This study was designed to estimate the accuracy of the postural assessment software (PAS/SAPO) for measurement of corporal angles and distances as well as the inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. Postural assessment software was developed as a subsidiary tool for postural assessment. It is easy to use and available in the public domain. Nonetheless, validation studies are lacking. The study sample consisted of 88 pictures from 22 subjects, and each subject was assessed twice (1 week interval) by 5 blinded raters. Inter- and intra-rater reliabilities were estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. To estimate the accuracy of the software, an inanimate object was marked with hallmarks using pre-established parameters. Pictures of the object were rated, and values were checked against the known parameters. Inter-rater reliability was excellent for 41% of the variables and very good for 35%. Ten percent of the variables had acceptable reliability, and 14% were defined as non-acceptable. For intra-rater reliability, 44.8% of the measurements were considered to be excellent, 23.5% were very good, 12.4% were acceptable and 19.3% were considered non-acceptable. Angular measurements had a mean error analisys of 0.11 degrees , and the mean error analisys for distance was 1.8 mm. Unacceptable intraclass correlation coefficient values typically used the vertical line as a reference, and this may have increased the inaccuracy of the estimates. Increased accuracies were obtained by younger raters with more sophisticated computer skills, suggesting that past experience influenced results. The postural assessment software was accurate for measuring corporal angles and distances and should be considered as a reliable tool for postural assessment.

To contrast the efficacy of two exercise programs, segmental stabilization and strengthening of abdominal and trunk muscles, on pain, functional disability, and activation of the transversus abdominis muscle (TrA), in individuals with chronic low back pain. Our sample consisted of 30 individuals, randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: segmental stabilization, where exercises focused on the TrA and lumbar multifidus muscles, and superficial strengthening, where exercises focused on the rectus abdominis, abdominus obliquus internus, abdominus obliquus externus, and erector spinae. Groups were examined to discovere whether the exercises created contrasts regarding pain (visual analogical scale and McGill pain questionnaire), functional disability (Oswestry disability questionnaire), and TrA muscle activation capacity (Pressure Biofeedback Unit = PBU). The program lasted 6 weeks, and 30-minute sessions occurred twice a week. Analysis of variance was used for inter- and intra-group comparisons. The significance level was established at 5%. As compared to baseline, both treatments were effective in relieving pain and improving disability (p < 0.001). Those in the segmental stabilization group had significant gains for all variables when compared to the ST group (p < 0.001), including TrA activation, where relative gains were 48.3% and -5.1%, respectively. Both techniques lessened pain and reduced disability. Segmental stabilization is superior to superficial strengthening for all variables. Superficial strengthening does not improve TrA activation capacity.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 2 exercise programs, segmental stabilization exercises (SSEs) and stretching of trunk and hamstrings muscles, on functional disability, pain, and activation of the transversus abdominis muscle (TrA), in individuals with chronic low back pain. A total of 30 participants were enrolled in this study and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups as a function of intervention. In the segmental stabilization group (SS), exercises focused on the TrA and lumbar multifidus muscles, whereas in the stretching group (ST), exercises focused on stretching the erector spinae, hamstrings, and triceps surae. Severity of pain (visual analog scale and McGill pain questionnaire) and functional disability (Oswestry disability questionnaire) and TrA muscle activation capacity (Pressure Biofeedback Unit, or PBU) were compared as a function of intervention. Interventions lasted 6 weeks, and sessions happened twice a week (30 minutes each). Analysis of variance was used for intergroup and intragroup comparisons. As compared with baseline, both treatments were effective in relieving pain and improving disability (P < .001). Those in the SS group had significantly higher gains for all variables. The stretching group did not effectively activate the TrA (P = .94). Both techniques improved pain and reduced disability. In this study, SS was superior to muscular stretching for the measured variables associated with chronic low back pain.

Compare the effect of conventional static stretching and muscle chain stretching, as proposed by the global posture reeducation method, in the manual therapy of patients with chronic neck pain. Thirty-three female patients aged 35 to 60 years old, 31 of whom completed the program, were randomly divided into two groups: The global posture reeducation group (n=15) performed muscle chain stretching, while the conventional stretching group (n=16) performed conventional static muscle stretching. Both groups also underwent manual therapy. Patients were evaluated before and after treatment and at a six-week follow-up appointment and tested for pain intensity (by means of visual analog scale), range of motion (by goniometry), and health-related quality of life (by the SF-36 questionnaire). The treatment program consisted of two 1-hour individual sessions per week for six weeks. Data were statistically analyzed at a significance level of p<0.05. Significant pain relief and range of motion improvement were observed after treatment in both groups, with a slight reduction at follow-up time. Quality of life also improved after treatment, except for the global posture reeducation group in one domain; at follow-up, there was improvement in all domains, except that both groups reported increased pain. There were no significant differences between groups Conventional stretching and muscle chain stretching in association with manual therapy were equally effective in reducing pain and improving the range of motion and quality of life of female patients with chronic neck pain, both immediately after treatment and at a six-week follow-up, suggesting that stretching exercises should be prescribed to chronic neck pain patients.

To assess the efficacy of an exercise program aiming to improve balance and muscular strength, for postural control and muscular strength of women with osteoporosis. Sample consisted of 33 women with osteoporosis, randomized into one of two groups: intervention group, in which exercises for balance and improvement of muscular strength of the inferior members were performed for 8 wks (n = 17, age 72.8 +/- 3.6 yrs); control group, which was women not practicing exercises (n = 16, age 74.4 +/- 3.7 yrs). At baseline and after 8 wks of treatment, postural control was assessed using a force plate (Balance Master, Neurocom), and muscular strength during ankle dorsiflexion, knee extension, and flexion was assessed by dynamometry. Adherence to the program was 82%. When compared with the control group, individuals in the intervention group significantly improved the center of pressure velocity (P = 0.02) in the modified clinical test of sensory interaction for balance test, center of pressure velocity (P < 0.01), and directional control (P < 0.01) in limits of stability test, isometric force during ankle dorsiflexion (P = 0.01), knee extension (P < 0.01), and knee flexion (P < 0.01). Balance and strength exercises are effective in improving postural control and lower-limb strength in elderly women with osteoporosis.