| Low back pain(LBP)refers to the pain that occurs at the lower edge of ribs,lumbosacral and sacroiliac parts.It is a common health problem in ad-ults.The lifetime prevalence of low back pain is as high as 84%,and shows an increasing trend year by year.Nonspecific low back pain(NSLBP)refers to the low back pain that can not find the exact change of histopathological structure and can not determine the cause of pain through objective examination,accounting for about 85% of low back pain,many of which turn into chronic low back pain.The clinical guidelines for nonspecific low back pain propose various conservative therapies as the first choice for treatment,including non drug treatment and non-surgical treatment.Exercise therapy is the main method for the rehabilitation treatment of chronic low back pain.As an alternative th-erapy,hydrotherapy has been partially verified in experiments.At present,it is recommended to treat chronic low back pain,but at the same time,it is unclear whether the curative effect of water exercise comes from water environment or the effect of exercise.Purpose of the study:By observing the effect of core stability training in water on chronic nonspecific low back pain of college students,and comparing it with land core stability training,this paper provides practical basis for the rehabilitation treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain,and discusses some of its mechanisms.Research methods:44 college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain who met the inclusion conditions were selected.During the intervention period,3 people withdrew for some reason.Therefore,a total of 41 people participated in the experiment before and after the intervention,including 13 women and 28 men.They were randomly divided into two groups: the experimental group(n = 21)and the control group(n = 20).The experimental group received water core stability training and the control group received land core stability training.The two groups exercised three times a week for50 minutes each time for a total of 8 weeks.Visual analogue scale(VAS)was used to evaluate the degree of pain;Isokinetic muscle strength test(Cybex)was used to measure the lumbar muscle strength(peak torque and average power);Muscle state analyzer(tmg100)was used to measure the lumbar muscle state(maximum radial displacement,muscle reaction time,muscle contraction time,muscle relaxation time and continuous muscle contraction time);Oswestry dysfunction index(ODI)was used to evaluate the degree of dysfunction;The fear status was evaluated by exercise fear symptom scale(TSK).The indexes were measured before and after 8 weeks of intervention.Using spss24 0 statistical software was used to analyze the test data.For quantitative data,independent sample t-test was used to compare the initial test value,post test value and improvement value between groups,and paired sample t-test was used to compare within groups;Chi square test was used for qualitative data.Significance level P < 0.05.Research results:1.Changes of pain degree of subjects in the two groups before and after intervention:after 8 weeks of intervention,intra group comparison: the pain degree of the experimental group and the control group decreased compared with that before intervention(P < 0.05).Comparison between groups: the degree of pain in the experimental group decreased after intervention(2.40 ± 0.66 vs 2.93 ± 0.73),which was better than that in the control group(P < 0.05).2.Changes of isokinetic muscle strength of lumbar muscles in the two groups after intervention:(1)peak torque: after 8 weeks of intervention,intra group comparison:the peak torque in the experimental group was significantly different from that before intervention at 60 ° / s flexion and extension(145.29 ± 43.41,190.10 ± 53.15)(P <0.05),and there was no significant difference at 90 ° / s,120 ° / s flexion and extension(P > 0.05);There was no significant difference in 60 ° / s,90 ° / s and 120 °/ s flexion and extension in the control group(P > 0.05).Comparison between groups:there was no significant difference between the experimental group and the control group in the peak torque of 60 ° / s,90 ° / s and 120 ° / s flexion and extension(P >0.05).(2)Average power: after 8 weeks of intervention,intra group comparison: the average power of the experimental group at 60 ° / s flexion(86.38 ± 28.11)was significantly different from that before intervention(P < 0.05),and there was no significant difference in the average power of 60 °/ s extension,90 °/ s,120 °/ s flexion and extension(P > 0.05);There was no significant difference in the average power of 60 °/ s,90 °/ s and 120 °/ s flexion and extension in the control group(P >0.05).Comparison between groups: there was no significant difference in the average power of 60 °/ s,90 ° / s and 120 ° / s flexion and extension between the experimental group and the control group(P > 0.05).3.Changes of lumbar muscle status of the two groups after intervention:(1)right side:after 8 weeks of intervention,intra group comparison: there were significant differences in muscle contraction time(TC),muscle continuous contraction time(TS),maximum radial displacement(DM)and symmetry(sym)between the experimental group and those before intervention(P < 0.05),but there were no significant differences in muscle reaction time(TD)and muscle relaxation time(TR)between the experimental group and those before intervention(P > 0.05);The control group had significant differences in TD and sym compared with that before the intervention(P <0.05),and there was no significant difference in DM,TC,TR and TS compared with that before the intervention(P > 0.05).Comparison between groups: after the intervention,there was significant difference in TC(24.56 ± 1.92)and TS(278.92 ±59.69)between the experimental group and the control group(P < 0.05),but there was no significant difference in DM,TD,TR and sym(P > 0.05).(2)Left side: after 8weeks of intervention,intra group comparison: the experimental group had significant differences in DM,TC,TS and sym compared with those before intervention,and there was no significant difference in TD and tr compared with those before intervention(P > 0.05);There was no significant difference in DM,TD,TR and TS between the control group and that before the intervention(P > 0.05),and there was significant difference in TC and sym between the control group and that before the intervention(P < 0.05).Comparison between groups: after the intervention,there was significant difference in TC(25.09 ± 1.57)between the experimental group and the control group(P < 0.05),but there was no significant difference in DM,TS,TD,TR and sym(P > 0.05).4.Changes of ODI in the two groups before and after intervention: after 8 weeks of intervention,intra group comparison: ODI in the experimental group and the control group decreased compared with that before intervention(P < 0.05).Comparison between groups: the ODI in the experimental group decreased after intervention(17.52 ± 1.12 vs 18.85 ± 1.23),which was better than that in the control group(P <0.05).5.Changes of TSK in the two groups before and after the intervention: after 8 weeks of intervention,the TSK in the experimental group and the control group decreased compared with that before the intervention(P < 0.05).Comparison between groups:there was no significant difference in TSK between the experimental group and the control group(35.95 ± 0.80 vs 36.05 ± 0.69)(P > 0.05).Research conclusion:The 8-week core stability training in water can significantly improve the pain status of college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain,improve the lumbar muscle strength of college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain,improve the lumbar muscle status of college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain,improve the dysfunction of college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain,and improve the exercise fear of college students with chronic nonspecific low back pain,And the effect of water core stability training is better than that of land core stability training. |
PDF Full Text Request