Questa pagina è stata tradotta automaticamente e l'accuratezza della traduzione non è garantita. Si prega di fare riferimento al Versione inglese per un testo di partenza.

Pelvic Control Training Using Pressure Biofeedback Versus Core Stability Training in Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NLBP)

21 luglio 2026 aggiornato da: Riphah International University

Effect of Pelvic Control Training Using Pressure Biofeedback Versus Core Stability Training on Pain, Range of Motion, Muscle Strength, and Functional Disability in Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain

To compare the effects of pelvic control training using pressure biofeedback with core stability training on pain, range of motion, muscle strength, and functional disability in patients with non specific low back pain

Panoramica dello studio

Descrizione dettagliata

A randomized controlled trial compared core stabilization exercises with routine exercise therapy in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups, with both groups receiving conventional hot pack therapy three times per week for four weeks. Pain and functional disability were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Both interventions significantly improved outcomes; however, core stabilization exercises produced greater reductions in pain and disability than routine exercise therapy.

Another randomized controlled trial investigated the effects of core stability training (CST) alone versus combined core and pelvic floor muscle (PFM) training in sedentary women with low back pain. Participants were allocated into a control group, a CST group, and a combined training group, with supervised sessions conducted three times weekly for four weeks. Although both exercise interventions significantly improved trunk muscle endurance and reduced pain, CST alone demonstrated greater improvements in lumbar function than the combined intervention.

A randomized controlled trial compared traditional lumbar dynamic strength training with stabilization exercises using pressure biofeedback in patients with chronic low back pain. Outcomes included pain intensity, disability, lumbar mobility, transversus abdominis strength, quality of life, and fear-avoidance beliefs. Both interventions significantly improved all measured outcomes, with no statistically significant differences between groups, indicating comparable effectiveness.

A comparative study evaluated Maitland mobilization and core stability exercises in adults with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Pain and disability were measured using the VAS and ODI before and after treatment. Both interventions significantly reduced pain and improved functional disability, with no clear superiority of either treatment approach.

A randomized study compared pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) with conventional physiotherapy treatment. Participants received routine physiotherapy alone, PFMT, or PFMT combined with transversus abdominis co-activation. Functional disability and pain were assessed using the ODI and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). PFMT, particularly when combined with transversus abdominis activation, resulted in greater improvements in pain and disability, supporting its role as an adjunct to conservative management.

Another study evaluated the effectiveness of a core stability training program in women with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Participants who completed the structured exercise program demonstrated significant reductions in pain intensity and improvements in functional performance compared with the control group, supporting the therapeutic benefits of core stabilization exercises.

A randomized trial compared stabilization exercises alone with stabilization exercises combined with pelvic floor muscle training and physical therapy in women with nonspecific low back pain. The combined intervention produced greater improvements in pain, functional ability, and static and dynamic trunk muscle endurance than stabilization exercises alone.

A clinical study examined the effects of performing proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) lower extremity patterns with and without a pressure biofeedback unit (PBU) in individuals with chronic low back pain. The use of the PBU significantly increased abdominal muscle activation and reduced lumbopelvic rotation, indicating enhanced lumbopelvic stability and motor control during exercise.

Tipo di studio

Interventistico

Iscrizione (Stimato)

50

Fase

  • Non applicabile

Contatti e Sedi

Questa sezione fornisce i recapiti di coloro che conducono lo studio e informazioni su dove viene condotto lo studio.

Contatto studio

Luoghi di studio

    • Punjab Province
      • Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 60000
        • Reclutamento
        • Nishter Hospital Multan, CMH Multan
        • Contatto:

Criteri di partecipazione

I ricercatori cercano persone che corrispondano a una certa descrizione, chiamata criteri di ammissibilità. Alcuni esempi di questi criteri sono le condizioni generali di salute di una persona o trattamenti precedenti.

