本文選題：核心穩(wěn)定訓(xùn)練 + 整脊術(shù)　； 參考：《天津體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)》2016年03期

【摘要】：目的:通過(guò)采用綜合療法與單純物理因子治療進(jìn)行對(duì)比,探討以脊柱穩(wěn)定系統(tǒng)為理論基礎(chǔ)治療運(yùn)動(dòng)員脊柱源慢性腰痛的可行性,為更好地評(píng)估治療運(yùn)動(dòng)員慢性腰痛提供依據(jù)。方法:將49例樣本隨機(jī)分入實(shí)驗(yàn)組與對(duì)照組,實(shí)驗(yàn)組采用基于脊柱穩(wěn)定系統(tǒng)理論的整脊術(shù)、核心穩(wěn)定訓(xùn)練與物理因子進(jìn)行治療,對(duì)照組采用單純物理因子治療,共計(jì)12周。使用簡(jiǎn)式Mc Gill疼痛量表評(píng)分、指地距離和壓力感應(yīng)生物反饋測(cè)試評(píng)價(jià)運(yùn)動(dòng)員的康復(fù)指標(biāo),治療前和第4、8、12周末進(jìn)行評(píng)估。結(jié)果:所測(cè)數(shù)據(jù)均呈正態(tài)分布,實(shí)驗(yàn)組量表評(píng)分組內(nèi)比較差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,對(duì)照組量表評(píng)分組內(nèi)比較在治療結(jié)束時(shí)與治療前無(wú)顯著性差異,組間比較治療前無(wú)顯著性差異,治療后具有高度顯著性差異。實(shí)驗(yàn)組指地距離組內(nèi)比較均具有高度顯著性差異,對(duì)照組指地距離組內(nèi)比較除后伸外(P0.01)其他3組改善程度均不理想,其中前屈與左屈治療結(jié)束時(shí)與治療前比較無(wú)顯著性差異,右屈在4次測(cè)量中均無(wú)顯著性差異。組間比較治療前無(wú)顯著性差異,治療后均呈現(xiàn)高度顯著性差異。實(shí)驗(yàn)組腰背肌力組內(nèi)比較均呈現(xiàn)高度顯著性差異,對(duì)照組腰背肌力在治療結(jié)束時(shí)與治療前比較無(wú)顯著性差異,組間比較治療前無(wú)顯著性差異,治療后具有高度顯著性差異。結(jié)論:基于脊柱穩(wěn)定系統(tǒng)的評(píng)估方法可以較為準(zhǔn)確反映運(yùn)動(dòng)員脊柱源慢性腰痛的程度,綜合康復(fù)治療方法在治療運(yùn)動(dòng)員脊柱源慢性腰痛上優(yōu)于單純物理因子治療。
[Abstract]:Objective: to explore the feasibility of treating athletes' chronic low back pain from spine based on spinal stabilization system by using comprehensive therapy and simple physical factor therapy, so as to provide a basis for better evaluation and treatment of athletes' chronic low back pain. Methods: 49 cases were randomly divided into experimental group and control group. The experimental group was treated with spinal spine stabilization system theory, core stabilization training and physical factors were used, and the control group was treated with physical factor alone for 12 weeks. A simple Mc Gill pain scale was used to evaluate the rehabilitation indexes of athletes by means of ground distance and pressure-induced biofeedback test before treatment and at the end of the 812th week of the 4th week. Results: all the measured data were normal distribution. There were significant differences in the scores of the experimental group and the control group. There was no significant difference between the control group and the control group at the end of treatment and before treatment, but there was no significant difference between the two groups before treatment. There was a significant difference after treatment. There were significant differences between the experimental group and the control group, except for the extension (P0.01). There was no significant difference at the end of the treatment between flexion and left flexion, and there was no significant difference between the control group and the control group at the end of treatment. There was no significant difference in the right flexion among the four measurements. There was no significant difference before and after treatment. In the experimental group, there was a significant difference between the two groups, but there was no significant difference between the two groups at the end of treatment and before treatment, but there was a significant difference between the two groups after treatment. Conclusion: the evaluation method based on spine stabilization system can accurately reflect the degree of chronic low back pain caused by spine in athletes. Comprehensive rehabilitation therapy is superior to physical factor therapy in the treatment of chronic low back pain caused by spine in athletes.
【作者單位】： 國(guó)家體育總局訓(xùn)練局體能康復(fù)中心;
【基金】：廣東省體育局2014年科研項(xiàng)目(項(xiàng)目編號(hào):GDSS2014164)
【分類號(hào)】：R87

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張苗海;;針刺治療運(yùn)動(dòng)員慢性腰痛的療效觀察[J];國(guó)際中醫(yī)中藥雜志;2006年02期

2 賈井平;286例慢性腰痛的X線平片分析[J];實(shí)用醫(yī)技雜志;1997年02期

3 白雨;;懸吊運(yùn)動(dòng)療法對(duì)慢性腰痛患者疼痛及核心區(qū)力量的影響[J];遼寧體育科技;2012年06期

4 鄭義;一種強(qiáng)腰健腎方法[J];中國(guó)學(xué)校體育;1998年04期

5 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 盧瑋;矯瑋;;懸吊運(yùn)動(dòng)訓(xùn)練對(duì)慢性腰痛患者靜態(tài)平衡能力的影響[A];第九屆全國(guó)體育科學(xué)大會(huì)論文摘要匯編(3)[C];2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2077092