Moving tele-monitoring and tele-treatment from promise to practice : a business model approach for a chronic lower back pain application

The availability of new information and communication technologies creates opportunities for new, mobile tele-health services. While many promising tele-health projects deliver working R&D prototypes, they often do not result in actual deployment. We aim to identify critical issues than can increase our understanding and enhance the viability of the mobile tele-health services beyond the R&D phase by developing a business model. The present study describes the systematic development and evaluation of a service-oriented business model for tele-monitoring and -treatment of chronic lower back pain patients based on a mobile technology prototype. We address challenges of multi-sector collaboration and disruptive innovation.

From prototype to exploitation : mobile services for patients with chronic lower back pain

Many research and development projects that are carried out by firms and research institutes are technology-oriented. There is a large gap between research results, for instance in the form of prototypes, and the actual service offerings to customers. This becomes problematic when an organization wants to bring the results from such a project to the market, which will be particularly troublesome when the research results do not readily fit traditional offerings, roles and capabilities in the industry, nor the financial arrangements. In this chapter, we discuss the design of a business model for a mobile health service, starting with a research prototype that was developed for patients with chronic lower back pain, using the STOF model and method. In a number of design sessions, an initial business model was developed that identifies critical design issues that play a role in moving from prototype toward market deployment. The business model serves as a starting-point to identify and commit relevant stakeholders, and to draw up a business plan and case. This chapter is structured as follows. We begin by discussing the need for mobile health business models. Next, the research and development project on mobile health and the prototype for chronic lower back pain patients are introduced, after which the approach used to develop the business model is described, followed by a discussion of the developed mobile health business model for each of the STOF domains. We conclude with a discussion regarding the lessons that were learned with respect to the development of a business model on the basis of a prototype.

Prevalence and correlates of low back pain among occupational therapy students in Northern Queensland

Background: Although low back pain (LBP) is an important issue for the health profession, few studies have examined LBP among occupational therapy students. Purpose. To investigate the prevalence and distribution of LBP, its adverse sequelae; and to identify potential risk factors.----------- Methods: In 2005, a self-reported questionnaire was administered to occupational therapy students in Northern Queensland.----------- Findings: The 12-month period-prevalence of LBP was 64.6%. Nearly half (46.9%) had experienced pain for over 2 days, 38.8% suffered LBP that affected their daily lives, and 24.5% had sought medical treatment. The prevalence of LBP ranged from 45.5 to 77.1% (p=0.004), while the prevalence of LBP symptoms persisting longer than two days was 34.1 to 62.5% (p=0.020). Logistic regression analysis indicated that year of study and weekly computer usage were statistically-significant LBP risk factors.----------- Implications: The occupational therapy profession will need to further investigate the high prevalence of student LBP identified in this study.

The effect of hip muscle strengthening on pain and disability for individuals with non-specific low back pain : a randomized controlled trial

Introduction Clinical guidelines for the treatment of chronic low back pain suggest the use of supervised exercise. Motor control (MC) based exercise is widely used within clinical practice but its efficacy is equivalent to general exercise therapy. MC exercise targets the trunk musculature. Considering the mechanical links between the hip, pelvis, and lumbar spine, surprisingly little focus has been on investigating the contribution of the hip musculature to lumbopelvic support. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of two exercise programs for the treatment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). Methods Eighty individuals aged 18-65 years of age were randomized into two groups to participate in this trial. The primary outcome measures included self-reported pain intensity (0-100mm VAS) and percent disability (Oswestry Disability Index V2). Bilateral measures of hip strength (N/kg) and two dimensional frontal plane mechanics (º) were the secondary outcomes. Outcomes were measured at baseline and following a six-week home based exercise program including weekly sessions of real-time ultrasound imaging. Results Within group comparisons revealed clinically meaningful reductions in pain for both groups. The MC exercise only (N= 40, xˉ =-20.9mm, 95%CI -25.7, -16.1) and the combined MC and hip exercise (N= 40, xˉ = -24.9mm, 95%CI -30.8, -19.0). There was no statistical difference in the change of pain (xˉ =-4.0mm, t= -1.07, p=0.29, 95%CI -11.5, 3.5) or disability (xˉ =-0.3%, t=-0.19, p=0.85, 95%CI -11.5, 3.5) between groups. Conclusion Both exercise programs had similar and positive effects on NSLBP which support the use of the home based exercise programs with weekly supervised visits. However, the addition of specific hip strengthening exercises to a MC based exercise program did not result in significantly greater reductions in pain or disability. Trial Registration NCTO1567566 Funding: Worker’s Compensation Board Alberta Research Grant.

