Taiwan (R.O.C)
TEL: (886)-37-357125 ext. 12005; FAX: (886)-37-336274
E-mail: steven-mandy@yahoo.com.tw
ABSTRACT1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
[Purpose] Through core strength training, patients with chronic low back pain can strengthen their deep trunk muscles. However, independent training remains challenging, despite the existence of numerous core strength training strategies. Currently, no standardized system has been established analyzing and comparing the results of core strength training and typical resistance training. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the results of previous studies to explore the effectiveness of various core strength training strategies for patients with chronic low back pain. [Methods] We searched for relevant studies using electronic databases. Subsequently, we evaluated their quality by analyzing the reported data.
[Results] We compared four methods of evaluating core strength training: trunk balance, stabilization, segmental stabilization, and motor control exercises. According to the results of various scales and evaluation instruments, core strength training is more effective than typical resistance training for alleviating chronic low back pain.
[Conclusion] All of the core strength training strategies examined in this study assist in the alleviation of chronic low back pain; however, we recommend focusing on training the deep trunk muscles to alleviate chronic low back pain.
Key words: core strength training, chronic low back pain, resistance training
INTRODUCTION
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is defined as low back pain that persists for more than 12 weeks, and it is the most frequently reported clinical symptom of orthopedic diseases in Europe and the United States1). More than 50% of people in the United States are affected by CLBP2),and it is the
primary cause of work absence and permanent disability3, 4). The core muscles, which are the primary
muscle group for maintaining spinal stability5), can be divided into two groups according to their
functions and attributes. The first groupof muscles is composed of the deep core muscles, which are also called local stabilizing muscles. These muscles primarily include the transversus abdominis, lumbar multifidus, internal oblique muscle and quadratus lumborum3, 6). The lumbar multifidus is
directly connected to each lumbar vertebral segment5), and the transversus abdominis and lumbar
multifidus activate a co-contraction mechanism. The abdominal draw-in that occurs during contraction provides spine segmental stability and maintains the spine within the neutral zone7). In additional,
these muscles provide precise motor control and are thus primarily responsible for spinal stability6, 8).
The second group of muscles comprises the shallow core muscles, which are also known as global stabilizing muscles, including the rectus abdominis, internal and external oblique muscles, erector spinae, quadratus lumborum, and hip muscle groups9). These muscles are not directly attached to the
spine, but connect the pelvis to the thoracic ribs or leg joints, thereby enabling additional spinal control. These muscles produce high torque to counterbalance external forces impacting the spine; thus, this group of muscles is secondarily responsible for maintaining spinal stability6, 8, 10). When the
core muscles function normally, they can maintain segmental stability, protect the spine, and reduce
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
stress impacting the lumbar vertebrae and intervertebral discs11); hence, the core muscles are also
called“the natural brace” in humans10).
The causes of CLBP are complex, several of which are unknown12). One major cause involves the
weakening of the shallow trunk and abdominal muscles12, 13). Mitigating CLBP and improving mobility
typically involves strengthening these muscles12). Another cause of CLBP is the weakening of or
insufficient motor control of the deep trunk muscles, such as the lumbar multifidus and transversus abdominis1). During physical activities, the trunk muscle tissues ensure the mobility and stability of the
lumbopelvic region; thus, changes in trunk muscle activity (particularly in the lumbar multifidus and transversus abdominis) are typically observed in patients with low back pain8). Core strength training
is directed at training the deep trunk muscles14). However, independent training is challenging for
CLBP patients despite the existence of numerous core strength training strategies. Furthermore, no standardized system has been established for analyzing and comparing the results of core strength training and typical resistance training. Therefore, we systematically reviewed relevant studies to explore theeffectiveness of various core strength trainingstrategiesat alleviating CLBP.
METHODS
The articles reviewed in this study were primarilyobtained from the EBSCO and PubMed databases. The inclusion criteria were: studies published between 2008 and 2012 involving experimental research methods, CLBP patients, and core strength trainingstrategies. Studies with non-English references and
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
those that adopted departmental review or case report procedures were excluded from this study. Searches were conducted using key words such as CLBP, core strength training, trunk exercises , and trunk stability. Two sports medicine experts with at least 10 years of experience were invited to select the articles. The core strength training methods, sports treatments, evaluation methods, and study results of the reference studies were extracted and analyzed. Finally, the Jadad scale, which has a five-point scale (higher scores indicated higher-quality research), was used to rate the quality of the references15)
RESULTS
After consulting with experts and reviewing the abstracts of 135 relevant articles, four articles were identified as suitable for this study. The four reviewed articles16–19) yielded Jadad quality scores
ranging between 4 and 5 (Table 1). In these studies, four core strength trainingexercises (i.e., trunk balance, stabilization, segmental stabilization, and motor control) were implemented for training the deep core muscles. Trunk balance exercises are aimed at enhancing subjects' balance by strengthening the trunk19). Stabilization emphasizes progressive core strength training techniques, such as supine,
prone, sitting, quadruped, and standing stabilization exercises17). Segmental stabilization exercises
focus on strengthening various deep core muscles18). Motor control exercises are based on motor
control theory16). All of the control groups in the four reference studies performed typical resistance
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
training to strengthen their trunk and lower limb muscles (e.g., curl-ups, straight-leg raises, and push-ups).
