An observational study in Low Back Pain, sponsored by Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education. Completed at 1 site in Poland. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 50 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-24.
Sponsored by Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education · Observational
The aim of this study was to determine the significance of the impact of external factors (self-evaluation of the subjects) and internal factors, including the range of motion in the spine and hip joints, trunk muscle endurance and body posture of tennis players, on the occurrence and severity of low back pain.
The aim of the study was to compare tennis players with and without lower back pain (LBP) and individuals not engaged in asymmetric sports without LBP in terms of spinal flexion, extension, lateral bending range of motion, hip joint flexion, extension, internal and external rotation, modified seat and reach test results, trunk muscle endurance, body posture parameters, and survey information regarding training volume and stretching exercises. Identifying significant differences between participants with and without LBP could provide indications for modifying rehabilitation programs for amateur tennis players with LBP or for introducing preventive exercises targeting factors significantly influencing the occurrence of LBP in this population. Prior to the study, participants provided written consent and were informed of their right to withdraw from the study at any time.
2,373 studies on the registry are indexed under Back Pain; 284 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 106 is close to the median of 100 across 357 observational studies indexed under Back Pain.
Browse Back Pain studies →Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education is the lead sponsor of 34 studies on the registry; 5 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Participants were recruited through announcements in tennis clubs, on internet portals, and on social media platforms within groups for amateur tennis players.
For Study Group:
For Comprarison Group I:
For Comparison Group II:
Exclusion Criteria:
Women and men amateur tennis players with LBP
Women and men amateur tennis players without LBP
Physically active women and men not engaged in asymmetric sports without LBP
Hip range of motion
The hip range of motion was measured using a digital inclinometer. During hip rotation measurement, the subject lay prone with the pelvis stabilized by a strap. The tested hip was in a neutral position with the knee flexed to 90 degrees. The inclinometer was zeroed along the tibial axis when the tibial plateau was parallel to the ground. The range of motion was the angular difference between the initial and final positions. For flexion, the subject lay supine with the non-tested lower limb stabilized. The inclinometer was zeroed parallel to the ground. The final position was where the thigh could no longer move further into flexion. For extension, the subject .lay supine with the pelvis at the edge of the table. The subject maximally flexed both hips. The subject held the non-tested lower limb with both hands. On the tested side, the lower limb hung freely off the table. The inclinometer was zeroed on a surface parallel to the ground, and in the final position of the test.
Time frame: Baseline
Spine range of motion
The measurement was conducted using a Baseline bubble inclinometer. For flexion, the patient stood in a relaxed position. The spinous processes of Th12 and S1 were palpated and marked. The inclinometer was zeroed at Th12, and the patient executed a full forward bend. The same was repeated at S1. The lumbar flexion range was the difference between readings at Th12 and S1. For extension, the patient also stood relaxed. Before measuring, the patient performed three maximum lumbar extensions. The inclinometer was zeroed at Th12, and the patient executed a maximum extension. The same procedure was repeated at S1. The lumbar extension range was the difference between readings at Th12 and S1. For lateral trunk flexion, the measurement was the distance between a point on the lateral thigh, where the tip of the third finger reached in a relaxed standing position, and a point on the thigh/shin after performing maximum lateral flexion.
Time frame: Baseline
Modified sit and reach test
To perform the test, the subject sat on the examination table in such a way that one lower limb rested on the floor with the knee flexed at 90 degrees, while the other limb was placed on the table with the knee joint extended. The subject positioned their hands in front of them, thumbs joined and palms facing down. With elbows fully extended, the subject reached as far forward as possible, placing their hands on the table. The distance from the tip of the third finger to the heel line was measured. Positive results indicated that the tip of the third finger extended beyond the heel line, while negative results indicated that it was positioned before the heel line.
Time frame: Baseline
Body posture
Posture assessment was conducted using the Diers Formetric 4D system, a non-invasive method with proven accuracy and reproducibility. This system employs surface topography for three-dimensional mapping of the subject's torso. The measurement followed the manufacturer's methodology. The subject stood 2 meters from the projector and camera, with foot placement marked on the treadmill. The back and neck were exposed, and undergarments adjusted to reveal the upper gluteal cleft. The subject assumed a relaxed standing position without posture correction. The examiner adjusted the projector height so that the central reference stripe aligned with the lower angle of the scapula. The device performed 12 scans in 6 seconds (2 Hz). The Diers software analyzed approximately 50,000 points on the subject's back, presenting a three-dimensional model of the spine with posture parameters.
Time frame: Baseline
Trunk muscle endurance
The protocol for assessing trunk muscle endurance was based on the McGill et al. (1999) method. \[McGill, S. M., Childs, A., \& Liebenson, C. (1999). Endurance times for low back stabilization exercises: Clinical targets for testing and training from a normal database. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 80(8), 941-944. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-9993(99)90087-4\]
Time frame: Baseline
Oswestry Disability Index
The survey assessed the level of pain and disability associated with LBP.
Time frame: Baseline
Custom survey for individuals not playing tennis
The survey covered spinal pain, health status, physical activity, and the presence of chronic diseases
Time frame: Baseline
Custom survey for tennis players
The survey covered training volume, engagement in general conditioning and stretching exercises, presence of chronic diseases, history of injuries, and the level of spinal pain
Time frame: Baseline
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education