Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Proprioception deficit has been suggested as a possible mechanism contributing for the impaired postural control in low back pain (LBP) patients. Whether proprioception deficit is a result of or a cause of LBP has not been investigated.
UNASSIGNED: The purpose of this study was to compare proprioceptive postural control strategies between prolonged standing induced low back pain developers (PDs) and non-pain developers (NPDs).
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-two healthy subjects performed 1-h prolonged standing and their ratings of perceived LBP have been recorded. Eight quiet standing trials for 60 s performed immediately before and after the prolonged standing. Postural control was challenged by muscle vibration and different postural conditions during quiet standing. Data were recorded using a force platform.
UNASSIGNED: Forty percentage of participants is classified as PD. Before the prolonged standing, relative proprioceptive weighting was greater in the PD compared to NPD group (P = .029). Main effect of postural condition (F1,24 = 5.21, P = .032) and interaction of time by group (F1,24 = 8.08, P = .009) were significant for COP displacement in anteroposterior direction. Interaction of postural condition by group (F1,26 = 7.82, P = .010) and time by group (F1,26 = 9.71, P = .004) were significant for COP displacement in mediolateral direction. Main effect of postural condition (F1,26 = 6.31, P = .018) and interaction of postural condition by group (F1,26 = 7.07, P = .013) were significant for mean velocity in mediolateral direction.
UNASSIGNED: The PD group has altered proprioceptive postural control strategies before and after prolonged standing. Proprioception deficit should not be considered to be solely an adaptive response and may be causal for LBP development.
UNASSIGNED: The purpose of this study was to compare proprioceptive postural control strategies between prolonged standing induced low back pain developers (PDs) and non-pain developers (NPDs).
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-two healthy subjects performed 1-h prolonged standing and their ratings of perceived LBP have been recorded. Eight quiet standing trials for 60 s performed immediately before and after the prolonged standing. Postural control was challenged by muscle vibration and different postural conditions during quiet standing. Data were recorded using a force platform.
UNASSIGNED: Forty percentage of participants is classified as PD. Before the prolonged standing, relative proprioceptive weighting was greater in the PD compared to NPD group (P = .029). Main effect of postural condition (F1,24 = 5.21, P = .032) and interaction of time by group (F1,24 = 8.08, P = .009) were significant for COP displacement in anteroposterior direction. Interaction of postural condition by group (F1,26 = 7.82, P = .010) and time by group (F1,26 = 9.71, P = .004) were significant for COP displacement in mediolateral direction. Main effect of postural condition (F1,26 = 6.31, P = .018) and interaction of postural condition by group (F1,26 = 7.07, P = .013) were significant for mean velocity in mediolateral direction.
UNASSIGNED: The PD group has altered proprioceptive postural control strategies before and after prolonged standing. Proprioception deficit should not be considered to be solely an adaptive response and may be causal for LBP development.
摘要：
未经证实：本体感觉缺陷已被认为是导致下腰痛（LBP）患者姿势控制受损的可能机制。尚未调查本体感觉缺陷是LBP的结果还是原因。
UNASSIGNED：这项研究的目的是比较长时间站立诱发的下腰痛开发者（PDs）和非疼痛开发者（NPDs）之间的本体感觉姿势控制策略。
未经评估：32名健康受试者长时间站立1小时，并记录了他们的感知LBP评分。在长时间站立之前和之后立即进行了八次安静的站立试验，持续60秒。在安静的站立过程中，肌肉振动和不同的姿势条件对姿势控制提出了挑战。使用力平台记录数据。
未经评估：40%的参与者被归类为PD。在长时间站立之前，与NPD组相比，PD组的相对本体感受权重更大（P=0.029）。姿势条件（F1,24=5.21，P=.032）和各组时间相互作用（F1,24=8.08，P=.009）对前后方向的COP位移具有重要意义。各组的姿势状况（F1,26=7.82，P=.010）和各组的时间（F1,26=9.71，P=.004）的交互作用对中外侧方向的COP位移具有重要意义。姿势状况的主要影响（F1,26=6.31，P=.018）和姿势状况按组的相互作用（F1,26=7.07，P=.013）对中外侧方向的平均速度具有显着意义。
未经授权：PD组的本体感觉姿势控制策略在长时间站立前后发生了改变。本体感觉缺陷不应仅被视为适应性反应，可能是LBP发展的原因。
UNASSIGNED：这项研究的目的是比较长时间站立诱发的下腰痛开发者（PDs）和非疼痛开发者（NPDs）之间的本体感觉姿势控制策略。
未经评估：32名健康受试者长时间站立1小时，并记录了他们的感知LBP评分。在长时间站立之前和之后立即进行了八次安静的站立试验，持续60秒。在安静的站立过程中，肌肉振动和不同的姿势条件对姿势控制提出了挑战。使用力平台记录数据。
未经评估：40%的参与者被归类为PD。在长时间站立之前，与NPD组相比，PD组的相对本体感受权重更大（P=0.029）。姿势条件（F1,24=5.21，P=.032）和各组时间相互作用（F1,24=8.08，P=.009）对前后方向的COP位移具有重要意义。各组的姿势状况（F1,26=7.82，P=.010）和各组的时间（F1,26=9.71，P=.004）的交互作用对中外侧方向的COP位移具有重要意义。姿势状况的主要影响（F1,26=6.31，P=.018）和姿势状况按组的相互作用（F1,26=7.07，P=.013）对中外侧方向的平均速度具有显着意义。
未经授权：PD组的本体感觉姿势控制策略在长时间站立前后发生了改变。本体感觉缺陷不应仅被视为适应性反应，可能是LBP发展的原因。