Table 2shows the three types of evaluation method used in the four reference studies16-19). The first
type was pain evaluation, which included the visual analog scale (VAS) and McGill pain questionnaire16-19). The second type was scale evaluation, for which the range minimum query (RMQ),
Oswestry disability questionnaire (OSWDQ), and back performance scale (BPS) were used to evaluate the participants’ disability levels16-19). The Short Form-12 (SF-12) was divided into physical and
mental sections to evaluate the quality of life of CLBP patients9). The third type was an evaluation
instrumentinvolving a pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) and ultrasound16, 18). The four reference studies
employed pre- and post-test evaluations to evaluate the effectiveness of the exercise interventions and experimental and control group comparisons16-19). According to the VAS and McGill pain
questionnaire results of these studies, pain was reduced following core strength training, although no statistically significant differences were observed from the control groups. In contrast, the Roland-Morris questionnaire, SF-12, OSWDQ, PBU, and ultrasound muscle thickness measurements showed
statistically significant improvements.
DISCUSSION
Four types of core strength training were identified in the four reviewed studies16-19). Trunk balance
exercises encompassing the sitting, kneeling, quadruped, and supine postures involved alternating the
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
supporting objects between hard and soft and instructing the participants to move their head or upper limbs with their eyes closed16, 19). Based on similar principles, stabilization, segmental stabilization,
and motor control exercises were emphasized for retraining the motor control of the deep trunk muscles16, 18). Segmental stabilization exercises enhance spinal stability by focusing on the transversus
abdominis and lumbar multifidus18). Motor controlwas employed to teach participants to contract their
muscles (e.g., performing an abdominal draw-in maneuverwhile exhaling) while gradually increasing how long they could hold their breath by maintaining normal breathing for 10 seconds while performing 10 contractions. Subsequently, the participants performed dynamic exercises (e.g., the cat and camel positions) 16). In the four reviewed studies, the control groups performed typical resistance
training using machines and free weights to train shallow muscle groups16-19). Compared with typical
resistance training, core strength training is easier for CLBP patients to learn, although it is more challenging19). Additionally, no special equipment is required, and patients can independently practice
core strength training at home, which is essential because home-based exercise programs can yield additional benefits for motivated patients. Furthermore, several studies have shown that typical resistance training can easily injure CLBP patients16, 19).
Motor control plays a critical role in stabilizing the spinal system20. Maintaining lumbar spinal
stability involves three interactive systems: the passive support system, which relies on the ligaments and fasciasof skeletal muscles; the active contraction system, in which lumbar spinal movement and stability are maintained by contracting the core muscles; and the central nervous system, which plays a
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
leading role in motor control16). The central nervous system can respond to sensations produced in the
active and passive systems by using the central nerves to control motor coordination20, 21). The central
nervous system governs physical actions, and prevents interference in order to maintain spinal stability and lumbar spinal movement22).
Andrusaitis et al. reported a negative correlation between VAS and OSWDQresults, when a high pain level is associated with a high OSWDQ score17). The experimental group reported lower levels of
pain after practicing stabilization exercises, although the reduction was not significant, compared with the control group, which performed typical resistance training. However, an analysis of the Roland-Morris questionnaire results revealed a statistically significant difference17). The similarity between
these results and those reported by Gatti et al.19) and França et al.18) indicates that using disability
evaluation instruments rather than pain evaluation instruments can clearly demonstrate the benefits of implementing core strength training over typical resistance training. In addition, Gatti et al .19) and
França et al.18) reported that the Roland-Morris questionnaire, OSWDQ, and SF-12 results showed
significant improvements in the experimental group compared with the control group. Evaluating
subjects' disability level primarily involves analyzing their ability to perform functional (e.g., climbing stairs) and occupational activities18, 19, 23). Gatti et al.19) asserted that disability scale levels are primarily
evaluated based on functional activities that are a daily concern of CLBP patients. Thus, although core training and trunk balance exercises are challenging activities, they can reduce disability. Moreover, the effectiveness of such core training and trunk balance exercises is more easily perceived by patients
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
than that of pain reduction methods24. França et al.18) reported no difference in the VAS pain scores
between experimental and control groups; however, significant improvement may have been
undetectable because the pretest scores of both groups were low. Nevertheless, the reduction in pain
indicates that the functional disability of the CLBP patientshad improved markedly.