Physical activity amongst people with chronic back pain : an investigation of perceived barriers and facilitators to inform intervention development

Previous research has indicated people with non-specific low back pain who are physically inactive face a poorer prognosis than people with back pain who participate in low or moderate intensity physical activity. They also face a greater risk of other lifestyle related health conditions, such as diabetes and heart disease. For these reasons, contemporary non-surgical interventions for low back pain aim to incorporate a return to physical activity. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence supporting physical activity interventions for this purpose. It is likely that people with low back pain face additional challenges when trying to commence (or return to) regular physical activity. This exploratory qualitative research aimed to map out perceived barriers and facilitators to undertaking physical activity among people with non-specific low back pain to inform future intervention development.

The effect of the addition of hip strengthening exercises to a lumbopelvic exercise programme for the treatment of non-specific low back pain : a randomized controlled trial

Objectives To compare the efficacy of two exercise programs in reducing pain and disability for individuals with non-specific low back pain and to examine the underlying mechanical factors related to pain and disability for individuals with NSLBP. Design A single-blind, randomized controlled trial. Methods: Eighty participants were recruited from eleven community-based general medical practices and randomized into two groups completing either a lumbopelvic motor control or a combined lumbopelvic motor control and progressive hip strengthening exercise therapy program. All participants received an education session, 6 rehabilitation sessions including real time ultrasound training, and a home based exercise program manual and log book. The primary outcomes were pain (0-100mm visual analogue scale), and disability (Oswestry Disability Index V2). The secondary outcomes were hip strength (N/kg) and two-dimensional frontal plane biomechanics (°) measure during the static Trendelenburg test and while walking. All outcomes were measured at baseline and at 6-week follow up. Results There was no statistical difference in the change in pain (xˉ = -4.0mm, t= -1.07, p =0.29, 95%CI -11.5, 3.5) or disability (xˉ = -0.3%, t= -0.19, p =0.85, 95%CI -3.5, 2.8) between groups. Within group comparisons revealed clinically meaningful reductions in pain for both Group One (xˉ =-20.9mm, 95%CI -25.7, -16.1) and Group Two (xˉ =-24.9, 95%CI -30.8, -19.0). Conclusion Both exercise programs had similar efficacy in reducing pain. The addition of hip strengthening exercises to a motor control exercise program does not appear to result in improved clinical outcome for pain for individuals with non-specific low back pain.

The optimal frequency of aquatic physiotherapy for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a randomised controlled trial

