Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)NCT07659327
Effects Of Sahrmann's Versus McGill Exercise In Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
A study testing Sahrmann's Exercises and McGill Exercises in people with Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP), run by Riphah International University.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether Sahrmann exercises or McGill exercises are more effective for reducing pain and improving function in adults with non-specific low back pain. It will also evaluate which exercise program is more effective in improving spinal range of motion. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 35 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
- What is being tested?
- Sahrmann's Exercises and McGill Exercises
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 30 Jul 2026to 30 Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 35 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosed patients of non-specific low back pain Adults between 18-35 years. Both male and female included Low back pain for minimum of three months NPRS score 3-7 will be recruited in this study.
Who cannot join
- History of any trauma and spinal injury History of previous lumbar surgery History of cancer, spinal infection, rheumatologic diseases, spine fracture, red flag signs.
- Congenital anomly (scoliosis, kyphosis) Systemic diseases affecting bones \& joints such as rheumatoid arthritis
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Effects Of Sahrmann's Versus McGill Exercise On Pain, Disability, And Range Of Motion In Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether Sahrmann exercises or McGill exercises are more effective for reducing pain and improving function in adults with non-specific low back pain. It will also evaluate which exercise program is more effective in improving spinal range of motion.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Read more
Do Sahrmann exercises reduce pain more effectively than McGill exercises? Do Sahrmann exercises improve disability more effectively than McGill exercises? Do Sahrmann exercises improve lumbar range of motion more effectively than McGill exercises?
Researchers will compare a Sahrmann exercise program with a McGill exercise program to determine which approach produces better outcomes in patients with non-specific low back pain.
Participants will:
Be randomly assigned to either a Sahrmann exercise group or a McGill exercise group.
Receive standard physical therapy treatment, including heat therapy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS).
Perform the assigned exercise program under the supervision of a physiotherapist.
Attend exercise sessions 3-5 times per week during the study period. Complete assessments of pain, disability, and lumbar range of motion before and after the intervention.
Have pain measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), disability measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and lumbar range of motion measured using a Baseline Bubble Inclinometer.
Read the detailed description
Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders and a major cause of disability worldwide. It is characterized by pain localized between the lower rib margins and the gluteal folds without a specific identifiable pathology. Individuals with NSLBP often experience pain, reduced spinal mobility, impaired motor control, and functional limitations that negatively affect daily activities and quality of life.
Exercise-based rehabilitation is widely recommended as a first-line treatment for NSLBP. Core stabilization exercises have gained considerable attention because deficits in trunk muscle function and lumbopelvic stability are believed to contribute to the persistence and recurrence of low back pain. Among the commonly used approaches, Sahrmann exercises and McGill exercises are designed to improve spinal stability through different mechanisms.
The Sahrmann approach emphasizes motor control training and the correction of movement impairments through progressive lumbopelvic stabilization exercises. The McGill approach focuses on enhancing spinal stability and muscular endurance while minimizing spinal loading through a series of stabilization exercises commonly referred to as the McGill Big Three. Although both approaches are frequently used in rehabilitation practice, evidence directly comparing their effectiveness in individuals with NSLBP remains limited.
This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the effects of Sahrmann exercises and McGill exercises on clinical outcomes in adults with non-specific low back pain. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups and will receive a supervised exercise program in addition to standard physical therapy care. Clinical assessments will be conducted before and after the intervention period to evaluate changes in pain, functional disability, and lumbar mobility.
The findings of this study may help identify the more effective exercise-based rehabilitation approach for individuals with non-specific low back pain and provide evidence to support clinical decision-making in physical therapy practice.
- Conditions
- Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
- Being tested
- Sahrmann's Exercises, McGill Exercises
- Keywords
- non-specific low back pain, pain management, Disability Evaluation, Exercise Therapy, Rehabilitation, sahrmann' exercise, McGill exercise
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Sahrmann's ExercisesOther
Group A will receive sahrmann's exercises after the baseline treatment. It will be including 5 levels:
Level 1 The participant slowly raised one leg to a position of approximately 90° hip flexion with 90° knee flexion.
Level 2 From the final position of the previous level, the participant slowly lowered one leg such that the heel contacted the ground/plinth.
Level 3 From the end position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered one leg such that the heel reached approximate 12cm above the ground. Then the leg slid out to fully extend the knee.
Level 4 From the final position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered both legs together such that the heels contacted the plinth. Then the legs slid out to fully extend the knees.
Level 5 From the final position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered both legs simultaneously such that the heels reached 12 cm above the ground. The legs then slid out to fully extend the knees.
McGill ExercisesOther
Patients will receive three exercises for rehabilitating lower back pain, termed the McGill Big Three (MGB3).
Mcgill begins with motion exercise (cat-camel motion exercise. It consists of six to eight cycle of spinal flexion and extension in quadruped position.
- Curl-up In which patient flexes one knee while keeping the other straight to minimize loss neutral posture. Then, the patient gently raises just the head and shoulders a short distance off the floor.
- Side plank The patient lying on the side supported on his elbow and hip, knees bent to 90 degrees, free hand place on the opposite shoulder. The patient then raises his trunk until the body supported on elbows and knees. If patient not able to perform side support exercise, the patient would assume the side lying position and initiate the contraction of quadratus lumborum by trying to lift both lower limbs up toward the ceiling.
- Bird-dog The bird dog exercise (opposite arm and leg extension in the quadruped position) carri
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group A: (Sahrmann's Exercises) | Experimental | The patients in this group will receive conventional Sahrmann's exercises along with baseline treatment for non-specific low back pain. Receives: Other: Sahrmann's Exercises |
| Group B: (McGill Exercises) | Active comparator | The patients in this group will receive McGill Exercises along with baseline treatment for non-specific low back pain. Receives: Other: McGill Exercises |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
In the current study, patients with NPRS score 3-7 will be recruited. Patient level of pain will be assessed using this scale. NRS is 11-points (NRS-11) which counts the pain and is wildly used in clinical settings because it is easy to administer and score. The patient is asked to indicate the value of his pain on the scale. A 11-point scale was used, with "0" representing "no pain" and "10" representing the "most severe pain imaginable" at the time of assessment (10). The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) demonstrates moderate to excellent test-retest reliability with ICC values ranging from 0.58 to 0.93, and good construct validity with correlation coefficients of 0.48 to 0.54
Measured: upto 6 weeks
Secondary outcomes (2)
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
The ODI was the primary outcomes used to assess self-reports of disability caused by LBP. The ODI is made up of 10 sections scored from 0 to 5 points, each section contain 6 statements with the total score ranging from 0 to 50 points. A higher score on questionnaires indicates a higher level of disability. The ODI (ICC > 0.84) has been recognized as valid and reliable tools for patients suffering from chronic LBP.
Measured: upto 6 weeks
Baseline Bubble Inclinometer
A Baseline Bubble Inclinometer (Model 10602 built by Fabrication Enterprise Inc., USA) was used to measure the active back flexion and extension range of motion without thoraco-lumbar pain. To evaluate the active thoraco-lumbar flexion and extension range of motion, the inclinometer was used at the T12-L1 spinous process.
Measured: upto 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Jun 2026
- Study start30 Jul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Dec 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Riphah International UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Riphah International University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Samrood Akram, Riphah International University
- Investigators
- Fatima Khan, MSPT*, Principal investigator, Riphah International University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07659327
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- REC/RCR & AHS/25/0137
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 16 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 22 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Bielewicz J, Daniluk B, Kamieniak P. VAS and NRS, Same or Different? Are Visual Analog Scale Values and Numerical Rating Scale Equally Viable Tools for Assessing Patients after Microdiscectomy? Pain Res Manag. 2022 Mar 29;2022:5337483. doi: 10.1155/2022/5337483. eCollection 2022.
PubMed 35391853Hernandez-Lucas P, Leiros-Rodriguez R, Mota J, Garcia-Soidan JL. Effects of a back school-based intervention on non-specific low back pain in adults: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023 Jul 10;23(1):229. doi: 10.1186/s12906-023-04061-1.
PubMed 37430269Niroomand T, Rabiei M, Mohammadi BJJoAST. Investigating the Effects Janda's and Sahrmann's Correcting Exercise Approaches on Trunk Muscles Function in Young Girls with Lower Crossed Syndrome. 2023;7(3):48-58.
Ghorbanpour A, Azghani MR, Taghipour M, Salahzadeh Z, Ghaderi F, Oskouei AE. Effects of McGill stabilization exercises and conventional physiotherapy on pain, functional disability and active back range of motion in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. J Phys Ther Sci. 2018 Apr;30(4):481-485. doi: 10.1589/jpts.30.481. Epub 2018 Apr 13.
PubMed 29706690Ahmad SNS, Letafatkar A, Brewer BW, Sharifnezhad A. Comparison of cognitive functional therapy and movement system impairment treatment in chronic low back pain patients: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 Aug 29;24(1):684. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06815-x.
PubMed 37644472Alkhathami K, Alshehre Y, Brizzolara K, Weber M, Wang-Price S. Effectiveness of Spinal Stabilization Exercises on Movement Performance in Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2023 Feb 1;18(1):169-172. doi: 10.26603/001c.68024. eCollection 2023.
PubMed 36793568Chan EWM, Hamid MSA, Nadzalan AM, Hafiz E. Abdominal muscle activation: An EMG study of the Sahrmann five-level core stability test. Hong Kong Physiother J. 2020 Dec;40(2):89-97. doi: 10.1142/S1013702520500080. Epub 2020 Mar 10.
PubMed 33005073Hlaing SS, Puntumetakul R, Khine EE, Boucaut R. Effects of core stabilization exercise and strengthening exercise on proprioception, balance, muscle thickness and pain related outcomes in patients with subacute nonspecific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Nov 30;22(1):998. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04858-6.
PubMed 34847915Alonso-Sal A, Alonso-Perez JL, Sosa-Reina MD, Garcia-Noblejas-Fernandez JA, Balani-Balani VG, Rossettini G, Villafane JH. Effectiveness of Physical Activity in the Management of Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review. Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Dec 16;60(12):2065. doi: 10.3390/medicina60122065.
PubMed 39768944Morotani M. General principles of the Movement System Impairment diagnostic system. The Journal of Manual Physical Therapy. 2022;22(1):29-35.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects Of Sahrmann's Versus McGill Exercise On Pain, Disability, And Range Of Motion In Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07659327
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- REC/RCR & AHS/25/0137
- Conditions
- Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
- Keywords
- non-specific low back pain, pain management, Disability Evaluation, Exercise Therapy, Rehabilitation, sahrmann' exercise, McGill exercise
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Riphah International UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 30 Jul 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether Sahrmann exercises or McGill exercises are more effective for reducing pain and improving function in adults with non-specific low back pain. It will also evaluate which exercise program is more effective in improving spinal range of motion.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Do Sahrmann exercises reduce pain more effectively than McGill exercises? Do Sahrmann exercises improve disability more effectively than McGill exercises? Do Sahrmann exercises improve lumbar range of motion more effectively than McGill exercises?
Researchers will compare a Sahrmann exercise program with a McGill exercise program to determine which approach produces better outcomes in patients with non-specific low back pain.
Participants will:
Be randomly assigned to either a Sahrmann exercise group or a McGill exercise group.
Receive standard physical therapy treatment, including heat therapy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS).
Perform the assigned exercise program under the supervision of a physiotherapist.
Attend exercise sessions 3-5 times per week during the study period. Complete assessments of pain, disability, and lumbar range of motion before and after the intervention.
Have pain measured using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), disability measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and lumbar range of motion measured using a Baseline Bubble Inclinometer.
Detailed description
Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders and a major cause of disability worldwide. It is characterized by pain localized between the lower rib margins and the gluteal folds without a specific identifiable pathology. Individuals with NSLBP often experience pain, reduced spinal mobility, impaired motor control, and functional limitations that negatively affect daily activities and quality of life.
Exercise-based rehabilitation is widely recommended as a first-line treatment for NSLBP. Core stabilization exercises have gained considerable attention because deficits in trunk muscle function and lumbopelvic stability are believed to contribute to the persistence and recurrence of low back pain. Among the commonly used approaches, Sahrmann exercises and McGill exercises are designed to improve spinal stability through different mechanisms.
The Sahrmann approach emphasizes motor control training and the correction of movement impairments through progressive lumbopelvic stabilization exercises. The McGill approach focuses on enhancing spinal stability and muscular endurance while minimizing spinal loading through a series of stabilization exercises commonly referred to as the McGill Big Three. Although both approaches are frequently used in rehabilitation practice, evidence directly comparing their effectiveness in individuals with NSLBP remains limited.
This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the effects of Sahrmann exercises and McGill exercises on clinical outcomes in adults with non-specific low back pain. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups and will receive a supervised exercise program in addition to standard physical therapy care. Clinical assessments will be conducted before and after the intervention period to evaluate changes in pain, functional disability, and lumbar mobility.
The findings of this study may help identify the more effective exercise-based rehabilitation approach for individuals with non-specific low back pain and provide evidence to support clinical decision-making in physical therapy practice.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group A: (Sahrmann's Exercises) | Experimental | Other: Sahrmann's ExercisesThe patients in this group will receive conventional Sahrmann's exercises along with baseline treatment for non-specific low back pain. |
| Group B: (McGill Exercises) | Active comparator | Other: McGill ExercisesThe patients in this group will receive McGill Exercises along with baseline treatment for non-specific low back pain. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 35 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Diagnosed patients of non-specific low back pain Adults between 18-35 years. Both male and female included Low back pain for minimum of three months NPRS score 3-7 will be recruited in this study.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- History of any trauma and spinal injury History of previous lumbar surgery History of cancer, spinal infection, rheumatologic diseases, spine fracture, red flag signs.
- Congenital anomly (scoliosis, kyphosis) Systemic diseases affecting bones \& joints such as rheumatoid arthritis
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Sahrmann's ExercisesGroup A will receive sahrmann's exercises after the baseline treatment. It will be including 5 levels: Level 1 The participant slowly raised one leg to a position of approximately 90° hip flexion with 90° knee flexion. Level 2 From the final position of the previous level, the participant slowly lowered one leg such that the heel contacted the ground/plinth. Level 3 From the end position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered one leg such that the heel reached approximate 12cm above the ground. Then the leg slid out to fully extend the knee. Level 4 From the final position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered both legs together such that the heels contacted the plinth. Then the legs slid out to fully extend the knees. Level 5 From the final position of level 1, the participant slowly lowered both legs simultaneously such that the heels reached 12 cm above the ground. The legs then slid out to fully extend the knees. | Other | Group A: (Sahrmann's Exercises) |
| McGill ExercisesPatients will receive three exercises for rehabilitating lower back pain, termed the McGill Big Three (MGB3). Mcgill begins with motion exercise (cat-camel motion exercise. It consists of six to eight cycle of spinal flexion and extension in quadruped position. 1. Curl-up In which patient flexes one knee while keeping the other straight to minimize loss neutral posture. Then, the patient gently raises just the head and shoulders a short distance off the floor. 2. Side plank The patient lying on the side supported on his elbow and hip, knees bent to 90 degrees, free hand place on the opposite shoulder. The patient then raises his trunk until the body supported on elbows and knees. If patient not able to perform side support exercise, the patient would assume the side lying position and initiate the contraction of quadratus lumborum by trying to lift both lower limbs up toward the ceiling. 3. Bird-dog The bird dog exercise (opposite arm and leg extension in the quadruped position) carri | Other | Group B: (McGill Exercises) |
Primary outcome
Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Time frame: upto 6 weeks
In the current study, patients with NPRS score 3-7 will be recruited. Patient level of pain will be assessed using this scale. NRS is 11-points (NRS-11) which counts the pain and is wildly used in clinical settings because it is easy to administer and score. The patient is asked to indicate the value of his pain on the scale. A 11-point scale was used, with "0" representing "no pain" and "10" representing the "most severe pain imaginable" at the time of assessment (10). The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) demonstrates moderate to excellent test-retest reliability with ICC values ranging from 0.58 to 0.93, and good construct validity with correlation coefficients of 0.48 to 0.54
2 secondary outcomes
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
Time frame: upto 6 weeks
Baseline Bubble Inclinometer
Time frame: upto 6 weeks
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Jun 2026.
- Background: PubMed 35391853Bielewicz J, Daniluk B, Kamieniak P. VAS and NRS, Same or Different? Are Visual Analog Scale Values and Numerical Rating Scale Equally Viable Tools for Assessing Patients after Microdiscectomy? Pain Res Manag. 2022 Mar 29;2022:5337483. doi: 10.1155/2022/5337483. eCollection 2022.
- Background: PubMed 37430269Hernandez-Lucas P, Leiros-Rodriguez R, Mota J, Garcia-Soidan JL. Effects of a back school-based intervention on non-specific low back pain in adults: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023 Jul 10;23(1):229. doi: 10.1186/s12906-023-04061-1.
- BackgroundNiroomand T, Rabiei M, Mohammadi BJJoAST. Investigating the Effects Janda's and Sahrmann's Correcting Exercise Approaches on Trunk Muscles Function in Young Girls with Lower Crossed Syndrome. 2023;7(3):48-58.
- Background: PubMed 29706690Ghorbanpour A, Azghani MR, Taghipour M, Salahzadeh Z, Ghaderi F, Oskouei AE. Effects of McGill stabilization exercises and conventional physiotherapy on pain, functional disability and active back range of motion in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. J Phys Ther Sci. 2018 Apr;30(4):481-485. doi: 10.1589/jpts.30.481. Epub 2018 Apr 13.
- Background: PubMed 37644472Ahmad SNS, Letafatkar A, Brewer BW, Sharifnezhad A. Comparison of cognitive functional therapy and movement system impairment treatment in chronic low back pain patients: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 Aug 29;24(1):684. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06815-x.
- Background: PubMed 36793568Alkhathami K, Alshehre Y, Brizzolara K, Weber M, Wang-Price S. Effectiveness of Spinal Stabilization Exercises on Movement Performance in Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2023 Feb 1;18(1):169-172. doi: 10.26603/001c.68024. eCollection 2023.
- Background: PubMed 33005073Chan EWM, Hamid MSA, Nadzalan AM, Hafiz E. Abdominal muscle activation: An EMG study of the Sahrmann five-level core stability test. Hong Kong Physiother J. 2020 Dec;40(2):89-97. doi: 10.1142/S1013702520500080. Epub 2020 Mar 10.
- Background: PubMed 34847915Hlaing SS, Puntumetakul R, Khine EE, Boucaut R. Effects of core stabilization exercise and strengthening exercise on proprioception, balance, muscle thickness and pain related outcomes in patients with subacute nonspecific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Nov 30;22(1):998. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04858-6.
- Background: PubMed 39768944Alonso-Sal A, Alonso-Perez JL, Sosa-Reina MD, Garcia-Noblejas-Fernandez JA, Balani-Balani VG, Rossettini G, Villafane JH. Effectiveness of Physical Activity in the Management of Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review. Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Dec 16;60(12):2065. doi: 10.3390/medicina60122065.
- BackgroundMorotani M. General principles of the Movement System Impairment diagnostic system. The Journal of Manual Physical Therapy. 2022;22(1):29-35.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Not yet recruiting
Hybrid mHealth for Low Back Pain
Chronic Low-back Pain (cLBP), Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Not yet recruiting
Psoas Major Muscle Intervention on Chronic Lumbar Pain in Cleaning Professionals.
Lumbar Pain, Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Not yet recruiting
Web-Based Exercise Program for Non-Specific Low Back Pain
Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Not yet recruiting
Erector Spinae Plane Block for Acute Low Back Pain
Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Percutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation As Alternative To Nerve Blocks In Anesthesia, Pain Medicine And Rehabilitation Of Nonspecific Chronic Pain
Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP), Facet Joint Syndrome
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Fatima Khan, MSPT* principal investigator
Riphah International University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Sahrmann's Exercises and McGill Exercises in people with Non-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP), run by Riphah International University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Sumrod Akram (03324806143, samrood.akram@riphah.edu.pk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) (time frame: upto 6 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07659327, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Jun 2026.