Pelvik Kuşak Ağrısı Olan ve Olmayan Gebelerde Spinal Postür, Kinezyofobi, Ağrı Felaketleştirme ve Dizabilitenin Karşılaştırılması: Tanımlayıcı Çalışma

Year 2025, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 9 - 16

Esra Gökdemir , Nihan Erdoğan Atalay , Mehmet Ata Topçuoğlu , Nuriye Özengin

Abstract

Çalışmanın amacı pelvik kuşak ağrısı olan ve olmayan gebelerde spinal postür, kinezyofobi, ağrı felaketleştirme ve dizabilitenin karşılaştırılmasıydı. Çalışmaya toplamda 54 gebe kadın dahil edildi. Gebeler pelvik kuşak ağrısı olan (n=27) ve pelvik kuşak ağrısı olmayan (n=27) olmak üzere iki gruba ayrıldı. Gebelerin fiziksel ve sosyodemografik özellikleri sorgulandı. Gebelerin pelvik kuşak ağrısı Pelvik Kuşak Anketi ile ağrı şiddeti Vizüel Analog Skala ile ağrı felaketleştirme derecesi Ağrı Felaketleştirme Ölçeği ile ağrı aktivite paternleri Ağrı Aktivite Paternleri Ölçeği ile dizabilite dereceleri Oswestry Dizabilite İndeksi ile kinezyofobileri Tampa Kinezyofobi Ölçeği ile değerlendirildi. Gebelerin sagital postürlerini değerlendirmek için Spinal Mouse kullanıldı. Gebelerin sakrum- kalça, torakal açı, uzunluk değerleri ve kinezyofobi değerleri her iki grupta da benzer bulundu (P>0,05). Pelvik kuşak ağrısı olanların VAS skorları daha yüksekti (P<0,001). İki grupta da Ağrı Felaketleştirme Ölçeği ve Ağrı Aktivite Paternleri Ölçeği skorlarının ortalama değerleri benzer bulundu (P>0,05). Pelvik kuşak ağrısı olanların dizabilite düzeyi daha yüksek bulundu (P<0,001). Bu çalışmanın sonucunda pelvik kuşak ağrısı olan ve olmayan gebelerde spinal postür, kinezyofobi, ağrı felaketleştirme düzeyi ve ağrı aktivite paternlerinin benzer olduğu görüldü. Pelvik kuşak ağrısı olan gebelerde ağrı şiddetinin ve dizabilite düzeyinin daha yüksek olduğu saptandı. Gebelerin rutin değerlendirmelerine dizabilite, kinezyofobi ve ağrı parametrelerinin de eklenmesi gerektiği görüşündeyiz.

Keywords

Pelvik kuşak ağrısı, Postür, Gebelik, Pelvik ağrı

Project Number

(Protokol NO. 2020/151)

Comparison of Spinal Posture, Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing and Disability in Pregnant Women with and without Pelvic Girdle Pain: Descriptive Study

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare spinal posture, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing and disability in pregnant women with and without pelvic girdle pain. A total of 54 pregnant women were included in the study. The pregnant women were divided into two groups as those with pelvic girdle pain (n=27) and those without pelvic girdle pain (n=27). The physical and sociodemographic characteristics of the pregnant women were questioned. Pregnant women's pelvic girdle pain was evaluated with the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire, pain intensity with the Visual Analog Scale, pain catastrophizing degree with the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, pain activity patterns with the Patterns of Activity Measure-Pain, disability degrees with the Oswestry Disability Index, and kinesiophobia with the Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale. Spinal Mouse was used to evaluate the sagittal postures of pregnant women. Sacrum-hip, thoracic angle, length values and kinesiophobia values of the pregnant women were found to be similar in both groups (P>0.05). Those with pelvic girdle pain had higher VAS scores (P<0.001). The mean scores of Pain Catastrophizing Scale and Pain Activity Patterns Scale scores were similar in both groups (P>0.05). The disability level was found to be higher in patients with pelvic girdle pain (P<0.001). As a result of this study, spinal posture, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing level and pain activity patterns were found to be similar in pregnant women with and without pelvic girdle pain. It was determined that the severity of pain and disability level were higher in pregnant women with pelvic girdle pain. We think that disability, kinesiophobia and pain parameters should be added to the routine evaluations of pregnant women.

Keywords

Pelvic girdle pain, Posture, Pregnancy, Pelvic pain

Project Number

(Protokol NO. 2020/151)

References

• Aldabe D, Milosavljevic S, Bussey MD. 2020. A multivariate model for predicting PPGP considering postural adjustment parameters. Musculoskeletal Sci Pract, 48: 102153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102153
• Almashaqbeh S, Qananwah Q, Alquran H, Alkhatib E, Alomari A, Alzain R. 2019. Spinal curvature kinematics of stair ascending for the second and the third trimesters of simulated pregnancy in a month by month basis. 2019 IEEE Jordan International Joint Conference on Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, April 9-11, Amman, Jordan, pp: 277-280. https://doi.org/10.1109/JEEIT.2019.8717467
• Bastiaanssen J, de Bie R, Bastiaenen C, Essed G, van den BP. 2005. A historical perspective on pregnancy-related low back and/or pelvic girdle pain. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 120(1): 3-14.
• Beales D, Lutz A, Thompson J, Wand BM, O’Sullivan P. 2016. Disturbed body perception, reduced sleep, and kinesiophobia in subjects with pregnancy-related persistent lumbopelvic pain and moderate levels of disability: An exploratory study. Manual Ther, 21: 69-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2015.04.016
• Cane D, Nielson W, McCarthy M, Mazmanian D. 2013. Pain-related activity patterns: measurement, interrelationships, and associations with psychosocial functioning. Clin J Pain, 29(5): 435-442.
• Doğru HY, Özsoy F, Doğru S, Karaman T, Şahin A, Özsoy AZ, Çakmak B, Süren M. 2018. Catastrophizing, depression and anxiety during pregnancy: relation between lumbopelvic pain and physical/social functioning. J Rational Emotive Cognitive Behav Ther, 36(2): 119-136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-017-0277-z
• Ebina A, Sawa R, Kondo Y, Murata S, Takada M, Fuji H, Okuyama Y, Tanikawa Y, Souke K, Ono R. 2020. Influence of kinesiophobia with pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain at late pregnancy on postpartum depressive symptoms. Physical Ther Res, 23(1): 92-98. https://doi.org/10.1298/ptr.e9999
• Fairbank JCT, Pynsent PB. 2000. The oswestry disability index. Spine, 25(22): 2940-2953. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017
• Fernandes L, Storheim K, Lochting I, Grotle M. 2012. Crosscultural adaptation and validation of Norwegian pain catastrophizing scale in patients with low back pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 13(111): 1-9.
• Gausel AM, Kjærmann I, Malmqvist S, Dalen I, Larsen JP, Økland I. 2016. Pelvic girdle pain 3-6 months after delivery in an unselected cohort of Norwegian women. Eur Spine J, 25(6): 1953-1959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3959-1
• Glinkowski Wojciech Tomasik P, Walesiak K, Głuszak M, Krawczak K, Michoński J, Czyżewska A, Żukowska Agnieszka Sitnik R, MIrosław W. 2016. Posture and low back pain during pregnancy - 3D study. Ginekol Pol, 87(8): 575-580.
• Goubran M, Farajzadeh A, Lahart IM, Bilodeau M, Boisgontier MP. 2023. Kinesiophobia and physical activity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. URL: https://zenodo.org/records/8216112 (erişim tarihi: 13 Eylül 2024). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8216112
• Gutke A, Boissonnault J, Brook G, Stuge B. 2018. The severity and ımpact of pelvic girdle pain and low-back pain in pregnancy: A Multinational study. J Women’s Health, 27(4): 510-517. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2017.6342
• Gutke A, Lundberg M, Östgaard HC, Öberg B. 2011. Impact of postpartum lumbopelvic pain on disability, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, activity level, kinesiophobia, and depressive symptoms. Eur Spine J, 20(3): 440-448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1487-6
• Gutke A, Östgaard HC, Öberg B. 2006. Pelvic girdle pain and lumbar pain in pregnancy: A cohort study of the consequences in terms of health and functioning. Spine, 31(5): 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000201259.63363.e1
• Gutke A, Östgaard HC, Öberg B. 2008. Predicting persistent pregnancy-related low back pain. Spine, 33(12): 386-393. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817331a4
• Kindermans H, Roelofs J, Goossens M, Huijnen I, Verbunt J, Vlaeyen J. 2011. Activity patterns in chronic pain: underlying dimensions and associations with disability and depressed mood. Pain, 12(10): 1049-1058.
• Kori S, Miller R, Todd D. 1990. Kinisophobia: a new view of chronic pain behavior. Pain Manag, 3: 35-43.
• Mannion A, Knecht K, Balaban G, Dvorak J, Grob D. 2004. A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature. Eur Spine J, 13: 122-136.
• O’Sullivan P, Beales D. 2007. Diagnosis and classification of pelvic girdle pain disorders, Part 2: Illustration of the utility of a classification system via case studies. Man Ther, 12: 1-12.
• Okanishi N, Kito N, Akiyama M, Yamamoto M. 2012. Spinal curvature and characteristics of postural change in pregnant women. Acta Obstet et Gynecol Scand, 91: 856-861. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01400.x
• Olsson C, Buer N, Holm K, Nilsson -Wikmar L. 2009. Lumbopelvic pain associated with catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs in early pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 88: 378-385.
• Önder H. 2018. Nonparametric statistical methods used in biological experiments. BSJ Eng Sci, 1(1): 1-6.
• Östgaard HC, Andersson GB, Schultz AB, Miller JA. 1993. Influence of some biomechanical factors on lowback pain in pregnancy. Spine, 18(1): 61-65.
• Robinson HS, Veierød MB, Mengshoel AM, Vøllestad, NK. 2010. Pelvic girdle pain - Associations between risk factors in early pregnancy and disability or pain intensity in late pregnancy: A prospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskel Disord, 11: 91. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-11-91
• Shahzad Z, Ashraf HS, Sohail M, Farooq H, Asif T, Safdar Z. 2021. Prevalence of anterior pelvic pain, pain intensity and functional disability among pregnant women of lahore city, pakistan. Rawal Medic J, 46(2): 386-390.
• Shijagurumayum Acharya R, Tveter AT, Grotle M, Eberhard-Gran M, Stuge B. 2019. Prevalence and severity of low back-and pelvic girdle pain in pregnant Nepalese women. Bio Med Cent Preg Childbirth, 19(1): 1-11.
• Stuge B, Garratt A, Krogstad Jenssen H, Grotle M. 2011. The pelvic girdle questionnaire: a condition-specific instrument for assessing activity limitations and symptoms in people with pelvic girdle pain. Phys Ther, 91(7): 1096-1108.
• Süygün ET. 2019. Ağri Akti̇vi̇te paternleri̇ ölçeği̇’ni̇n Türkçe uyarlaması geçerli̇ği̇ güveni̇li̇rli̇ği̇. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Ana Bilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye, ss: 101.
• Tunca Yilmaz Ö, Yakut Y, Uygur F, Uluǧ N. 2011. Tampa kinezyofobi ölçeǧi’nin Türkçe versiyonu ve test-tekrar test güvenirliǧi. Fizyoter Rehabil, 22(1): 44-49.
• Ugurlu M, Karakas Ugurlu G, Erten S, Caykoylu A. 2017. Validity of Turkish form of pain catastrophizing scale and modeling of the relationship between pain-related disability with pain intensity, cognitive, and emotional factors. Psychiat Clin Psychopharmacol, 27(2): 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750573.2017.1322672
• Vlaeyen J, Linton S. 2000. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain, 85(3): 317-332.
• Vlaeyen J, Seelen H, Peters M. 1999. Fear of movement/(re)injury and muscular reactivity in chronic low back pain patients: an experimental investigation. Pain, 82: 297-304.
• Vlaeyen JWS, Kole-Snijders AMJ, Boeren RGB, van Eek H. 1995. Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain, 62(3): 363-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(94)00279-N
• Vleeming A, Albert H, Ostgaard H, Sturesson B, Stuge B. 2008. European guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pelvic girdle pain. Eur Spine J, 17(6): 794-819. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0602-4
• Wu W, Meijer O, Uegaki K, Mens M, van Dieën J, Wuisman P, Ostgaard H. 2004. Pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain (PPP), I: Terminology, clinical presentation, and prevalence. Eur Spine J, 13(7): 575-589.
• Yakut E, Düger T, Öksüz C, Yörükan S, Ureten K, Turan D, Firat T, Kiraz S, Kirdi N, Kayihan H, Yakut Y, Güler Ç. 2004. Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. J Spine, 29(5): 581-585.
• Yelvar D, Çırak Y, Demir Y, Türkyılmaz E. 2019. Cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the pelvic girdle questionnaire in pregnant. Ankara Med J, 19(3): 513-523. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.17098/amj. 624417