Purpose: To establish whether there was a difference in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (PwCMSKD) after participating in a multimodal physiotherapy program (MPP) either two or three sessions a week. Methods: Total of 114 PwCMSKD participated in this prospective randomised controlled trial. An individualised MPP, consisting of exercises for mobility, motor-control, muscle strengthening, cardiovascular training, and health education, was implemented either twice a week (G2: n = 58) or three times a week) (G3: n = 56) for 1 year. Outcomes: HRQoL physical and mental health state (PHS/MHS), Roland Morris disability Questionnaire (RMQ), Neck-Disability-Index (NDI) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities’ Arthritis Index (WOMAC) were used to measure outcomes of MPP for people with chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain and osteoarthritis, respectively. Measures were taken at baseline, 8 weeks (8 w), 6 months (6 m), and 1 year (1 y) after starting the programme. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups (G2 and G3), except in NDI at 8 w (−3.34, (CI 95%: −6.94/0.84, p = 0.025 (scale 0–50)). All variables showed improvement reaching the following values (from baseline to 1 y) G2: PHS: 57.72 (baseline: 41.17; (improvement: 16.55%), MHS: 74.51 (baseline: 47.46, 27.05%), HRQoL 0.90 (baseline: 0.72, 18%)), HRQoL-VAS 84.29 (baseline: 58.04, 26.25%), RMQ 4.15 (baseline: 7.85, 15.42%), NDI 3.96 (baseline: 21.87, 35.82%), WOMAC 7.17 (baseline: 25.51, 19.10%). G3: PHS: 58.64 (baseline: 39.75, 18.89%), MHS: 75.50 (baseline: 45.45, (30.05%), HRQoL 0.67 (baseline: 0.88, 21%), HRQoL-VAS 86.91 (baseline: 52.64, 34.27%), RMQ 4.83 (baseline: 8.93, 17.08%), NDI 4.91 (baseline: 23.82, 37.82%), WOMAC 6.35 (baseline: 15.30, 9.32%). Conclusions: No significant differences between the two groups were found in the outcomes of a MPP except in the NDI at 8 weeks, but both groups improved in all variables during the course of 1 year under study.

Ability to discriminate between healthy and low back pain sufferers using ultrasound during maximum lumbar extension

Objective To analyze the ability to discriminate between healthy individuals and individuals with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) by measuring the relation between patient-reported outcomes and objective clinical outcome measures of the erector spinae (ES) muscles using an ultrasound during maximal isometric lumbar extension. Design Cross-sectional study with screening and diagnostic tests with no blinded comparison. Setting University laboratory. Participants Healthy individuals (n=33) and individuals with CNLBP (n=33). Interventions Each subject performed an isometric lumbar extension. With the variables measured, a discriminate analysis was performed using a value ≥6 in the Roland and Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ) as the grouping variable. Then, a logistic regression with the functional and architectural variables was performed. A new index was obtained from each subject value input in the discriminate multivariate analysis. Main Outcome Measures Morphologic muscle variables of the ES muscle were measured through ultrasound images. The reliability of the measures was calculated through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The relation between patient-reported outcomes and objective clinical outcome measures was analyzed using a discriminate function from standardized values of the variables and an analysis of the reliability of the ultrasound measurement. Results The reliability tests show an ICC value >.95 for morphologic and functional variables. The independent variables included in the analysis explained 42% (P=.003) of the dependent variable variance. Conclusions The relation between objective variables (electromyography, thickness, pennation angle) and a subjective variable (RMDQ ≥6) and the capacity of this relation to identify CNLBP within a group of healthy subjects is moderate. These results should be considered by clinicians when treating this type of patient in clinical practice.

Resolvin inflammation with pain

Background: Inflammation and pain coexist in conditions such as arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, and lower back pain. The drugs currently used to treat the combination of inflammation and pain all have disadvantages. Thus, new drugs and new approaches are needed to treat inflammation with pain. The resolvins are considered to be part of the natural resolving mechanism for inflammation, and have been shown to prevent inflammation in animal models. Objectives/methods: To evaluate a paper suggesting that the resolvins RvE1 and RvD1 attenuate inflammatory pain in animal models. Results: RvE1 has been shown to attenuate inflammation and, to a lesser extent, pain in animal models. Limited results are presented of the effectiveness of RvD1 against inflammatory pain. Conclusion: Drugs that mimic or potentiate the effects of the resolvins may be useful for the treatment of some inflammation with pain.

