A Study on Central Sensitization in Chronic Non specific Low Back Pain

Abstract

Materials and Methods: newlineOne hundred twenty-eightpatients with CNSLBP were randomly allocated to two groups. The experimental group (n=64) received only MEP and control group (n=64) received only CPP. Each group received specific weekly newlinev newline newlinetreatment five times during the study for two months. Outcome measures were Central sensitization Inventory-Gujarati (CSI-G) for the presence of CS, Numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) for pain intensity, pressure pain threshold by pressure algometry, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire-Gujarati (RMDQ-G) for disability, Fear-avoidance-beliefs Questionnaire-Gujarati (FABQ-G) for fear-avoidance beliefs, trunk flexors and extensors endurance tests, and Global rating of change scores for overall improvements. newlineResults and Discussion: newlineBoth the groups irrespective of having CS or without CS showed a decrease in NPRS, CSI-G, RMDQ-G and FABQ-G scores and increase in PPT and trunk flexors and extensors endurance scores. But decrease in NPRS, CSI-G, RMDQ-G and FABQ-G scores and increase in PPT scores were significantly better in the experimental group with plt0.05. In contrast, control group performed significantly better on trunk flexors and extensors endurance scores with plt0.05. newlineSimilarly, when compared the CNSLBP patients of experimental and control group having CS; results were same as above. newlineConclusion: newlineMcKenzie exercises are effective in reducing central sensitization, pain, disability and fear avoidance beliefs but it does not improve trunk flexors and extensors endurance in CNSLBP patients with central sensitization. newline newline