Statistical Outcome Profile of a Diaphragmatic Breathing-Based Rehabilitation Programme for Mechanical Low Back Pain: Pain, Disability and Core Stability at 9-Month Follow-up

Résumé fourni par la source

Background: Diaphragmatic breathing is increasingly incorporated into rehabilitation for mechanical low back pain because the diaphragm contributes to both respiration and lumbopelvic stabilization. This paper was designed as an outcome-focused statistical analysis, with greater emphasis on the trajectory, magnitude, consistency, and clinical interpretation of changes in pain, disability, and core-stability performance. Methods: Thirty adults with mechanical low back pain received diaphragmatic breathing retraining together with conventional physiotherapy four times weekly for 6 weeks. Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI), and Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU) scores were recorded at baseline, 6 weeks, and 9-month follow-up. The dissertation-reported analysis used repeated-measures ANOVA for overall time effects and paired t-tests for pairwise comparisons, with p<0.05 considered significant. Relative improvement and the proportion of total observed change already present at 6 weeks were additionally interpreted. Results: Mean NPRS decreased from 6.47 +/- 1.04 at baseline to 3.47 +/- 1.04 at 6 weeks and 1.47 +/- 1.04 at 9 months (F=438.46, p<0.001). Mean MODI decreased from 43.70 +/- 7.76% to 25.70 +/- 7.76% and 15.70 +/- 7.76% (F=256.82, p<0.001). Mean PBU scores increased from 3.80 +/- 0.76 to 6.80 +/- 0.76 and 8.80 +/- 0.76 (F=592.11, p<0.001). Every reported pairwise comparison was significant (p<0.001). At follow-up, pain had decreased 77.3%, disability 64.1%, and PBU performance had increased 131.6%. Approximately 60.0% of total observed pain change, 64.3% of disability change, and 60.0% of PBU change were already present at 6 weeks. Conclusion: The combined rehabilitation programme was associated with large, progressive, and statistically consistent improvements across all three clinical domains. The size of the NPRS and MODI changes exceeded commonly used thresholds for clinically meaningful improvement. However, the single-group design and concurrent conventional physiotherapy prevent causal attribution to diaphragmatic breathing retraining alone.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.