The Immediate Effect of a Single Treatment of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation with the StimaWELL 120MTRS System on Multifidus Stiffness in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) have altered lumbar multifidus stiffness properties compared to healthy controls. Although neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) application to the multifidus might affect stiffness, this has never been investigated. The aims of this study were to examine the effect of a single NMES treatment on multifidus stiffness and pain intensity in CLBP patients. Methods: 30 participants (13 male, 17 female) were randomized to one of two intervention (‘phasic’ and ‘combined’) protocols with the StimaWELL 120MTRS system. Multifidus stiffness at L4 and L5 was measured via shear-wave elastography (SWE) at rest and in standing prior to, and 15 min after, a 20 min NMES treatment. Pain intensity was measured pre- and post-treatment with the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). Results: There were significant increases in resting shear modulus at right L4 (p = 0.001) and bilaterally at L5 (p = 0.017; p = 0.020) in the ‘combined’ intervention group, and a significant between-group difference at right L4 (p < 0.001). There were significant decreases in standing shear modulus at right L4 (p = 0.015) and left L5 (p = 0.036) in the ‘combined’ intervention group, and a significant between-group difference at left L5 (p = 0.016). Both groups experienced significant decreases in pain intensity (MD combined group = 1.12, 95% CI [0.34, 1.90], p = 0.011) (MD phasic group = 1.42, 95% CI [0.68, 2.16], p = 0.001). Conclusions: There were multiple significant changes in multifidus stiffness in the combined group, but not in the phasic group. Both groups experienced significant decreases in low back pain intensity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".