• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Pratimų individualizacijos reikšmė gydant lėtinį nugaros skausmą / The importance of exercise individualization in choronic low back pain treatment

Achramavičienė, Miglė 23 May 2005 (has links)
The purpose of the study was to find out the importance of exercise individualization treating chronic low back pain. Methods: 32 chronic low back pain pacients, 32.12±4.83 years of age, were divided into two groups under research. The first group took part in 14 weeks general trunk muscles strengthening program. The second group patients obtained individual 14 weeks trunk muscles strengthening programs. Individual programs were made by physiotherapist in accordance with trunk muscles static and dynamic endurance characteristics which were measured and evaluated with trunk muscles capability tests. The capability of trunk muscles of all patients were measured and evaluated before and after exercise program using tests suggested by D. J Magee in year 2000. At the same time the intensity of experienced pain was evaluated using Phoenix recommendations (1999). Results: Both exercise programs significantly reduced chronic low back pain and also amplified trunk muscles static and dynamic endurance. The effect of individualized exercise treatment programs for reducing pain was significantly higher. The average intensity of pain dropped from 5.69 to 2.25 in the general exercise group, and from 5.63 to 0.94 in the individualized exercise programs group. The improvement in the individualized group was significantly higher than that in the general group, i.e. 4.69 ± 1.78 and 3.44±1.71 respectively. Other significant difference between two exercise groups was different distribution of... [to full text]

Page generated in 0.056 seconds