Influence of dynamic sitting on back and pelvic pain during pregnancy

Czech version

Authors: Jesenická R.; Horklová A.; Wrona J.
Authors‘ workplace: Klinika rehabilitace a tělovýchovného lékařství LF OU a FN Ostrava
Published in: Rehabil. fyz. Lék., 31, 2024, No. 4, pp. 168-172.
Category: Original Papers
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccrhfl 2024168

Overview

Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the impact of dynamic sitting on the level of back and pelvic pain during pregnancy, as well as on mobility and quality of life during pregnancy. Participants and methods: The study included 22 pregnant women who were divided into an experimental and a control group. The experimental group (N = 11), with an average age of 32.55 ± 5.5 years and an initial body mass index (BMI) of 24.81 ± 3.26, used a dynamic cushion while sitting for 20 minutes daily over a period of two months. The control group (N = 11), with an average age of 31.64 ± 5.12 years and an initial BMI of 24.27 ± 2.4, did not use the dynamic cushion. The effect was assessed using a shortened version of the McGill pain questionnaire and a questionnaire evaluating the mobility and quality of life of pregnant women, known as the Pregnancy mobility index. Results: According to the shortened version of the McGill pain questionnaire, there was improvement in part of the pain assessment score in the experimental group and a deterioration of pain in the control group. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant. According to the questionnaire evaluating mobility and quality of life during pregnancy, there was a deterioration in the control group. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant. Conclusions: The use of a dynamic cushion cannot be unequivocally recommended as a preventive measure for back pain or for preserving mobility and quality of life during pregnancy. However, partial results from the pilot study suggest that further exploration of this issue is warranted, and additional research should be conducted, particularly with a larger sample size.

Keywords:

Lower back pain – pregnancy – dynamic sitting – pain questionnaire

Sources

1. Fitzgerald CM, Segal NA. Musculoskeletal health in pregnancy and postpartum: an evidence-based guide for clinicians. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing 2015.

2. Kesikburun S, Güzelküçük Ü, Fidan U et al. Musculoskeletal pain and symptoms in pregnancy: a descriptive study. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis 2018; 10 (12): 229–234. doi: 10.1177/1759720X18812449.

3. Opala-Berdzik A, Bacik B, Cieślińska-Świder J et al. The influence of pregnancy on the location of the center of gravity in standing position. J Hum Kinet 2010; 26: 5–11. doi: 10.2478/v10078-010-0042-1.

4. Kohutová A, Gruberová O, Kracíková J. Bolest ke zdravému těhotenství nepatří. Mod gynekol porod 2020; 27 (1): 34–42.

5. Gijon-Nogueron GA, Gavilan-Diaz M, Valle-Funes V et al. Anthropometric foot changes during pregnancy: a pilot study. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2013; 103 (4): 314–321. doi: 10.7547/1030 314.

6. Segal NA, Boyer ER, Teran-Yengle P et al. Pregnancy leads to lasting changes in foot structure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 92 (3): 232–240. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31827443a9.

7. Cherni Y, Desseauve D, Decatoire A et al. Evaluation of ligament laxity during pregnancy. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2019; 48 (5): 351–357. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2019.02. 009.

8. Calguneri M, Bird HA, Wright V. Changes in joint laxity occurring during pregnancy. Ann Rheum Dis 1982; 41 (2): 126–128. doi: 10.1136/ard.41.2.126.

9. Filipová P. [@fyziofemina]. Pánevní dno a těhotenství. Instagram. 2021 [online]. Dostupné z: https: //www.instagram.com/p/CKLpVT5rlMI/?igshid=1wcir11skx424.

10. Poděbradská R, Šarmírová M, Prochazka M. Funkční poruchy pohybového systému v těhotenství. Ceska Gynekol 2018; 83 (2): 138–144.

11. Wijma J, Weis Potters AE, de Wolf BT et al. Anatomical and functional changes in the lower urinary tract during pregnancy. BJOG 2001; 108 (7): 726–732. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528. 2001.00123.x.

12. Senčík J. Vybrané aspekty ergonomie při kancelářské práci. JOSRA 2015; 8 (2–3).

13. Dickin DC, Surowiec RK, Wang H. Energy expenditure and muscular activation patterns through active sitting on compliant surfaces. J Sport Health Sci 2017; 6 (2): 207–212. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2015.10.004.

14. Dostál M. Zhodnocení zvolených parametrů vybraných typů kancelářských křesel pohledem fyzioterapeuta. Ostrava: 2019. Bakalářská práce. Ostravská univerzita, Lékařská fakulta.

15. Šolcová I, Knotek P, Blahuš P et al. Standardizovaná česká verze krátké formy dotazníku bolesti McGillovy univerzity. Bolest 2000; 3 (2): 113–117.

16. Van der Pol G, de Leeuw JR, van Brummen HJ et al. The pregnancy mobility index: a mobility scale during and after pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006; 85 (7): 786–791. doi: 10.1080/00016340500456373.

17. Ellegast RP, Kraft K, Groenesteijn L et al. Comparison of four specific dynamic office chairs with a conventional office chair: impact upon muscle activation, physical activity and posture. Appl Ergon 2012; 43 (2): 296–307. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2011.06.005.

18. Glinkowski WM, Tomasik P, Walesiak K et al. Posture and low back pain during pregnancy – 3D study. Ginekol Pol 2016; 87 (8): 575–580. doi: 10.5603/GP.2016.0047.

Doručeno/Submitted: 23. 7. 2024

Přijato/Accepted: 16. 11. 2024

Korespondenční autor:

doc. PhDr. Radana Jesenická, Ph.D.

Horní Lipová 254

790 63 Lipová-lázně

e-mail: radana.jesenicka@gmail.com