| Titre : | Comparison of time-dependent resistance isometric exercise and active range of motion exercise in alleviating the sensitization of postoperative axial pain after cervical laminoplasty (2022) |
| Auteurs : | Cong Nie ; Kaiwen Chen ; Y.U. Zhu ; Huan Song ; Feizhou Lyu ; Jianyuan Jiang ; Xinlei Xia ; Chaojun Zheng |
| Type de document : | Article |
| Dans : | Musculoskeletal Science and Practice (Vol. 62, December 2022) |
| Article en page(s) : | 102669 |
| Note générale : | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2022.102669 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Descripteurs : |
HE Vinci Douleur postopératoire ; Entraînement en résistance ; Exercice physique |
| Mots-clés: | Muscles paraspinaux cervicaux ; Test sensoriel quantitatif |
| Résumé : | Background Postoperative axial pain (PAP) is a significant complication after cervical laminoplasty. Objective To investigate pain sensitization in PAP patients and effects of time-dependent resistance isometric exercise compared to active range-of-motion exercise on PAP. Study design Retrospective cohort analysis. Methods 211 patients undergoing postoperative 12-week exercises were evaluated for pressure pain threshold (PPT), temporal summation (TS) and both cross-sectional area and fatty infiltration of paraspinal muscles preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. There patients underwent Numeric rating pain scale (NRS) and neck disability index (NDI) 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Results At postoperative 3-month assessments, fewer patients undergoing isometric exercise showed PAP compared to range-of-motion exercise group (14/98 vs. 34/113; P = 0.006), and pain-related assessments in the former were lower than the latter (NRS at rest: 0.3 + 0.8 vs. 0.7 + 1.4, P = 0.014; NRS with movements: 0.4 + 1.0 vs. 1.0 + 1.7, P = 0.015; NDI: 2.4 + 6.3 vs. 6.7 + 10.9, P = 0.002). Postoperative cross-sectional area was smaller in isometric exercise group (603.5 + 190.2) than in range-of-motion exercise group (678.7 + 215.5) (P = 0.033), and the former showed higher local-area PPT and lower TS than the latter (PPT: 3.9 + 1.8 vs. 3.1 + 1.6, P = 0.002; TS: 1.8 + 0.9 vs. 2.2 + 1.0, P = 0.003). PAP patients showed lower local-area PPT and greater TS than those without PAP in both isometric (PPT: 2.8 + 0.7 vs. 4.0 + 1.9, P = 0.019; TS: 2.4 + 0.6 vs. 1.7 + 0.9, P = 0.011) and range-of-motion (PPT: 2.2 + 0.9 vs. 3.6 + 1.7, P |
| Disponible en ligne : | Oui |
| En ligne : | https://login.ezproxy.vinci.be/login?url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468781222001692 |
Bibliothèques HE Vinci
