Isokinetic Trunk Strength in Acute Low Back Pain Patients Compared to Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Search
2.2. Eligibility Criteria
2.3. Study Selection
2.4. Assessment of the Risk of Bias and Quality of Evidence
2.5. Data Extraction and Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Article Selection
3.2. Characteristics of the Studies
3.3. Methodological Quality and Risk of Bias
3.3.1. Sample
3.3.2. Procedure
3.3.3. Presentation of Results
3.4. Trunk Strength Parameters
3.4.1. Average Peak Torque in Flexion and Extension
3.4.2. Coefficient of Variation
3.4.3. Average Power
3.5. Adverse Outcome from Trunk Isokinetic Assessment
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- James, S.L.; Abate, D.; Abate, K.H.; Abay, S.M.; Abbafati, C.; Abbasi, N.; Abbastabar, H.; Abd-Allah, F.; Abdela, J.; Abdelalim, A.; et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 Diseases and Injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2018, 392, 1789–1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wu, A.; March, L.; Zheng, X.; Huang, J.; Wang, X.; Zhao, J.; Blyth, F.M.; Smith, E.; Buchbinder, R.; Hoy, D. Global low back pain prevalence and years lived with disability from 1990 to 2017: Estimates from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Ann. Transl. Med. 2020, 8, 299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vlaeyen, J.W.S.; Maher, C.G.; Wiech, K.; Van Zundert, J.; Meloto, C.B.; Diatchenko, L.; Battié, M.C.; Goossens, M.; Koes, B.; Linton, S.J. Low back pain. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 2018, 4, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cassidy, J.D.; Carroll, L.J.; Côté, P. The Saskatchewan Health and Back Pain Survey. Spine 1998, 23, 1860–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Freburger, J.K.; Holmes, G.M.; Agans, R.P.; Jackman, A.M.; Darter, J.D.; Wallace, A.S.; Castel, L.D.; Kalsbeek, W.D.; Carey, T.S. The rising prevalence of chronic low back pain. Arch. Intern. Med. 2009, 169, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pengel, L.H.M.; Herbert, R.D.; Maher, C.G.; Refshauge, K.M. Acute low back pain: Systematic review of its prognosis. Br. Med. J. 2003, 327, 323–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hoy, D.; Brooks, P.; Blyth, F.; Buchbinder, R. The Epidemiology of low back pain. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Rheumatol. 2010, 24, 769–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menezes Costa, L.D.C.; Maher, C.G.; Hancock, M.J.; McAuley, J.H.; Herbert, R.D.; Costa, L.O.P.P. The prognosis of acute and persistent low-back pain: A meta-analysis. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2012, 184, E613–E624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- da Silva, T.; Mills, K.; Brown, B.T.; Pocovi, N.; de Campos, T.; Maher, C.; Hancock, M.J. Recurrence of low back pain is common: A prospective inception cohort study. J. Physiother. 2019, 65, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maher, C.; Underwood, M.; Buchbinder, R. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet 2017, 389, 736–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cholewicki, J.; Greene, H.; Polzhofer, G.; Galloway, M.; Shah, R.; Radebold, A. Neuromuscular Function in Athletes. J. Orthop. Sport. Phys. Ther. 2002, 32, 568–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radebold, A.; Cholewicki, J.; Panjabi, M.M.; Patel, T.C. Muscle Response Pattern to Sudden Trunk Loading in Healthy Individuals and in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. Spine 2000, 25, 947–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Catalá, M.M.; Schroll, A.; Laube, G.; Arampatzis, A.; Catala, M.M.; Schrollia, A.; Laube, G.; Ararnpatzis, A.; Moreno Catalá, M.; Schroll, A.; et al. Muscle Strength and Neuromuscular Control in Low-Back Pain: Elite Athletes Versus General Population. Front. Neurosci. 