Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2018, Vol. 45 Issue (2): 194-197    DOI: 10.12891/ceog4090.2018
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Pregnancy-related lumbar and pelvic girdle pain in Polish women
M. Starzec1, *(), A. Truszyńska-Baszak2, A. Tarnowski3
1 Rehabilitation Division, Department of Physiotherapy, Second Faculty of Medicine,Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
2 Jozef Pilsudski University of Physical Education, Physiotherapy Department, Warsaw, Poland
3 Psychology Department, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Download:  PDF
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Purpose of investigation: To examine lumbo-pelvic pain (LPP) characteristics in pregnant Polish women. Materials and Methods: The study population consisted of 189 Poles aged 21 to 40 (mean age 29.86 sd. 3.84) years, between 12 and 36 gestation weeks. The control group consisted of 36 non-pregnant Poles. On the basis of body diagrams the authors found three distinctive kinds of pain: lumbar, pelvic girdle, and mixed pain. For further pain characteristics visual analogue scale (VAS) scale, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ) were used. Results: Sixty-five percent of pregnant women reported suffering from LPP. Mean pain intensity was 4.84 for lumbar pain (LP) and 4.87 for pelvic girdle pain (PGP) on the VAS scale. Mean activity limitation caused by PGP was 32.67% and mean disability caused by LP was 17.92%. The control group reported PGP significantly less often. Conclusions: LPP can cause significant problems in pregnant women and they also experience PGP more often than non-pregnant women.
Key words:  Pelvic girdle      Lumbar pain      Pregnancy     
Published:  10 April 2018     
*Corresponding Author(s):  M. STARZEC     E-mail:  m.starzec@outlook.com

Cite this article: 

M. Starzec, A. Truszyńska-Baszak, A. Tarnowski. Pregnancy-related lumbar and pelvic girdle pain in Polish women. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(2): 194-197.

URL: 

https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/10.12891/ceog4090.2018     OR     https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/Y2018/V45/I2/194

[1] Amanda M. Wang, Alan J. Lee, Shannon M. Clark. The effects of overweight and obesity on pregnancy-related morbidity[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 999-1009.
[2] Leen Van den Eeden, Greet Leysens,Dominique Mannaerts, Yves Jacquemyn. Air pollution: cardiovascular and other negative effects on pregnancy: a narrative review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1010-1016.
[3] Xin Du, Qian Zou, Yu-Lan Liu. Transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy by uterine artery pre-ligation: a report of 4 cases[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1044-1047.
[4] Marcelo Epsztein Kanczuk, Nicholas J Lightfoot, Alison Pighills, Antony Ji, Casey Steele, Daniel Bartlett. The time to perform spinal or general anaesthesia in COVID-19 positive parturients requiring emergency caesarean delivery: a prospective crossover simulation study[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1099-1106.
[5] Noor Hazim Abdulkareem, Elham Hazeim Abdulkareem. SARS-CoV-2 detection in pregnant and non-pregnant women[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1141-1145.
[6] Min Jung Kim, Hee-Sook Lim, Hae-Hyeog Lee, Tae-Hee Kim, Yongsoon Park. Dietary assessment, nutrition knowledge, and pregnancy outcome in high-risk pregnant Korean women[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1178-1185.
[7] Neha Sethi, Ann Gee Tan, Maherah Kamarudin, Sofiah Sulaiman. Successful delivery of a twin pregnancy with complete hydatidiform mole and coexistent live fetus: a case report and review of literature[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1232-1247.
[8] Luca Roncati, Greta Gianotti, Elisa Ambrogi, Giovanna Attolini. COVID-19 in pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 778-780.
[9] Silvia Amodeo, Giulia Bonavina, Anna Seidenari, Paolo Ivo Cavoretto, Antonio Farina. Real-world implementation and adaptation to local settings of first trimester preeclampsia screening in Italy: a systematic review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 812-819.
[10] Yu Deng, Zhan-Hui Ou, Min-Na Yin, Pei-Ling Liang, Zhi-Heng Chen, Abraham Morse, Ling Sun. Age and anti-Műllerian hormone: prediction of cumulative pregnancy outcome in in vitro fertilization with diminished ovarian reserve[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 835-841.
[11] Serdar Balci. The effect of ultraviolet index measurements on levels of vitamin D andinflammatory markers in pregnant women[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 888-892.
[12] Anna M. Rubinshtein, Oleg V. Golyanovskiy. Obstetric outcomes in women of advanced maternal age after assisted reproduction[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 893-900.
[13] Qian Hu, Mohammed Sharooq Paramboor, Tao Guo. Diagnosis and management of intramural ectopic pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 974-979.
[14] Ovadya Rosenbluh, Asnat Walfisch. Birth defects associated with obesity[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 472-477.
[15] Sara Oday, Maysoon Sharief. The role of salivary progesterone and cervical length measurement in predicting risk of spontaneous preterm birth[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 509-513.
No Suggested Reading articles found!