4.5 Article

Postural hygiene program to prevent low back pain

Journal

SPINE
Volume 26, Issue 11, Pages 1280-1286

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200106010-00022

Keywords

behavioral intervention; childhood; health education; low back pain; physiotherapy; primary prevention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study Design. A quasi-experimental study with 3 x 4 design was performed. Objective. To improve the level of knowledge and motor skills and thereby avert the development of painful symptoms. Summary of Background Date. Despite the fact that low back pain effects a high percentage of the population, little research has been carried out to prevent low back pain through health education. Methods. The participants in this study were 106 third-grade (9-year-old) students. The program included 11 sessions. The teacher attended the placebo group sessions. No intervention was used with the control group. Results. The level of knowledge and motor skills in the experimental group showed a significant increase immediately after the intervention finished, and at 6- and 12- month intervals after completion of the postural hygiene program (P = 0.00). Some positive changes were generalized to natural situations (P = 0.00). in an independent health check carried out by the local school health services 4 years after application of the postural hygiene program, the results tended slightly to favor the experimental condition over the control conditions (placebo + no intervention). A greater number of the control subjects required medical treatment for tow back pain, although this difference was only marginally significant (P = 0.07). Conclusions. The findings from this study support the hypothesis that programs involving practice and motivating strategies impart health knowledge and habits more efficiently than those restricted to the mere transmission of information.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available