Rehabilitation therapy using the HUBER platform in chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) refers to a complex condition that involves structural, biomechanical, cognitive, psychological, social, and lifestyle issues. First-line therapies include physical therapy and exercise, as well as psychological follow-up and pain medication. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a 6-week center-based program using a multi-axis motorized platform (HUBER) connected with force sensors, that allows the patients to execute isometric exercises on the spine flexion-to-extension ratio at 60 and 120°/s, pain, trunk flexibility, and disability. DESIGN: The design of the study was prospective, active control, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: The setting was outpatients physical therapy clinic. POPULATION: The population analyzed presented NSCLBP. METHODS: Seventy individuals with NSCLBP were randomized into 2 intervention arms (1:1 ratio): 1/standard rehabilitation group (STAND) with physiotherapy, balneotherapy and cycloergometer exercises and 2/HUBER rehabilitation group (HUB) with physiotherapy, balneotherapy and HUBER exercises. Both programs lasted 6 weeks, with 4 sessions of 2 hours each per week. RESULTS: Each group reported statistically significant improvements on the isokinetic spine strength, flexibility of the trunk, lumbar joint mobility, muscular endurance of the trunk and of the lower limbs, pain score and disability (P<0.05). The spine flexion/extension ratio at 60˚/s improved similarly between groups (-22.23 for HUB, and -13.04 for STAND; P=0.178) with a greater effect size in HUB. Only HUB reported a significant improvement in the spine flexion-to-extension ratio at 120˚/s (from 87.3 to 78.6, P=0.012). HUB reported a greater decrease in the Oswestry Disability Index (-16.83) compared to STAND (-12.11), with a statistically significant effect between groups (P=0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Exercises performed on the HUBER platform added to physiotherapy and balneotherapy are as effective as a standard rehabilitation program with physiotherapy, balneotherapy and cycloergometer exercises to improve isokinetic spine strength, lumbar joint mobility, flexibility and muscular endurance of the trunk and the lower limbs. In addition, exercising with the HUBER platform result in a greater reduction in disability compared to a standard rehabilitation program (clinicalTrials.gov: NCT05437016). CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: A variety of intervention techniques, including supervised exercise and manual therapy are now used to manage persistent NSCLBP. The added value of the HUBER device on disability suggests that the platform could be beneficial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".