Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT07282925
NCT07282925
Recruiting
Not Applicable

Effects of Cognitive Functional Therapy Versus Kinetic Control Training on Pain, Disability, Movement Control in Patients With Non-specific Low Back Pain

Lahore University of Biological and Applied Sciences2 sites in 1 country70 target enrollmentStarted: December 15, 2025Last updated:

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Recruiting
Sponsor
Lahore University of Biological and Applied Sciences
Enrollment
70
Locations
2
Primary Endpoint
Pain Intensity Measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale

Overview

Brief Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) with Kinetic Control Training (KCT) in participants with non-specific low back pain. The study wants to see which approach helps lower pain, reduce disability and improve movement control. The main questions it aims to answer is

  • Is there difference between Cognitive Functional Therapy and Kinetic control training on pain intensity, disability and movement control in participants with Non Specific Low Back Pain?
  • Is there difference between Cognitive Functional Therapy and Kinetic control training on pain catastrophizing and self-efficacy in participants with Non Specific Low Back Pain? Researcher will compare the both CFT and KCT group to see if one treatment is superior to other in treating participants with non-specific back pain.

Participants will

  • Attend treatment sessions based on the group they are placed in.
  • Take session three times each week for eight weeks.
  • They will be asked short questions about their pain, daily activity, and movement throughout the study.

Detailed Description

Low back pain (LBP) has the highest prevalence globally among musculoskeletal disorders, affecting around 619 million people in 2020 and it is expected that the number of cases will increase to 843 million by 2050. LBP is defined as the localized pain below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds which may or may not include leg pain. It is commonly categorized as specific and non-specific low back pain. Non-Specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP) accounts for nearly 90% of all cases.

NSLBP is multifactorial and mostly new cases recover within a short time but the condition frequently recurs and may become persistent. An extensive review regarding the management of LBP has stated that exercise plays a fundamental role in treating patients with NSLBP. However, the results regarding the appropriate type of exercise are the subject of controversy. Over the past decades, researchers have advised a variety of exercises. However, despite applying various treatment approaches, conservative treatment for NSLBP yields small effect sizes.

Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) is a contemporary exercise intervention developed by Peter O'Sullivan, to address the multidimensional nature of non-specific low back pain. The CFT is structured into three phases: (1) making sense of pain, (2) exposure with control, and (3) lifestyle changes. Rather than adopting a one size fits all approach, CFT provides clinicians with the opportunity to explore the multidimensional nature of NSLBP.

Kinetic Control Training (KCT) developed by Comerford, is a clinical framework focused on the assessment and correction of uncontrolled movement. KCT emphasizes identifying direction-specific movement faults (e.g., flexion, extension, rotation control deficits) that contribute to symptom provocation. KCT utilizes a three-stage retraining process: (1) cognitive facilitation of correct muscle activation; (2) integration into low-load, non-provocative tasks; and (3) progression to complex, functional movements under load and fatigue.

Despite the promising evidence supporting both CFT and KCT, a clear comparative study of their effectiveness in addressing NSLBP is lacking. Most existing studies have focused on one technique or compared it with general exercise. This study seeks to address this gap by evaluating and comparing the effects of Cognitive Functional Therapy and Kinetic Control Training in individuals with NSLBP.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
19 Years to 39 Years (Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • Patients of both sexes
  • Aged between 19 to 39
  • Patients who score 6 points or higher on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at the time of screening
  • Patients who will have Non-Specific Chronic Low Back pain for at least 3 months duration

Exclusion Criteria

  • If the primary pain area is not the lumbar spine.
  • If leg pain is the primary problem.
  • If patient have inflammatory disease.
  • If patient have progressive neurological disease.
  • If patient have red flag disorders (malignancy/cancer, traumas such as fracture).
  • Pregnant females.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Pain Intensity Measured by Numeric Pain Rating Scale

Time Frame: It will be measured at baseline, 4 weeks and at 8 weeks.

Pain intensity will be measured with an 11 point Numeric Pain Rating Scale that is measured from 0 to 10. 0 is no pain, 1-3 indicates mild pain, 4-6 indicates moderate pain and 7-10 is the most severe pain imaginable.

Disability measured by Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire

Time Frame: It will be measured at baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks

Disability will be measured by Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The RMDQ is a valid and reliable tool for estimating the level of disability in Low Back Pain patients. It is composed of 24 questions that are to be answered by the patients with answers of either 'Yes' or 'No'. The variation of the total score may range from a score of 0 (no disability) to a score of 24 (maximum disability).

Lumbar Motor Control measured by the Luomajoki Motor Control Test Battery

Time Frame: baseline, 4 week and 8 week

To evaluate lumbar motor control, the Luomajoki Motor Control Test Battery is employed. This battery includes six individual tests that examine movement control in various positions such as standing, sitting, quadruped, and prone. Each test is scored either 0 or 1, with a total score of 3 or higher indicates impaired motor control

Secondary Outcomes

  • Catastrophizing pain will be measured by Pain Catastrophizing Scale.(baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks)
  • Self-efficacy will be measured by Pain Self Efficacy Scale(Baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks)

Investigators

Sponsor
Lahore University of Biological and Applied Sciences
Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Umber Nawaz

Assistant Professor

Lahore University of Biological and Applied Sciences

Study Sites (2)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials