CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentPain Management and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improved interoceptive awareness in chronic low back pain: a comparison of Back school versus Feldenkrais method

Paolucci, Teresa, Zangrando, Federico, Iosa, Marco, De Angelis, Simona, Marzoli, Caterina, Piccinini, Giulia, Saraceni, Vincenzo Maria·2017·Disability and Rehabilitation
DOI 10.1080/09638288.2016.1175035
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of the Feldenkrais method for relieving pain in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and the improvement of interoceptive awareness. METHOD: This study was designed as a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Fifty-three patients with a diagnosis of CLBP for at least 3 months were randomly allocated to the Feldenkrais (mean age 61.21 ± 11.53 years) or Back School group (mean age 60.70 ± 11.72 years). Pain was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), disability was evaluated with the Waddel Disability Index, quality of life was measured with the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), and mind-body interactions were studied using the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness Questionnaire (MAIA). Data were collected at baseline, at the end of treatment, and at the 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: The two groups were matched at baseline for all the computed parameters. At the end of treatment (Tend), there were no significant differences between groups regarding chronic pain reduction (p = 0.290); VAS and MAIA-N sub scores correlated at Tend (R = 0.296, p = 0.037). By the Friedman analysis, both groups experienced significant changes in pain (p < 0.001) and disability (p < 0.001) along the investigated period. CONCLUSIONS: The Feldenkrais method has comparable efficacy as Back School in CLBP. Implications for rehabilitation The Feldenkrais method is a mind-body therapy that is based on awareness through movement lessons, which are verbally guided explorations of movement that are conducted by a physiotherapist who is experienced and trained in this method. It aims to increase self-awareness, expand a person's repertoire of movements, and to promote increased functioning in contexts in which the entire body cooperates in the execution of movements. Interoceptive awareness, which improves with rehabilitation, has a complex function in the perception of chronic pain and should be investigated further in future research. The efficacy of the Feldenkrais method is comparable with that of BS for nonspecific chronic low back pain. The physician can recommend a body-mind rehabilitation approach, such as the Feldenkrais method, or an educational and rehabilitation program, such as BS, to the patient, based on his individual needs. The 2 rehabilitation approaches are equally as effective in improving interoceptive awareness.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09638288.2016.1175035

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 44 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Paolucci T, 2012, Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 48, 245
  2. Morone G, 2011, Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 47, 533
  3. Ohry A, 2000, Isr Med Assoc J, 2, 66
  4. 10.1016/S1051-9815(98)00020-5 · DOI
  5. Webb R, 2013, Evid Based Complement Alternat Med, 479142
  6. Melzack R., 1975, Pain, 103, 199
  7. 10.1097/01.brs.0000182227.33627.15 · DOI
  8. Kamper SJ, 2014, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 9, CD000963

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Paolucci, T., Zangrando, F., Iosa, M., De Angelis, S., Marzoli, C., Piccinini, G., & Saraceni, V. M.
Affiliations
  • Policlinico Umberto I (IT)
  • Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
  • Complex Unit of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy;
Corresponding author
Paolucci, Teresa
ORCID
Venue
Disability and Rehabilitation
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-05-23
Volume
39
Issue
10
Pages
994-1001
ISSN
  • 0963-8288 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5165
DOI
10.1080/09638288.2016.1175035
OpenAlex
W2402049446
Cited by
73
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Disability and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Myofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic low back pain, Feldenkrais method, back school, interoceptive awareness, mind-body interventions, pain perception, disability, quality of life, movement education, McGill Pain Questionnaire, SF-36 quality of life
MeSH terms
Aged, Exercise Therapy, Female, Humans, Italy, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Quality of Life, Severity of Illness Index, Single-Blind Method, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain, Chronic Pain, Pain Management, Interoception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review