Criteri di ammissibilità

Età idonea allo studio

  • Adulto

Accetta volontari sani

No

Descrizione

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Children aged 18-30 years.
  • The body mass index within the typical range of 18.5 to 24.9 kg/m².
  • No history of musculoskeletal, neurological, or vestibular disorders.
  • Physically active individuals not engaged in regular core or balance training programs in the last 3 months.
  • Willing to provide informed consent and comply with the study protocol.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of lower extremity, spinal, or pelvic injuries in the past 6 months.
  • Current pain, dizziness, or balance impairments.
  • Known postural deformities (e.g., scoliosis, hyper lordosis).
  • Neurological, cardiovascular, or systemic conditions affecting balance or motor performance.
  • Pregnancy or recent childbirth (<6 months)
  • Participation in any other interventional study during the study period.

Piano di studio

Questa sezione fornisce i dettagli del piano di studio, compreso il modo in cui lo studio è progettato e ciò che lo studio sta misurando.

Come è strutturato lo studio?

Dettagli di progettazione

  • Scopo principale: Trattamento
  • Assegnazione: Randomizzato
  • Modello interventistico: Assegnazione parallela
  • Mascheramento: Separare

Armi e interventi

Gruppo di partecipanti / Arm
Intervento / Trattamento
Sperimentale: Pelvic Control Training intervention with a Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU)
Participants in the PBU-guided pelvic floor muscle training group completed a 6-week program, performed 3-5 sessions per week, with each session lasting 25 minutes. During Week 1, participants were trained in isolated pelvic floor muscle contractions in a crook-lying position using a Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU) set at 40 mmHg. They performed 8-12 repetitions with 5-10-second holds and 5-10-second rest periods for 1-2 sets. In Week 2, the program progressed to 2-3 sets, with emphasis on correct muscle activation and minimizing compensatory activity using visual feedback from the PBU. Week 3 focused on improving endurance and maintaining lumbopelvic stability during sustained contractions. In Week 4, functional tasks such as reaching, supine leg slides, and supported bridging were introduced. Week 5 incorporated advanced exercises, including marching and bridging with continued biofeedback, while promoting pelvic control in supported sitting. During Week 6, participants practiced pe
Participants in the core stability exercise group completed a 6-week program performed 3-5 sessions per week, with each session lasting 25 minutes. The program progressed from core activation exercises (abdominal drawing-in, pelvic tilts, heel slides, and supine marching) to low- and moderate-load stabilization exercises, including dead bugs, glute bridges, bird-dogs, and modified side planks. Exercise intensity and complexity were gradually increased by adding full planks, unstable limb movements, and functional reaching tasks. Throughout the intervention, emphasis was placed on maintaining a neutral spine, controlled breathing, postural stability, and proper neuromuscular control while avoiding compensatory movements.
Altri nomi:
  • PCT
  • PBU
Comparatore attivo: Core stability training
Participants in the core stability exercise group completed a 6-week program consisting of 3-5 sessions per week, with each session lasting 25 minutes. Training progressed from core muscle activation exercises (abdominal drawing-in, pelvic tilts, heel slides, and supine marching) to low- and moderate-load stabilization exercises, including dead bugs, glute bridges, bird-dogs, and modified side planks. Exercise intensity and complexity were gradually increased by adding full planks, unstable limb movements, and functional reaching tasks. Throughout the program, emphasis was placed on maintaining a neutral spine, proper breathing, neuromuscular control, postural stability, and avoiding compensatory movements.
Participants in the core stability exercise group completed a 6-week program consisting of 3-5 sessions per week, with each session lasting 25 minutes. Training progressed from core muscle activation exercises (abdominal drawing-in, pelvic tilts, heel slides, and supine marching) to low- and moderate-load stabilization exercises, including dead bugs, glute bridges, bird-dogs, and modified side planks. Exercise intensity and complexity were gradually increased by adding full planks, unstable limb movements, and functional reaching tasks. Throughout the program, emphasis was placed on maintaining a neutral spine, proper breathing, neuromuscular control, postural stability, and avoiding compensatory movements.
Altri nomi:
  • CST

Cosa sta misurando lo studio?

