Early initiation of a strength training based rehabilitation after lumbar spine fusion improves core muscle strength: a randomized controlled trial

Dejan Kernc, Vojko Strojnik, Rok Vengust, Dejan Kernc, Vojko Strojnik, Rok Vengust

Abstract

Background: To analyze the safety and effects of early initiation of rehabilitation including objective measurement outcomes after lumbar spine fusion based on principles of strength training.

Methods: The study recruited 27 patients, aged 45 to 70 years, who had undergone lumbar spine fusion. The method of concealed random allocation without blocking was used to form two groups. The strength training group started rehabilitation 3 weeks after surgery. Patients exercised twice weekly over 9 weeks focusing on muscle activation of lumbopelvic stabilization muscles. The control group followed a standard postoperative protocol, where no exercises were performed at that stage of rehabilitation. Functional outcomes and plain radiographs were evaluated at 3 weeks and subsequently at 3 and 18 months after the surgery.

Results: No hardware loosening of failure was observed in the training group. Both groups improved their walking speed after 3 months (p < 0.01), although improvement in the training group was significantly greater than in the control group (p < 0.01). Moreover, the training group significantly improved after the training period in all isometric trunk muscles measurements (p < 0.03), standing reach height (p < 0.02), and pre-activation pattern (p < 0.05). After 18 months, no training effects were observed.

Conclusions: The study showed that early initiation of a postoperative rehabilitation program based on principles of strength training is safe, 3 weeks after lumbar spine fusion, and enable earlier functional recovery than standard rehabilitation protocol.

Trial registration: The study is registered at the US National Institutes of Health ( ClinicalTrials.gov ) NCT03349580 . The date of registration: November 21, 2017 - Retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Early initiation; Intra-abdominal pressure; Lumbar spine fusion; Randomized controlled trial; Rehabilitation; Strength training.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The National Medical Ethics Committee of Slovenia approved the study (No.62/03/14, date 4.4.2014). All patients received written and verbal informed consent about their participation in the rehabilitation program.

Our study adheres to CONSORT guidelines and includes a completed CONSORT checklist.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consent subject flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Six-minute walking test (6MWT) (group mean). p1—difference between the baseline’s and 3 months’ mean for the training group. p2—difference between the 3 months’ and 18 months’ mean for the control group. p3—difference between the baseline’s and 18 months’ mean for the training group. ANOVA1,2—one-way repeated-measures ANOVA between the baseline’s and 3 months’ mean. Horizontal solid and dashed lines indicate the mean expected walking distance (571 m), with 95% CI (± 90 m) in a normal, age-matched population, respectively [21]
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Isometric trunk muscle strength (Nm) (group mean). p1—difference between the baseline’s and 3 months’ mean for the training group. p2—difference between the 3 months’ and 18 months’ mean for the control group. p3—difference between the baseline’s and 18 months’ mean for the training group. p4—difference between the baseline’s and 18 months’ mean for the control group. ANOVA1,2—one-way repeated-measures ANOVA between the baseline’s and 3 months’ mean