2018, 12, 436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Steele, J.; Bruce-Low, S.; Smith, D. A reappraisal of the deconditioning hypothesis in low back pain: Review of evidence from a triumvirate of research methods on specific lumbar extensor deconditioning. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 2014, 30, 865–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hori, Y.; Hoshino, M.; Inage, K.; Miyagi, M.; Takahashi, S.; Ohyama, S.; Suzuki, A.; Tsujio, T.; Terai, H.; Dohzono, S.; et al. ISSLS PRIZE IN CLINICAL SCIENCE 2019: Clinical importance of trunk muscle mass for low back pain, spinal balance, and quality of life—A multicenter cross-sectional study. Eur. Spine J. 2019, 28, 914–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, K.H.; Beom, J.W.; Lee, T.S.; Lim, J.H.; Lee, T.H.; Yuk, J.H. Trunk muscles strength as a risk factor for nonspecific low back pain: A pilot study. Ann. Rehabil. Med. 2014, 38, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, J.H.; Hoshino, Y.; Nakamura, K.; Kariya, Y.; Saita, K.; Ito, K. Trunk muscle weakness as a risk factor for low back pain. A 5-year prospective study. Spine 1999, 24, 54–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oxland, T.R. Fundamental biomechanics of the spine-What we have learned in the past 25 years and future directions. J. Biomech. 2016, 49, 817–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panjabi, M.M. The stabilizing system of the spine: Part I. function, dysfunction, adaptation, and enhancement. J. Spinal Disord. 1992, 5, 383–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbado, D.; Lopez-Valenciano, A.; Juan-Recio, C.; Montero-Carretero, C.; Van Dieën, J.H.; Vera-Garcia, F.J. Trunk stability, trunk strength and sport performance level in judo. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Golubić, A.; Šarabon, N.; Marković, G. Association between trunk muscle strength and static balance in older women. J. Women Aging 2019, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granacher, U.; Gollhofer, A.; Hortobágyi, T.; Kressig, R.W.; Muehlbauer, T. The importance of trunk muscle strength for balance, functional performance, and fall prevention in seniors: A systematic review. Sport. Med. 2013, 43, 627–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zouita, A.B.M.; Salah, F.Z.B.; Dziri, C.; Beardsley, C.; Ben Moussa Zouita, A.; Ben Salah, F.Z.; Dziri, C.; Beardsley, C. Comparison of isokinetic trunk flexion and extension torques and powers between athletes and nonathletes. J. Exerc. Rehabil. 2018, 14, 72–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kibler, W.B.; Press, J.; Sciascia, A. The Role of Core Stability in Athletic Function. Sport. Med. 2006, 36, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cronström, A.; Creaby, M.W.; Nae, J.; Ageberg, E. Modifiable Factors Associated with Knee Abduction During Weight-Bearing Activities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sport. Med. 2016, 46, 1647–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Heebner, N.R.; Abt, J.P.; Lovalekar, M.; Beals, K.; Sell, T.C.; Morgan, J.; Kane, S.; Lephart, S. Physical and performance characteristics related to unintentional musculoskeletal injury in special forces operators: A prospective analysis. J. Athl. Train. 