Altered response of the anterolateral abdominal muscles to simulated weight-bearing in subjects with low back pain

An important aspect of neuromuscular control at the lumbo-pelvic region is stabilization. Subjects with low back pain (LBP) have been shown to exhibit impairments in motor control of key muscles which contribute to stabilization of the lumbo-pelvic region. However, a test of automatic recruitment that relates to function has been lacking. A previous study used ultrasound imaging to show that healthy subjects automatically recruited the transversus abdominis (TrA) and internal oblique (IO) muscles in response to a simulated weight-bearing task. This task has not been investigated in subjects with LBP. The aim of this study was to compare the automatic recruitment of the abdominal muscles among subjects with and without LBP in response to the simulated weight-bearing task. Twenty subjects with and without LBP were tested. Real-time ultrasound imaging was used to assess changes in thickness of the TrA and internal oblique IO muscles as well as lateral movement ("slide") of the anterior fascial insertion of the TrA muscle. Results showed that subjects with LBP showed significantly less shortening of the TrA muscle (P < 0.0001) and greater increases in thickness of the IO muscle (P = 0.002) with the simulated weight-bearing task. There was no significant difference between groups for changes in TrA muscle thickness (P = 0.055). This study provides evidence of changes in motor control of the abdominal muscles in subjects with LBP. This test may provide a functionally relevant and non-invasive method to investigate the automatic recruitment of the abdominal muscles in people with and without LBP.

Do pain-related beliefs influence adherence to multidisciplinary rehabilitation? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES: To understand how pain-related cognitions predict and influence treatment retention and adherence during and after a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program.

METHODS: Electronic databases including Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Academic Search Complete, and Scopus were used to search three combinations of keywords: chronic pain, beliefs, and treatment adherence.

RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 591 results, with an additional 12 studies identified through reference screening. 81 full-text papers were assessed for eligibility and 10 papers met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review. The pain-related beliefs that have been measured in relation to treatment adherence include: pain-specific self-efficacy, perceived disability, catastrophizing, control beliefs, fear-avoidance beliefs, perceived benefits and barriers, as well as other less commonly measured beliefs. The most common pain-related belief investigated in relation to treatment adherence was pain-related self-efficacy. Findings for the pain-related beliefs investigated among the studies were mixed. Collectively, all of the aforementioned pain-related beliefs, excluding control beliefs, were found to influence treatment adherence behaviours.

DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that treatment adherence is determined by a combination of pain-related beliefs either supporting or inhibiting chronic pain patients' ability to adhere to treatment recommendations over time. In the studies reviewed, self-efficacy appears to be the most commonly researched predictor of treatment adherence, its effects also influencing other pain-related beliefs. More refined and standardised methodologies, consistent descriptions of pain-related beliefs and methods of measurement will improve our understanding of adherence behaviours.

Barriers to primary care clinician adherence to clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION: Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for the management of low back pain that contain consistent messages, large evidence-practice gaps in primary care remain.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies that have explored primary care clinicians' perceptions and beliefs about guidelines for low back pain, including perceived enablers and barriers to guideline adherence.

METHODS: Studies investigatingperceptions and beliefs about low back pain guidelines were included if participants were primary care clinicians and qualitative methods had been used for both data collection and analysis. We searched major databases up to July 2014. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, extracted data, appraised method quality using the CASP checklist, conducted thematic analysis and synthesized the results in narrative format.

RESULTS: Seventeen studies, with a total of 705 participants, were included. We identified three key emergent themes and eight subthemes: (1) guideline implementation and adherence beliefs and perceptions; (2) maintaining the patient-clinician relationship with imaging referrals; (3) barriers to guideline implementation. Clinicians believed that guidelines were categorical, prescriptive and constrained professional practice; however popular clinical practices superseded the guidelines. Imaging referrals were used to manage consultations and to obtain definitive diagnoses. Clinicians' perceptions reflected a lack of content knowledge and understanding of how guidelines are developed.

DISCUSSION: Addressing misconceptions and other barriers to uptake of evidence-based guidelines for managing low back pain is needed to improve knowledge transfer and close the evidence-practice gap in the treatment of this common condition.