Misure di risultato primarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
Lasso di tempo: 6 weeks
The ODI is comprised of ten categories, each of which evaluates a distinct element of daily functioning. These sections include the following: the level of pain, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, standing, sleeping, social life, sexual function, and traveling. Every sentence has a score between 0 and 5, where 0 denotes the least amount of handicap and 5 the greatest score. The index, which varies from 0 to 100, is calculated by adding the scores for each question that has been answered, then multiplying the amount by two. A higher score denotes a higher degree of low back pain-related disability
6 weeks
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Lasso di tempo: 6 weeks
The 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) goes from 0 to 10, with 10 denoting "the highest level of pain imaginable" and 0 denoting "no pain". It is a simple indicator of pain intensity since patients choose the number that most accurately represents their level of pain. Both the NRS and other well-validated pain measuring scales have shown strong correlation, validity, and sensitivity to treatments that are known to improve pain. The test-retest reliability for patients has been fairly high, with values of 0.96 and 0.95, respectively. The NRS and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) demonstrated a high construct validity relationship in individuals with chronic pain syndromes (correlations varied from 0.86 to 0.95)
6 weeks
Bubble Inclinometer
Lasso di tempo: 6 weeks
The bubble inclinometer has high reliability for measuring lumbar range of motion in healthy individuals and patients with LBP. They can be used for evaluating lumbar range of motion in healthy individuals and patients suffering from lumbar back pain, as well as for monitoring therapeutic interventions. For healthy persons, the bubble inclinometer reliably measures the range of motion both within and between days (ICC˃0.75). Regarding the ICC measure, they deemed it high if it was between 0.80 and 1.00, average if it was between 0.60-0.79, and low if it was ≥0.59. Bubble inclinometer has a high degree of reliability when it comes to monitoring all of the aforementioned ranges of motion in the within-day test on patients. Regarding the Between Days Test, while the measurement reliability for side flexions, back extensions, and forward bends was excellent when standing, cut off value for lumbar flexion is less than 40 degrees, while for lumbar extension, it is less than 20 degrees. T
6 weeks
Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU)
Lasso di tempo: 6 weeks
The Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU) is a clinical instrument that assesses and trains the lumbopelvic stability through the changes in the pressure of an inflated cushion that is placed beneath the lumbar spine or Abdomen. It entails the employment of a pressure gauge that gets attached to a pressure cell so that the slightest movement in the pelvic or spinal region can be sensed during the period that particular muscles are being used in a synergistic exercise. One of the numerous functions of the PBU in the field of physical therapy and rehabilitation is the assessment of the capacity of the patient to maintain his spine in a neutral position when his deep abdominal muscles, i.e., multifidus and transversus abdominis, are contracted. When training, the unit is inflated to a basal pressure, which is usually 40 mmHg when the unit is below the lumbar spine. Subsequently, the patient performs the exercises (leg sliding, bridging and belly hollowing) against the desired range of pressure
6 weeks

Collaboratori e investigatori

Qui è dove troverai le persone e le organizzazioni coinvolte in questo studio.

Investigatori

  • Investigatore principale: Annum Manzoor, MS OMPT, Gulab Devi Teaching institute

Pubblicazioni e link utili

La persona responsabile dell'inserimento delle informazioni sullo studio fornisce volontariamente queste pubblicazioni. Questi possono riguardare qualsiasi cosa relativa allo studio.

Pubblicazioni generali

Studiare le date dei record

Queste date tengono traccia dell'avanzamento della registrazione dello studio e dell'invio dei risultati di sintesi a ClinicalTrials.gov. I record degli studi e i risultati riportati vengono esaminati dalla National Library of Medicine (NLM) per assicurarsi che soddisfino specifici standard di controllo della qualità prima di essere pubblicati sul sito Web pubblico.

Studia le date principali

Inizio studio (Effettivo)

16 luglio 2026

Completamento primario (Stimato)

25 agosto 2026

Completamento dello studio (Stimato)

16 settembre 2026

Date di iscrizione allo studio

Primo inviato

21 luglio 2026

Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità

21 luglio 2026

Primo Inserito (Effettivo)

24 luglio 2026

Aggiornamenti dei record di studio

Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Effettivo)

24 luglio 2026

Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC

21 luglio 2026

Ultimo verificato

1 luglio 2026

Maggiori informazioni

Termini relativi a questo studio

Altri numeri di identificazione dello studio

  • REC/RCR & AHS/25/043

Piano per i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)

Hai intenzione di condividere i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)?

NO

Informazioni su farmaci e dispositivi, documenti di studio

Studia un prodotto farmaceutico regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Studia un dispositivo regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .

Sottoscrivi