CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07208435WEBEX-LBPUpdated May 19, 2026

Web-Based Exercise Program for Non-Specific Low Back Pain

An interventional study of Web-Based Therapeutic Exercise Program and Traditional Home Exercise Program in Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP), sponsored by Medipol University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-05-19.

Sponsored by Medipol University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by May 2026, 5 months ago, but the record still lists the study as not yet recruiting.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
30
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 45 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study evaluates the effectiveness of a web application-based exercise program (delivered via Physitrack) for managing non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) compared to traditional home exercise programs. The trial focuses on whether web-based delivery can improve pain, function, quality of life, and adherence, providing evidence for digital rehabilitation as a practical alternative to conventional physiotherapy.

Read the detailed description

Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is a prevalent condition associated with pain, functional limitations, and reduced quality of life. Access to in-person physiotherapy can be limited by geographic, financial, or time-related constraints. Web-based exercise programs offer an accessible alternative by delivering personalized exercises, educational content, reminders, and self-monitoring tools via digital platforms.

This study aims to investigate whether a structured web application-based exercise program can improve outcomes for adults with NSLBP compared to traditional home exercises. The trial addresses gaps in current evidence regarding the effectiveness of telerehabilitation, patient engagement, and delivery modes, and seeks to determine if digital interventions can serve as a viable complement or alternative to conventional physiotherapy.

02

Conditions studied

  • Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Non-Specific Low Back Pain
  • NSLBP
  • Web-Based Exercise Program
  • Telerehabilitation
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Physiotherapy
  • Home Exercise Program
  • Pain Management
  • Functional Improvement
  • Quality of Life
03

In context

Agnosia

1,190 studies on the registry are indexed under Agnosia; 508 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 30 is below the median of 78 across 1,024 interventional studies indexed under Agnosia.

Browse Agnosia studies →

Lead sponsor

Medipol University is the lead sponsor of 311 studies on the registry; 86 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 45 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults aged 18-45 years diagnosed with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) for 6 weeks to \<12 months.
  • Self-reported pain intensity ≥3 on a 0-10 Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS).
  • Evidence of functional limitation (Oswestry Disability Index or Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire).
  • Access to a smartphone, tablet, or computer with internet connectivity.
  • Ability and willingness to participate in telerehabilitation programs.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Specific causes of low back pain (herniated disc with radiculopathy, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, fractures, infections, malignancy).
  • Neurological deficits (e.g., severe motor weakness, progressive neurological symptoms).
  • Severe psychiatric or cognitive disorders interfering with participation.
  • History of spinal surgery within the last year.
  • Severe comorbidities contraindicating exercise (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, cardiovascular disease).
  • Pregnant or planning pregnancy during the study period.
  • Active substance or alcohol abuse.
  • Participation in other structured rehabilitation or physical therapy programs within the last 3 months.
05

Study design

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

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Web-Based Exercise Program

    Participants complete an 8-week web-based exercise program via Physitrack. Sessions last 30-45 minutes, twice per week, focusing on core strengthening, spinal mobility, posture correction, and pain reduction. Exercises progress weekly from basic core engagement to advanced trunk control and integration.

    Behavioral: Web-Based Therapeutic Exercise Program

  • Active comparator
    Traditional Home Exercise Program

    Participants complete a 6-week traditional home exercise program. Sessions last 30-40 minutes, focusing on flexibility, basic trunk and core strengthening, balance, and ergonomic practice. Exercises progress weekly, emphasizing pain relief, trunk mobility, and functional strength.

    Behavioral: Traditional Home Exercise Program

Interventions

  • BehavioralWeb-Based Therapeutic Exercise Program

    Participants complete an 8-week web-based therapeutic exercise program via Physitrack, with 30-45 minute sessions twice weekly. The program targets core strengthening, spinal mobility, posture correction, and pain reduction. Exercises progress weekly from basic core engagement and breathing techniques to advanced trunk control, dynamic movements, and integration. The platform provides instructional videos, reminders, educational content, and self-monitoring tools to enhance adherence, engagement, and self-management.