References

    1. Christensen FB, Stender Hansen E, Laursen M, Thomsen K, Bunger CE. Long-term functional outcome of pedicle screw instrumentation as a support for posterolateral spinal fusion: randomized clinical study with a 5-year follow-up. Spine. 2002;27:1269–1277. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200206150-00006.
    1. Deyo RA, Gray DT, Kreuter W, Mirza S, Brook M. United States trends in lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions. Spine. 2005;30:1441–1445. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000166503.37969.8a.
    1. Fischgrund JS, Mackay M, Herkowitz HN, Brower R, Montgomery DM, Kurz LT. 1997 Volvo award winner in clinical studies: degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine. 1997;22:2807–2812. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199712150-00003.
    1. France JC, Yaszemski MJ, Lauerman WC, Cain JE, Glover JM, Lawson KJ, et al. A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion: outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. Spine. 1999;24:553–560. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010.
    1. Möller H, Hedlund R. Instrumented and noninstrumented posterolateral fusion in adult spondylolisthesis: a prospective randomized study: part 2. Spine. 2000;25:1716–1721. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200007010-00017.
    1. Weinstein NJ, Lurie JD, Olson P, Bronner KK, Fisher ES, Morgan TS. United States trends and regional variations in lumbar spine surgery: 1992–2003. Spine. 2006;31:2707. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000248132.15231.fe.
    1. Christensen FB, Laurberg I, Bünger CE. Importance of the back-cafe concept to rehabilitation after lumbar spinal fusion: a randomized clinical study with a 2-year follow-up. Spine. 2003;28:2561–2569. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000097890.96524.A1.
    1. Oestergaard LG, Nielsen CV, Bunger CE, Svidt K, Christensen FB. The effect of timing of rehabilitation on physical performance after lumbar spinal fusion: a randomized clinical study. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1884–1890. doi: 10.1007/s00586-013-2717-5.
    1. Cholewicki J, Juluru K, McGill SM. Intra-abdominal pressure mechanism for stabilizing the lumbar spine. J Biomech. 1999;32:13–17. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(98)00129-8.
    1. Cholewicki J, Reeves NP. All abdominal muscles must be considered when evaluating the intra-abdominal pressure contribution to trunk extensor moment and spinal loading. J Biomech. 2004;37:953–954. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2003.09.021.
    1. Hodges PW, Cresswell AG, Daggfeldt K, Thorstensson A. In vivo measurement of the effect of intra-abdominal pressure on the human spine. J Biomech. 2001;34:347–353. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00206-2.
    1. Hodges PW, Richardson CA. Feedforward contraction of transversus abdominis is not influenced by the direction of arm movement. Exp Brain Res. 1997;114:362–370. doi: 10.1007/PL00005644.
    1. Schröter J, Lechterbeck M, Hartmann F, Gercek E. Structured rehabilitation after lumbar spine surgery: subacute treatment phase. Der Orthopade. 2014;43:1089–1095. doi: 10.1007/s00132-014-3051-2.
    1. Oestergaard LG, Nielsen CV, Bunger CE, Sogaaed R, Fruensgaard S, Helmig P, et al. The effect of early initiation of rehabilitation after lumbar spinal fusion: a randomized clinical study. Spine. 2012;37:1803–1809. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31825a17ab.
    1. Greenwood J, Mcgregor A, Jones F, Mullane J, Hurley M. Rehabilitation following lumbar fusion surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine. 2016;41:28–36. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001132.
    1. Abbott AD, Tyni-Lenné R, Hedlund R. Early rehabilitation targeting cognition, behavior, and motor function after lumbar fusion: a randomized controlled trial. Spine. 2010;35:848–857. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d1049f.
    1. Paalanne NP, Korpelainen R, Taimela SP, Remes J, Salakka M, Karppinen JI. Reproducibility and reference values of inclinometric balance and isometric trunk muscle strength measurements in Finnish young adults. J Strength Conditioning Res. 2009;23:1618–1626. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a3cdfc.
    1. Laboratories A.C.o.P.S.f.C.P.F ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166:111. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102.
    1. Bennell K, Dobson F, Hinman R. Measures of physical performance assessments: Self-Paced Walk Test (SPWT), Stair Climb Test (SCT), Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), Chair Stand Test (CST), Timed Up & Go (TUG), Sock Test, Lift and Carry Test (LCT), and Car Task. Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:350–370. doi: 10.1002/acr.20538.
    1. Silfies SP, Bhattacharya A, Biely S, Smith SS, Giszter S. Trunk control during standing reach: a dynamical system analysis of movement strategies in patients with mechanical low back pain. Gait Posture. 2009;29:370–376. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.10.053.
    1. Casanova C, Celli BR, Barria P, Casas A, Cote C, De Torres JP, et al. The 6-min walk distance in healthy subjects: reference standards from seven countries. Eur Respiratory J. 2011;37:150–156. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00194909.
    1. Kim CM, Eng JJ, Whittaker MW. Level walking and ambulatory capacity in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury: relationship with muscle strength. Spinal Cord. 2004;42:156–162. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101569.
    1. Lamoth CJ, Meijer OG, Daffertshofer A, Wuisman P, Beek PJ. Effects of chronic low back pain on trunk coordination and back muscle activity during walking: changes in motor control. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:23–40. doi: 10.1007/s00586-004-0825-y.
    1. Redelmeier DA, Bayoumi AM, Goldstein RS, Guyatt GH. Interpreting small differences in functional status: the Six Minute Walk test in chronic lung disease patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;155:1278–1282. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.155.4.9105067.
    1. Crombez G, Vlaeyen J, Heuts P, Lysens R. Pain-related fear is more disabling than pain itself: evidence on the role of pain-related fear in chronic back pain disability. Pain. 1999;80:329–339. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00229-2.
    1. Kienbacher T, Fehrmann E, Habenicht R, Koller D, Oeffel C, Kollmitzer J, et al. Age and gender related neuromuscular pattern during trunk flexion-extension in chronic low back pain patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016;13(1):16. 10.1186/s12984-016-0121-1. .

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever