CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04786717Updated Sep 30, 2022

Lumbopelvic Movement Control: Effect of Injury History, and the Role of Cortical Control and Its Practical Application 1

An interventional study of core muscle training and movement control training in Biomechanical Phenomena, sponsored by National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University. Completed at 1 site in Taiwan. Open to participants aged 20 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-09-30.

Sponsored by National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
41
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
20 Years to 40 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Lumbopelvic movement control is crucial for movement stability during weight loading training, and also an important risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of low back pain (LBP). Previous studies indicated that athletes with LBP had poorer lumbopelvic movement control, and the deficits in lumbopelvic control could be remained after LBP remission. However, there has been no study investigating the effect of LBP history (LBPH) on the performance of the loaded squatting task, and lumbopelvic movement control in people who practice regular weight training.

Therefore, the aims of this study are to examine the differences in lumbopelvic movement control, kinematics and muscle activation during the loaded squatting task in weight training practitioners with LBP, LBPH, and asymptomatic controls, to compare the cortical control mechanisms between 3 types of motor control training strategies, and to investigate the intervention effect of motor control training on restoring the lumbopelvic movement control and squatting performance.

Read the detailed description

Lumbopelvic movement control is crucial for movement stability during high weight loading training, and also an important risk factor for the occurrence and recurrence of low back pain (LBP). Previous studies indicated that athletes with LBP had poorer lumbopelvic movement control, and for those athletes who have recovered from LBP, some research data still showed that poor lumbopelvic control remained. However, there has been no study investigating the effect of LBP history (LBPH) on the performance of the loaded squatting task, and lumbopelvic movement control in people who practice regular weight training.

Therefore, the aims of this study are to examine the differences in lumbopelvic movement control, kinematics and muscle activation during the loaded squatting task in weight training practitioners with LBP, LBPH, and asymptomatic controls. In the next part of the study, investigators will further investigate the intervention effect of motor control training on restoring the lumbopelvic movement control and squatting performance. Methods: This is an exploratory, cross-sectional, and intervention study. First part: investigators plan to recruit 15 participants between 20-40 years old, practicing loaded squatting for 1 day a week for at least one year, and having LBPH; 15 matched participants with current LBP, and 15 controls for the study. All subjects will undergo a series of squatting task (4 X 10 repetitions) and the kinematics and muscle activation of the rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus/internal obliqus, eractor spinae, and gluteus maximus will be recorded and analyzed using Noraxon myoRESEARCH (Noraxon U.S.A., Inc., Scottsdale, AZ, USA). A set of lumbopelvic movement control tests will also be conducted. The kinematics, muscle activation, and movement control test scores will be compared between groups. The second part, investigators plan to recruit 45 weight training practitioners with LBPH, randomized into three groups (core muscle training, movement control training, combined imagery and movement control training), and compare the effect of 4-week training on squatting performance and lumbopelvic movement control. Statistical analysis: Comparisons of all continuous variables are performed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the intervention effect will be assessed using the repeated measures ANOVA. Chi squared test is used to examine the group differences in lumbopelvic movement control testing. The significance level is set at 0.05.

02

Conditions studied

  • Biomechanical Phenomena

Keywords

  • back pain history
  • deep squat
  • movement control
  • cortical control
  • imagery training
03

In context

Lead sponsor

National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University is the lead sponsor of 201 studies on the registry; 58 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
20 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

Frequency of weight loading squatting training:

  1. At least 1 time/week, at least 1 year.

LBP group:

  1. Present symptoms from T12 to the upper buttock
  2. Numerical rating scale (NRS) score ≥ 3/10
  3. Present episode of LBP lasting > 24 hours

LBPH group:

  1. Previous symptoms from T12 to the upper buttock
  2. Presently in symptom remission
  3. At least 2 episodes of LBP in the past 1 year, each lasting > 24 hours, and following a period of at least 2\~4 weeks pain-free, OR at least 1 episode of LBP, each lasting 2 months.

Asymptomatic controls:

  1. Without any history of LBP that limited their function or required treatment from a health professional in the past 2 years.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Inability to perform parallel-squat due to LBP
  2. Pain and ROM limitation in lower extremities
  3. LBP due to traumatic injury
  4. Previous spine surgery
  5. Spinal deformities: HIVD, spondylosis, scoliosis, spinal stenosis
  6. Neurological sign, and radiating pain to lower extremities
  7. Systematic disease: rheumatoid arthritis
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
41 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    core muscle training

    Training the endurance of the core muscle.

    Other: core muscle training

  • Experimental
    movement control training

    Based from the initial test, the subjects will receive lumbar movement control exercise. They will perform each lumbar movement control exercise in different position.

    Other: movement control training

  • Experimental
    combined imagery and movement control training

    The intervention of this group is mostly same as the movement control training group. The different part is that the first 3 times of the movement will be practiced through image training, and the subjects will practice the real movement in the rest of 7 times.

    Other: combined imagery and movement control training

Interventions

  • Othercore muscle training

    The intervention of this group will focus on training the endurance of the core muscle.

  • Othermovement control training

    Based from the initial test, the subjects will receive either lumbar flexion control exercise or lumbar extension control exercise. They will perform each lumbar movement control exercise in different position. Starting from the lying position, then progressing to sitting, standing with support, and the last level will be standing without support. Each set of movement will be practiced 10 times, totally 10 sets. It will take approximately 5\~8 minutes to finish each movement. The subjects will learn 5\~8 types of the movement every week.

  • Othercombined imagery and movement control training

    The intervention of this group is mostly same as the movement control training group. The different part is that the first 3 times of the movement will be practiced through image training, so the subjects will not have any real movement, and the last 7 times they will perform the lumbar motor control exercise literally. Each set of movement will be practiced 10 times, totally 10 sets. It will take approximately 5\~8 minutes to finish each movement. The subjects will learn 5\~8 types of the movement every week.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Lumbopelvic kinematics

    The investigator will place three markers at subjects' 1st lumbar vertebrae, 2nd sacrum vertebrae, and lateral side of left greater trochanter. The investigator will record the track of each marker through the video system(Noraxon myoVIDEOTM, Noraxon USA Inc., USA) while the subject is squatting. According to the record, the investigator will analyze the angles between 1st lumbar vertebrae and 2nd sacrum vertebrae which are the lumbar flexion angles and the lumbar extension angles.

    Time frame: pre-intervention

  2. Lumbopelvic kinematics

    The investigator will place three markers at subjects' 1st lumbar vertebrae, 2nd sacrum vertebrae, and lateral side of left greater trochanter. The investigator will record the track of each marker through the video system(Noraxon myoVIDEOTM, Noraxon USA Inc., USA) while the subject is squatting. According to the record, the investigator will analyze the angles between 1st lumbar vertebrae and 2nd sacrum vertebrae which are the lumbar flexion angles and the lumbar extension angles.

    Time frame: after 4 weeks of intervention

  3. Hip kinematics

    The investigator will place three markers at subjects' 1st lumbar vertebrae, 2nd sacrum vertebrae, and lateral side of left greater trochanter. The investigator will record the track of each marker through the video system(Noraxon myoVIDEOTM, Noraxon USA Inc., USA) while the subject is squatting. According to the record, the investigator will analyze the angles between 2nd sacrum vertebrae and greater trochanter which are the hip flexion angles and the hip extension angles.

    Time frame: pre-intervention

  4. Hip kinematics

    The investigator will place three markers at subjects' 1st lumbar vertebrae, 2nd sacrum vertebrae, and lateral side of left greater trochanter. The investigator will record the track of each marker through the video system(Noraxon myoVIDEOTM, Noraxon USA Inc., USA) while the subject is squatting. According to the record, the investigator will analyze the angles between 2nd sacrum vertebrae and greater trochanter which are the hip flexion angles and the hip extension angles.

    Time frame: after 4 weeks of intervention

  5. Muscle activation

    The investigator will record the muscle activation of erector spinae, rectus abdominus, internal obliques, and gluteus maximus through the electromyography (Noraxon TeleMyo sEMG System, Noraxon USA Inc., USA)

    Time frame: pre-intervention

  6. Muscle activation

    The investigator will record the muscle activation of erector spinae, rectus abdominus, internal obliques, and gluteus maximus through the electromyography (Noraxon TeleMyo sEMG System, Noraxon USA Inc., USA)

    Time frame: after 4 weeks of intervention

  7. Lumbopelvic control ability

    Using lumbar motor control test battery to test the stability of subjects' lumbar. This test battery is consisted of 10 motor control test based from previous studies. If the subjects complete the test successfully, they will get 1 point in each test, otherwise they may not get any points. Therefore, the minimum of the scale is 0 point, and the maximum is 10 points, and the higher scores mean the subjects can control their lumbar vertebrae much better.

    Time frame: pre-intervention

  8. Lumbopelvic control ability

    Using lumbar motor control test battery to test the stability of subjects' lumbar. This test battery is consisted of 10 motor control test based from previous studies. If the subjects complete the test successfully, they will get 1 point in each test, otherwise they may not get any points. Therefore, the minimum of the scale is 0 point, and the maximum is 10 points, and the higher scores mean the subjects can control their lumbar vertebrae much better.

    Time frame: after 4 weeks of intervention

07

Study locations

1 site
  • National Yang Ming University
    Taipei, 11221, Taiwan
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 30, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04786717
Lead sponsor
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University
Responsible party
Yi-Fen Shih (Professor, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 8, 2021
Start date
Nov 14, 2021
Primary completion
Jun 1, 2022
Completion
Jun 1, 2022
Last update
Sep 30, 2022

Study contacts

Yi-Fen Shih, PhD
study director · Department of Physical Therapy and Assistive Technology, National Yang-Ming Chiao-Tung University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion