Schaller Andrea, Dintsios Charalabos-Markos, Icks Andrea, Reibling Nadine, Froboese Ingo
Institute of Health Promotion and Clinical Movement Science, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany IST-University of Applied Sciences, Duesseldorf, Germany
IST-University of Applied Sciences, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Clin Rehabil. 2016 Sep;30(9):865-77. doi: 10.1177/0269215515618730.
To assess a comprehensive multicomponent intervention against a low intensity intervention for promoting physical activity in chronic low back pain patients.
Randomised controlled trial.
Inpatient rehabilitation and aftercare.
A total of 412 patients with chronic low back pain.
A multicomponent intervention (Movement Coaching) comprising of small group intervention (twice during inpatient rehabilitation), tailored telephone aftercare (twice after rehabilitation) and internet-based aftercare (web 2.0 platform) versus a low level intensity intervention (two general presentations on physical activity, download of the presentations).
Physical activity was measured using a questionnaire. Primary outcome was total physical activity; secondary outcomes were setting specific physical activity (transport, workplace, leisure time) and pain. Comparative group differences were evaluated six months after inpatient rehabilitation.
At six months follow-up, 92 participants in Movement Coaching (46 %) and 100 participants in the control group (47 %) completed the postal follow-up questionnaire. No significant differences between the two groups could be shown in total physical activity (P = 0.30). In addition to this, workplace (P = 0.53), transport (P = 0.68) and leisure time physical activity (P = 0.21) and pain (P = 0.43) did not differ significantly between the two groups. In both groups, physical activity decreased during the six months follow-up.
The multicomponent intervention was no more effective than the low intensity intervention in promoting physical activity at six months follow-up. The decrease in physical activity in both groups is an unexpected outcome of the study and indicates the need for further research.
评估一种综合多成分干预措施与低强度干预措施相比,对促进慢性腰痛患者身体活动的效果。
随机对照试验。
住院康复及后续护理。
共412例慢性腰痛患者。
一种多成分干预措施(运动指导),包括小组干预(住院康复期间两次)、个性化电话随访(康复后两次)和基于互联网的随访(网络2.0平台),与低强度干预措施(关于身体活动的两次一般性讲座、讲座资料下载)进行对比。
使用问卷测量身体活动情况。主要结局指标为总体身体活动;次要结局指标为特定场景下的身体活动(交通、工作场所、休闲时间)及疼痛程度。在住院康复6个月后评估两组间的差异。
在6个月随访时,运动指导组92名参与者(46%)和对照组100名参与者(47%)完成了邮寄的随访问卷。两组在总体身体活动方面无显著差异(P = 0.30)。除此之外,两组在工作场所身体活动(P = 0.53)、交通身体活动(P = 0.68)、休闲时间身体活动(P = 0.21)及疼痛程度(P = 0.43)方面也无显著差异。在两组中,身体活动在6个月随访期间均有所下降。
在6个月随访时,多成分干预措施在促进身体活动方面并不比低强度干预措施更有效。两组身体活动的下降是该研究未预料到的结果,表明有必要进一步开展研究。