PubMed · 10317323
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Saad. 1983. Program puts back injuries behind you.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10317323/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
STUDY DESIGN: A control group-designed 1-year follow-up study involving 9 to 11-year-old schoolchildren who followed back education. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of a back education program, consisting of six sessions of 1 hour each, in elementary school. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In surveys among children and teenagers during the past few years, as many as half of all children in a community report a history of low back pain. Although several authors advocate the implementation of back education in elementary school, no guidelines exist and little is known about the efficacy of such a program. METHODS: A total of 198 children (subjected to back education) and 165 controls performed a practical test, evaluating the use of back care principles while sitting, taking off shoes, picking up a pen, and handling a load and a book bag. Post-tests were performed within 1 week after the intervention, after 3 months, and after 1 year. The week prevalence of back and neck pain was evaluated at these test moments in extended samples of intervention children (n = 347) and controls (n = 349). To evaluate habit changes, a limited group of intervention pupils (n = 38) and controls (n = 31) was additionally evaluated in a candid camera observation at the last post-test. RESULTS: At all post-tests intervention pupils scored significantly higher (P < 0.001) than controls for all practical test items. Candid camera evaluation scores were higher in the intervention group sample compared with the control group sample for four of the eight evaluated items. Following back education significantly decreased the week prevalence of back and neck pain. CONCLUSIONS: Back education in elementary schoolchildren is efficacious up to 1 year. The role of early back education in preventing back pain at the adult age merits further attention.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether transferring equipment designed to assist a carer when moving someone who is able to take some weight through their legs is likely to affect the risk of back problems in the carer. DESIGN: Twelve pieces of equipment were tested by nurses transferring patients from commode to wheelchair and vice versa, and from wheelchair to bed and vice versa. Video recordings were taken of each transfer and freeze-frame pictures at the moment of greatest load were analysed. Compressive disc force was deduced, using a biomechanical model, from the weights of the patient and nurse and measurements of anatomical distances and angles. SETTING: The Sir Walter Puckey Gait Laboratory, in the Rehabilitation Research Unit, University of Southampton. SUBJECTS: Six female trained nurses with no recent history of hernia, back pain or pregnancy during the previous six months were recruited to use the equipment. Two female patients were chosen from those volunteering and screened for stroke, confusion and unusual footwear. The patients were able to partially weight-bear and were used to being transferred. RESULTS: The results indicate that the critical value of 3.4 kN at the L5/S1 disc (specified by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) was not exceeded when using transferring equipment. CONCLUSION: In this study, loading on the spine during transferring tasks with or without equipment was not considered harmful when good technique was employed.
Golf injuries to the lower back and elbow are common problems in both the professional and amateur player, and any information regarding the successful treatment of these injuries has important implications for the medical practitioner. This paper presents the successful management and outcome of two case studies associated with low back pain and lateral epicondylitis in golf. Exercise therapy and conditioning has been shown to be an effective treatment modality for these two types of injury. In particular, a dynamic exercise programme which incorporates golf functional rehabilitation, is a modern and accepted method by both the patient and the clinician. Effective programmes need to be golf-specific to maintain the interest of the participant and yet at the same time they need to be able to accommodate other factors such as age, gender and the level of the golfer. Furthermore, it is critical that the clinical practitioner has a fundamental knowledge of normal swing mechanics and a working knowledge of the musculoskeletal requirements needed to swing a golf club. In the case of the lower back injury, evaluation was based on detailed computer tomography and centred on the conditioning of the transversus abdominis muscle. Although this muscle is not considered to be paraspinal, it has particularly important implications in the maintenance of spinal stability so that other more specific golf functioning exercises and rehabilitation can be performed. For the case study of lateral epicondylitis detailed evaluation and consideration of neuropathy was an important factor in the diagnostic process. In part, it was necessary to deviate from conventional treatment to produce an effective outcome. A comprehensive resistance-strength-training programme and golf functional 'hitting' programme was used to treat the problem. The conformity by the patient to complete the exercise regimen has been an issue of concern for clinicians managing and treating golf-related problems. Many golfers are 'fanatical' and unless they can see that by continuing the programme their injury will be overcome, it is difficult trying to restrict their time on the golf course. The two case studies described in this article highlight how an extensive and dynamic golf functional programme could be used as an effective method for managing and preventing golf injuries.