2017, 52, 1153–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Juan-Recio, C.; Lopez-Plaza, D.; Barbado Murillo, D.; Pilar Garcia-Vaquero, M.; Vera-Garcia, F.J. Reliability assessment and correlation analysis of 3 protocols to measure trunk muscle strength and endurance. J. Sports Sci. 2018, 36, 357–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez-Perea, A.; Chirosa Ríos, L.J.; Martinez-Garcia, D.; Ulloa-Díaz, D.; Guede Rojas, F.; Jerez-Mayorga, D.; Chirosa Rios, I.J. Reliability of isometric and isokinetic trunk flexor strength using a functional electromechanical dynamometer. PeerJ 2019, 7, e7883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stark, T.; Walker, B.; Phillips, J.K.; Fejer, R.; Beck, R. Hand-held dynamometry correlation with the gold standard isokinetic dynamometry: A systematic review. PM R 2011, 3, 472–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kannus, P. Isokinetic Evaluation of Muscular Performance. Int. J. Sports Med. 1994, 15, S11–S18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mueller, S.; Stoll, J.; Mueller, J.; Mayer, F. Validity of isokinetic trunk measurements with respect to healthy adults, athletes and low back pain patients. Isokinet. Exerc. Sci. 2012, 20, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zouita Ben Moussa, A.; Zouita, S.; Ben Salah, F.; Behm, D.; Chaouachi, A. Isokinetic Trunk Strength, Validity, Reliability, Normative data and Relation to Physical Performance and Low back pain: A Review of the Literature. Int. J. Sports Phys. Ther. 2020, 15, 160–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cholewicki, J.; Breen, A.; Popovich, J.M.; Reeves, N.P.; Sahrmann, S.A.; van Dillen, L.R.; Vleeming, A.; Hodges, P.W. Can Biomechanics Research Lead to More Effective Treatment of Low Back Pain? A Point-Counterpoint Debate. J. Orthop. Sport. Phys. Ther. 2019, 49, 425–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nicholas, M.K.; Linton, S.J.; Watson, P.J.; Main, C.J. Early identification and management of psychological risk factors (“yellow flags”) in patients with low back pain: A reappraisal. Phys. Ther. 2011, 91, 737–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sanzarello, I.; Merlini, L.; Rosa, M.A.; Perrone, M.; Frugiuele, J.; Borghi, R.; Faldini, C. Central sensitization in chronic low back pain: A narrative review. J. Back Musculoskelet. Rehabil. 2016, 29, 625–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Comachio, J.; Magalhães, M.O.; Campos Carvalho E Silva, A.P.D.M.; Marques, A.P. A cross-sectional study of associations between kinesiophobia, pain, disability, and quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain. Adv. Rheumatol. 2018, 58, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- de Souza Júnior, J.R.; Lemos, T.V.; Hamu, T.C.D.D.S.; Calaça, F.I.R.; dos Santos, M.G.R.; Faria, A.M.; Silva, A.T.; Matheus, J.P.C. Effects of Kinesio Taping on peak torque and muscle activity in women with low back pain presenting fears and beliefs related to physical activity. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 2020, 24, 361–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Altman, D.; Antes, G.; Atkins, D.; Barbour, V.; Barrowman, N.; Berlin, J.A.; et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ouzzani, M.; Hammady, H.; Fedorowicz, Z.; Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 2016, 5, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Castro, M.P.D.; Ruschel, C.; Santos, G.M.; Ferreira, T.; Pierri, C.A.A.; Roesler, H. Isokinetic hip muscle strength: A systematic review of normative data. Sport. Biomech. 