Skip to main content

Table 2 Baseline and post-intervention maximal range of motion in the lumbar spine and hip joint

From: Sensor-based postural feedback is more effective than conventional feedback to improve lumbopelvic movement control in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomised controlled trial

  Baseline Post-intervention Mean difference (95%CI)
Chronic low back pain
 Waiter’s bow
  Lumbar spine Control 17.9 (5.9) 17.5 (6.6) −0.4 (−2.9 to 2.0)
Mirror 18.5 (4.3) 15.8 (2.7) −2.7 (−0.5 to − 0.2)
Sensor 16.2 (6.2) 6.5 (4.7) − 9.7 (− 13.9 to − 5.5)a
  Hip Control 27.8 (16.3) 28.3 (15.8) 0.5 (− 4.7 to 5.8)
Mirror 36.0 (13.7) 38.5 (14.2) 2.5 (− 3.4 to 8.4)
Sensor 31.4 (9.8) 46.1 (11.8) 14.7 (6.4 to 23.0)a
 Lifting task
  Lumbar spine Control 23.7 (7.2) 22.0 (10.6) − 1.7 (− 5.1 to 1.8)
Mirror 20.5 (7.2) 18.9 (4.7) − 1.6 (− 4.1 to 1.0)
Sensor 21.0 (7.5) 13.9 (7.8) −7.2 (− 3.7 to − 10.7)a
  Hip Control 89.2 (13.6) 87.3 (14.7) − 1.9 (− 7.9 to 4.1)
Mirror 91.1 (13.6) 86.3 (19.2) − 4.9 (− 11.5 to 1.8)
Sensor 89.7 (12.8) 95.4 (9.8) 5.7 (− 0.1 to 11.5)
Healthy subjects
 Waiter’s bow
  Lumbar spine Control 20.5 (7.3) 18.7 (9.7) −1.8 (−6.3 to 2.8)
Mirror 22.2 (7.7) 20.6 (9.8) −1.6 (−5.1 to 1.8)
Sensor 21.5 (6.1) 8.2 (4.4) − 13.3 (− 17.9 to − 9.4)a
  Hip Control 26.1 (10.5) 33.4 (13.8) 7.2 (− 1.6 to 12.9)
Mirror 27.7 (12.7) 33.5 (15.1) 5.8 (1.1 to 10.4)
Sensor 30.7 (10.1) 45.1 (7.4) 14.5 (9.2 to 19.7)a
 Lifting task
  Lumbar spine Control 24.1 (10.7) 22.4 (11.0) − 1.8 (− 3.0 to − 0.7)
Mirror 27.8 (7.0) 26.9 (7.3) − 0.9 (− 3.7 to 1.8)
Sensor 27.0 (8.3) 19.8 (7.0) − 7.1 (− 2.6 to − 11.7)a
  Hip Control 88.0 (13.1) 86.7 (12.7) − 1.3 (− 8.8 to 2.1)
Mirror 92.4 (13.3) 92.6 (7.8) 0.2 (−4.2 to 4.6)
Sensor 83.9 (14.1) 92.1 (10.7) 8.2 (3.1 to 13.3)
  1. All data are expressed as angles in degrees (°). Data for baseline and post-intervention are mean (SD). Mean difference = post-intervention minus baseline
  2. aMean difference > measurement error