Objective evaluation instruments are necessary for determining the extent to which core strength training can alleviate CLBP. Using PBU and ultrasound, França et al.16) and Akbari et al.18)reported
statistically significant differences between experimental and control groups. Using a PBU involves indirectly evaluating the movement of the transversus abdominis with a measuring instrument and an inflatable ball connected to a pressure guage. When filled with air, this simple device can be used to sense pressure change caused by bodily movements (specifically spinal movements), thereby facilitating the detection of transversus abdominis contractions18). For ultrasound evaluation, França et
al.16) used 7.5-MHz B-mode transducer ultrasonography to measure the thickness of the transversus
abdominis and lumbar multifidus boundaries. Ultrasonography is more effective than pain scales at
identifying statistical differences between the experimental and control groups16, 18). Thus, we
recommend that future studies investigate the influence of core strength training on CLBP patients by adopting evaluation instruments that yield relatively more objective and discriminating results.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
The authors are grateful for financial support from China Medical University under the contract No. CMU103-SR-12.
REFERENCES
(1) Rozemberg S: Chronic low back pain: definition and treatment. Rev Prat, 2008, 58: 265-272. (2) Lawrence JP, Greene HS, Grauner JN: Back pain in athletes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2006, 14:
726-735.
(3) Peng HY, Lin TB: Spinal pelvic-urethra reflex potentiation. BioMedicine, 2012, 2: 64-67.
(4) Magni G, Caldieron C, Rigatti-Luchini S, et al.: Chronic musculoskeletal pain and depressive symptoms in the general population. An analysis of the 1st National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. Pain, 1990, 43: 299-307.
(5) Aluko A, DeSouza L, Peacock J: The effect of core stability exercises on variations in acceleration of trunk movement, pain, and disability during an episode of acute nonspecific low back pain: a pilot clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 2013, 36: 497-504.
(6) Huang JT, Chen HY, Hong CZ, et al.: Lumbar facet injection for the treatment of chronic piriformis myofascial pain syndrome: 52 case studies. Patient Prefer Adherence, 2014, 20: 1105-1111.
(7) Wong AY, Parent EC, Funabashi M, et al.: Do various baseline characteristics of transversus abdominis and lumbar multifidus predict clinical outcomes in nonspecific low back pain? A systematic review. Pain, 2013, 154: 2589-2602.
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
(8) Kumar SP: Efficacy of segmental stabilization exercise for lumbar segmental instability in patients with mechanical low back pain: A randomized placebo controlled crossover study. N Am J Med Sci, 2011, 3: 456-461.
(9) Ekstrom RA, Donatelli RA, Carp KC: Electromyographic analysis of core trunk, hip, and thigh muscles during 9 rehabilitation exercises. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2007, 37: 754-762.
(10) Ezechieli M, Siebert CH, Ettinger M, et al.: Muscle strength of the lumbar spine in different sports. Technol Health Care, 2013, 21: 379-386.
(11) Huxel Bliven KC, Anderson BE: Core stability training for injury prevention. Sports Health, 2013, 5: 514-522.
(12) Lee CW, Hwangbo K, Lee IS: The effects of combination patterns of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and ball exercise on pain and muscle activity of chronic low back pain patients. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26: 93-96.
(13) Chang WD, Chang WY, Lee CL, et al.: Validity and reliability of wii fit balance board for the assessment of balance of healthy young adults and the elderly. J Phys Ther Sci, 2013, 25: 1251-1253.
(14) Schilling JF, Murphy JC, Bonney JR, et al.: Effect of core strength and endurance training on performance in college students: randomized pilot study. J Bodyw Mov Ther, 2013, 17: 278-290. (15) Clark HD, Wells GA, Huët C, et al.: Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the
Jadad scale. Control Clin Trials, 1999, 20: 448-452.
(16) Akbari A, Khorashadizadeh S , Abdi G: The effect of motor control exercise versus general
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
exercise on lumbar local stabilizing muscles thickness: randomized controlled trial of patients with chronic low back pain. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 2008, 21: 105-112.
(17) Andrusaitis SF, Brech GC, Vitale GF, et al.: Trunk stabilization among women with chronic lower back pain: a randomized, controlled, and blinded pilot study. Clinics, 2011, 66:1645-1650. (18) França FR, Burke TN, Hanada ES, et al.: Segmental stabilization and muscular strengthening in
chronic low back pain: a comparative study. Clinics, 2010, 65: 1013-1017.
(19) Gatti R, Faccendini S, Tettamanti A, et al.: Efficacy of trunk balance exercises for individuals with chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2011, 41: 542-552.
(20) Borghuis J, Hof AL, Lemmink KA: The importance of sensory-motor control in providing core stability: implications for measurement and training. Sports Med, 2008, 38: 893-916.
(21) Chang WD, Tsai CC, Lee CL, Lin HY, et al.: The correlation between heart rate variability and menopausal syndromes of postmenopausal phase in the middle-aged women. Exp Clin Cardiol, 20: 1790-1807.
(22) Panjabi MM: The stabilizing system of the spine. Part I. Function, dysfunction, adaption, and enhancement. J Spinal Disord, 1992, 5: 383-389.
(23) Chang WD: Effects of Home-based Physical Therapy on Functional Outcome of Disabled Elderly: the Experience of Miaoli County in Taiwan. J Phys Ther Sci, 2012, 24: 663-666.
(24) Kawi J: Self-management and self-management support on functional ablement in chronic low back pain. Pain Manag. Nurs, 2014, 15: 41-50.