2018, 19, 26–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whiting, P.; Rutjes, A.W.S.; Reitsma, J.B.; Bossuyt, P.M.M.; Kleijnen, J. The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2003, 3, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Downs, S.H.; Black, N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 1998, 52, 377–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cook, C.; Mabry, L.; Reiman, M.P.; Hegedus, E.J. Best tests/clinical findings for screening and diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome: A systematic review. Physiotherapy 2012, 98, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suzuki, N.; Endo, S. A quantitative study of trunk muscle strength and fatigability in the low-back-pain syndrome. Spine 1983, 8, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akebi, T.; Saeki, S.; Hieda, H.; Goto, H. Factors affecting the variability of the torque curves at isokinetic trunk strength testing. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1998, 79, 33–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gabr, W.; Eweda, R.S. Isokinetic Strength of Trunk Flexors and Extensors Muscles in Adult Men with and without Nonspecific Back Pain: A Comparative Study. J. Behav. Brain Sci. 2019, 9, 340–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hupli, M.; Sainio, P.; Hurri, H.; Alaranta, H. Comparison of trunk strength measurements between two different isokinetic devices used at clinical settings. J. Spinal Disord. Tech. 1997, 10, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estrázulas, J.A.; Estrázulas, J.A.; de Jesus, K.; de Jesus, K.; da Silva, R.A.; Libardoni dos Santos, J.O. Evaluation isometric and isokinetic of trunk flexor and extensor muscles with isokinetic dynamometer: A systematic review. Phys. Ther. Sport 2020, 45, 93–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mueller, S.; Stoll, J.; Cassel, M.; Engel, T.; Mueller, J.; Mayer, F. Trunk peak torque, muscle activation pattern and sudden loading compensation in adolescent athletes with back pain. J. Back Musculoskelet. Rehabil. 2019, 32, 379–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verbrugghe, J.; Agten, A.; Eijnde, B.O.; Vandenabeele, F.; De Baets, L.; Huybrechts, X.; Timmermans, A. Reliability and agreement of isometric functional trunk and isolated lumbar strength assessment in healthy persons and persons with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Phys. Ther. Sport 2019, 38, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dvir, Z.; Keating, J.L. Trunk extension effort in patients with chronic low back dysfunction. Spine 2003, 28, 685–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ripamonti, M.; Colin, D.; Rahmani, A. Maximal power of trunk flexor and extensor muscles as a quantitative factor of low back pain. Isokinet. Exerc. Sci. 2011, 19, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yahia, A.; Jribi, S.; Ghroubi, S.; Elleuch, M.; Baklouti, S.; Habib Elleuch, M. Evaluation of the posture and muscular strength of the trunk and inferior members of patients with chronic lumbar pain. Jt. Bone Spine 2011, 78, 291–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shirado, O.; Ito, T.; Kaneda, K.; Strax, T.E. Concentric and eccentric strength of trunk muscles: Influence of test postures on strength and characteristics of patients with chronic low-back pain. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1995, 76, 604–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulz, K.F.; Altman, D.G.; Moher, D. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 340, 698–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Egger, M.; Pocock, S.J.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Vandenbroucke, J.P. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007, 370, 1453–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouilland, S.; Loslever, P.; Lepoutre, F.X. Biomechanical comparison of isokinetic lifting and free lifting when applied to chronic low back pain rehabilitation. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 2002, 40, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martinez-Garcia, D.; Rodriguez-Perea, A.; Barboza, P.; Ulloa-Díaz, D.; Jerez-Mayorga, D.; Chirosa, I.; Ríos, L.J.C. Reliability of a standing isokinetic shoulder rotators strength test using a functional electromechanical dynamometer: Effects of velocity. PeerJ 2020, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Study | Objective | Participants | Age, Weight and Height (Mean ± SD) | Movement, Position and ROM | Velocity and Repetitions | Contraction Mode | Measured Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Suzuki et al. [44] | To measure the muscle strength and fatigability of the trunk flexors and extensors in normal pain-free subjects and in patients with LBP and to determine the role of the trunk muscles in LBP syndrome. | LBP group: 90 men. Acute pain: 38 Control group: 50 healthy men. | LBP group: 29.7 ± 5.4 yrs., 61.1 ± 8.5 kg, 167.8 ± 4.6 cm. Control group: 28.3 ± 4.3 yrs., 59.8 ± 7.5 kg,167.8 ± 5.2 cm. | Flexion 1: Supine with hands behind the neck, with hips and knees extended. Flexion 2: supine, hands behind the head, hips and knees bent. Extension: prone arms at the sides. ROM: 30° flexion and extension. | 30°/s 1 rep of 90 s | Isometric: no distinction according to duration of symptoms. Isokinetic: concentric, according to duration of symptoms (ALBP and CLBP). | Torque isometric (J); Trunk flexion (Joule), Trunk extension (J), abdominal strength (J) |
Akebi et al. [45] | To examine the difference in coefficient of variance (CV) of isokinetic trunk strength between healthy subjects and LBP patients. | LBP group: 143 (93 men and 50 women) Acute pain: 46, men 29 and women 17. Subacute pain: 38 Chronic pain: 59 Control group: 200 healthy subjects (112 men and 88 women) | LBP group: Men 51 ± 15.7 yrs., women: 50 ± 14.7 yrs. Control group: Men 49 ± 15.5 yrs., women 51 ± 15.3 yrs. Weight and height not described. | Standing with knees in semi-flexion. ROM: 0°–60° flexion and extension. | 60°/s 3 rep 120°/s 5 rep | Isokinetic: concentric. | Coefficient of variance (%) |
Hupli et al. [47] | To compare of trunk strength measurements between two different isokinetic devices used in clinical settings | LBP group: 21 (11 men and 10 women). Control group: 20 healthy subjects (10 men and 10 women) | LBP group: Men 40.1 ± 8.9 yrs., 79.5 ± 9.4 kg, 177.6 ± 4.9 cm. Women: 43.5 ± 9.2 yrs., 66.0 ± 13.3 kg, 164.9 ± 6.4 cm. Control group: Men: 39.7 ± 7.6 yrs., 78.9 ± 5.6 kg, 180.5 ± 6.8 cm. Women: 43.2 ± 7.2 yrs., 65.5 ± 6.8 kg, 168.6 ± 5.2 cm. | Standing with knees in semi-flexion. ROM: natural movement from vertical to flexion that each subject could perform. | 60°/s and 120°/s 5 rep. | Isokinetic: concentric. | Average peak torque (Nm) |
Gabr et al. [46] | To check and compare the muscle torque and power velocity of the trunk muscles in healthy men and male patients with low back pain to detect the relationship between low back pain and trunk muscles strength in the absence of structural neurological lesions. | LBP group: 50 men. Does not specify number per acute, subacute and chronic group. Control group: 50 healthy men. | LBP group: 22.9 ± 3.4 yrs., 77.7 ± 21.1 kg, 170.6 ± 6.4 cm. Control group: 23.4 ± 3.9 yrs., 76.1 ± 15.5 kg, 170.6 ± 7.9 cm. | Semi standing position. ROM: adjusted to each subject for maximum flexion and extension. | 60°/s and 120°/s | Isokinetic: concentric. | Peak torque, flexors/extensor ratio, average power of trunk flexor and extensor. |
Studies | Items | Total of N/UC | Total RoB | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | |||
Suzuki et al. [44] | Y | N | N | N | UC | UC | NA | Y | UC | UC | UC | UC | N | Y | UC | 11 | High RoB |
Akebi et al. [45] | N | N | N | Y | UC | UC | NA | Y | UC | UC | UC | UC | N | UC | Y | 11 | High RoB |
Hupli et al. [47] | Y | N | N | Y | UC | Y | NA | Y | UC | Y | Y | UC | N | Y | UC | 7 | High RoB |
Gabr et al. [46] | Y | Y | N | UC | UC | UC | NA | Y | UC | UC | Y | UC | N | Y | Y | 8 | High RoB |
Movement | Position | Acute LBP Group (Mean ± SD) | Control Group (Mean ± SD) | Unit | Study |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Flexion | Supine | 71.20 ± 22.85 (J) | 86.69 ± 27.66 (J) | Trunk flexion (J) | Suzuki et al. [44] |
49.7 ± 21.7 | 42.0 ± 21.7 | Fatigue (%) | Suzuki et al. [44] | ||
Standing | Ariel: 60°/s: 175.1 ± 61.4 Nm 120°/s: 155.7 ± 58.3 Nm Lido: 60°/s: 165.2 ± 47.7 Nm 120°/s: 185.0 ± 54.0 Nm | Ariel: 60°/s: 171.3 ± 45.2 Nm 120°/s: 165.2 ± 47.2 Nm Lido: 60°/s: 168.4 ± 48.8 Nm 120°/s: 187.0 ± 61.7 Nm | Average peak torque (Nm) | Hupli et al. [47] | |
60°/s: Men: 89.7 ± 34.5 Nm 120°/s: Men: 81.5 ± 34.9 Nm | 60°/s: Men: 118.7 ± 37.1 Nm 120°/s: Men: 121.1 ± 39.7 Nm | Average Peak torque | Gabr et al. [46] | ||
60°/s: Men: 38.9 ± 19.7 120°/s: Men: 32.0 ± 24.9 | 60°/s: Men 56.0 ± 25.2 120°/s: Men 57.7 ± 36.5 | Average Power | Gabr et al. [46] | ||
60°/s: Men: 12.2 ± 5.4 Women: 12.2 ± 7.1. 120°/s: Men: 20.4 ± 9.2 Women: 29.7 ± 15.5 | 60°/s: Men: 8.9 ± 6.5 Women: 9.5 ± 4.9. 120°/s: Men: 17.3 ± 6.2 Women: 21.1 ± 8.0 | Coefficient of variance (%) | Akebi et al. [45] | ||
Extension | Supine | 132.98 ± 29.91 | 156.72 ± 37.66 | Trunk extension (J) | Suzuki et al. [44] |
19.3 ± 13.2 | 17.2 ± 10.8 | Fatigue (%) | Suzuki et al. [44] | ||
Standing | Ariel: 60°/s: 178.9 ± 55.2 Nm 120°/s: 165.6 ± 52.6 Nm Lido: 60°/s: 240.0 ± 85.4 Nm 120°/s: 217.5 ± 89.5 Nm | Ariel: 60°/s: 189.3 ± 49.4 Nm 120°/s: 182.4 ± 52.6 Nm Lido: 60°/s: 264.0 ± 73.1 Nm 120°/s: 249.5 ± 68.3 Nm | Average peak torque (Nm) | Hupli et al. [47] | |
60°/s: Men: 91.5 ± 57.1 Nm 120°/s: Men: 69.2 ± 49.6 Nm | 60°/s: Men: 141.0 ± 64.5 Nm 120°/s: Men: 125.5 ± 68.1 Nm | Average Peak torque [46] | Gabr et al. [46] | ||
60°/s: Men: 41.8 ± 35.2 120°/s: Men: 37.6 ± 37.1 | 60°/s: Men: 68.4 ± 47.6 120°/s: Men: 61.7 ± 59.0 | Average Power [46] | Gabr et al. [46] | ||
60°/s: Men: 11.4 ± 6.9 Women: 11.6 ± 5.9 120°/s: Men: 21.9 ± 9.0 Women: 24.5 ± 14.1. | 60°/s: Men: 8.0 ± 5.8 Women: 9.2 ± 5.3. 120°/s: Men: 16.6 ± 6.6 Women: 22.2 ± 9.0. | Coefficient of variance (%) | Akebi et al. [45] | ||
Flexion–Extension ratio (%) | Supine | 55.9 ± 18.8 | 57.2 ± 16.0 | % Trunk flexion/extension (J) | Suzuki et al. [44] |
Abdominal Strength | Supine | 69.73 ± 24.13 | 79.04 ± 29.22 | Joule | Suzuki et al. [44] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Reyes-Ferrada, W.; Chirosa-Rios, L.; Rodriguez-Perea, A.; Jerez-Mayorga, D.; Chirosa-Rios, I. Isokinetic Trunk Strength in Acute Low Back Pain Patients Compared to Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052576
Reyes-Ferrada W, Chirosa-Rios L, Rodriguez-Perea A, Jerez-Mayorga D, Chirosa-Rios I. Isokinetic Trunk Strength in Acute Low Back Pain Patients Compared to Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(5):2576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052576
Chicago/Turabian StyleReyes-Ferrada, Waleska, Luis Chirosa-Rios, Angela Rodriguez-Perea, Daniel Jerez-Mayorga, and Ignacio Chirosa-Rios. 2021. "Isokinetic Trunk Strength in Acute Low Back Pain Patients Compared to Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 5: 2576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052576