  • BehavioralTraditional Home Exercise Program

    Participants follow a 6-week traditional home exercise program with 30-40 minute sessions, twice weekly. The program focuses on flexibility, basic trunk and core strengthening, balance, and ergonomic practice. Exercises progress weekly, including cat-cow stretches, pelvic tilts, glute bridges, partial curl-ups, bird-dog, lunges, and posture training. Participants perform exercises independently at home using printed instructions, aiming to reduce pain, improve spinal mobility, and enhance functional outcomes.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain Reduction (Numeric Pain Rating Scale, NPRS)

    Change in self-reported low back pain intensity from baseline to 6 weeks, measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain. Participants report their average pain over the past 24 hours.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks after intervention

Secondary outcomes

  1. Functional Disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI)

    Change in disability due to low back pain from baseline to 6 weeks, measured using the ODI, which evaluates daily activities such as pain intensity, personal care, lifting, walking, sitting, and sleeping. Higher scores indicate greater disability.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks after intervention

  2. Quality of Life (Short Form Health Survey, SF-36)

    Change in health-related quality of life from baseline to 6 weeks across physical and mental health domains

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks after intervention

  3. Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ)

    Participants' satisfaction with the intervention, including ease of use, communication, and perceived effectiveness.

    Time frame: 6 weeks end of intervention

  4. Proprioception (Joint Position Sense Test, JPS)

    Change in lumbar spine proprioception from baseline to 6 weeks.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks after intervention

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Istanbul Medipol University
    Istanbul, Beykoz 34810, Turkey (Türkiye)
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Searle A et al., 2015
  • Hayden JA et al., 2005
  • Qaseem A et al., 2017
  • Fernández-Rodríguez R et al., 2021
  • Natour J et al., 2015
  • Wells C et al., 2014
  • Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83. PubMed 1593914 ↗
  • Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017. PubMed 11074683 ↗
  • Sissel C. Pilates for Rehabilitation. 2nd ed. 2018.
  • Bini SA, Schilling PL, Patel SP, Kalore NV, Ast MP, Maratt JD, Schuett DJ, Lawrie CM, Chung CC, Steele GD. Digital Orthopaedics: A Glimpse Into the Future in the Midst of a Pandemic. J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jul;35(7S):S68-S73. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.04.048. Epub 2020 Apr 22. PubMed 32416956 ↗
  • Tseli E, Tsepis E, Anastasopoulos K, et al. Telerehabilitation in patients with low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2022;28(3):149-63.
  • Cottrell MA, Galea OA, O'Leary SP, Hill AJ, Russell TG. Real-time telerehabilitation for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions is effective and comparable to standard practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2017 May;31(5):625-638. doi: 10.1177/0269215516645148. Epub 2016 May 2. PubMed 27141087 ↗
  • Moffet H, Tousignant M, Nadeau S, Merette C, Boissy P, Corriveau H, Marquis F, Cabana F, Ranger P, Belzile EL, Dimentberg R. In-Home Telerehabilitation Compared with Face-to-Face Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015 Jul 15;97(14):1129-41. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.01066. PubMed 26178888 ↗
  • Hayden JA, van Tulder MW, Malmivaara AV, Koes BW. Meta-analysis: exercise therapy for nonspecific low back pain. Ann Intern Med. 2005 May 3;142(9):765-75. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-142-9-200505030-00013. PubMed 15867409 ↗
  • Maniadakis N, Gray A. The economic burden of back pain in the UK. Pain. 2000 Jan;84(1):95-103. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00187-6. PubMed 10601677 ↗
  • Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2017 Feb 18;389(10070):736-747. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30970-9. Epub 2016 Oct 11. PubMed 27745712 ↗
  • Andersson GB. Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet. 1999 Aug 14;354(9178):581-5. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)01312-4. PubMed 10470716 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data (IPD) from this study, including demographic information, pain scores (NPRS), functional disability scores (ODI), quality of life (SF-36), patient satisfaction (PSQ), and proprioception measurements (JPS), may be shared upon reasonable request. Data will be anonymized to protect participant privacy, and access will be provided for academic or research purposes only.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 19, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07208435
Lead sponsor
Medipol University
Responsible party
Yağmur Mustafaoğlu (PT, MSc (Cand.), Medipol University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 6, 2025
Start date
May 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
May 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Jun 2026 (estimated)
Last update
May 19, 2026

Study contacts

Yağmur Mustafaoğlu, PT, MSc (Cand.)
Contact
yagmurmustafaoglu84@gmail.com
+905397974655
Merve Yılmaz Menek, Assoc. Prof
study director · Assoc. prof. Merve Yılmaz Menek

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 not yet recruiting, as verified in Sep 2025. 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