The relationship between hip-abductor strength and the magnitude of pelvic drop in patients with low back pain

Context: It has been theorized that a positive Trendelenburg test (TT) indicates weakness of the stance hip-abductor (HABD) musculature, results in contralateral pelvic drop, and represents impaired load transfer, which may contribute to low back pain. Few studies have tested whether weakness of the HABDs is directly related to the magnitude of pelvic drop (MPD). Objective: To examine the relationship between HABD strength and MPD during the static TT and during walking for patients with nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) and healthy controls (CON). A secondary purpose was to examine this relationship in NSLBP after a 3-wk HABD-strengthening program. Design: Quasi-experimental. Setting: Clinical research laboratory. Participants: 20 (10 NSLBP and 10 CON). Intervention: HABD strengthening. Main Outcome Measures: Normalized HABD strength, MPD during TT, and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion during walking. Results: At baseline, the NSLBP subjects were significantly weaker (31%; P = .03) than CON. No differences in maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion (P = .72), right MPD (P = 1.00), or left MPD (P = .40) were measured between groups. During the static TT, nonsignificant correlations were found between left HABD strength and right MPD for NSLBP (r = -.32, P = .36) and CON (r = -.24, P = .48) and between right HABD strength and left MPD for NSLBP (r = -.24, P = .50) and CON (r = -.41, P = .22). Nonsignificant correlations were found between HABD strength and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion for NSLBP (r = -.04, P = .90) and CON (r = -.14, P = .68). After strengthening, NSLBP demonstrated significant increases in HABD strength (12%; P = .02), 48% reduction in pain, and no differences in MPD during static TT and maximal pelvic frontal-plane excursion compared with baseline. Conclusions: HABD strength was poorly correlated to MPD during the static TT and during walking in CON and NSLBP. The results suggest that HABD strength may not be the only contributing factor in controlling pelvic stability, and the static TT has limited use as a measure of HABD function.

The relationship between hip abductor muscle strength and magnitude of pelvic drop following a 3 week strengthening protocol in non-specific low back pain patients.

Purpose: To examine the relationship between hip abductor muscle (HABD) strength and the magnitude of pelvic drop (MPD) for patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and controls (CON) prior to and following a 3-week HABD strengthening protocol. At baseline, we hypothesized that NSLBP patients would exhibit reduced HABD strength and greater MPD compared to CON. Following the protocol, we hypothesized that strength would increase and MPD would decrease. Relevance: The Trendelenburg test (TT) is a common clinical test used to examine the ability of the HABD to maintain horizontal pelvic position during single limb stance. However, no study has specifically tested this theory. Moreover, no study has investigated the relationship between HABD strength and pelvic motion during walking or tested whether increased HABD strength would reduce the MPD. Methods: Quasi-experimental with 3-week exercise intervention. Fifteen NSLBP patients (32.5yrs,range 21-51yrs; VAS baseline: 5.3cm) and 10 CON (29.5yrs,range 22-47yrs) were recruited. Isometric HABD strength was measured using a force dynamometer and the average of three maximal voluntary contractions were normalized to body mass (N/kg). Two-dimensional MPD (degrees) was measured using a 60 Hz camera and was derived from two retroreflective-markers placed on the posterior superior iliac spines. MPD was measured while performing the static TT and while walking and averaged over 10 consecutive footfalls. NSLBP patients completed a 3-week HABD strengthening protocol consisting of 2 open-kinetic-chain exercises then all measures were repeated. Non-parametric analysis was used for group comparisons and correlation analysis. Results: At baseline, the NSLBP patients demonstrated 31% reduced HABD strength (mean=6.6 N/kg) compared to CON (mean=9.5 N/kg: p=0.03) and no significant differences in maximal pelvic frontal plane excursion while walking (NSLBP:mean=8.1°, CON:mean=7.1°: p=0.72). No significant correlations were measured between left HABD strength and right MPD (r=-0.37, p=0.11), or between right HABD strength and left MPD (r=-0.04, p=0.84) while performing the static TT. Following the 3-week strengthening protocol, NSLBP patients demonstrated a 12% improvement in strength (Post:mean=7.4 N/kg: p=0.02), a reduction in pain (VAS followup: 2.8cm), but no significant decreases in MPD while walking (p=0.92). Conclusions: NSLBP patients demonstrated reduced HABD strength at baseline and were able to increase strength and reduce pain in a 3-week period. However, despite increases in HABD strength, the NSLBP group exhibited similar MPD motion during the static TT and while walking compared to baseline and controls. Implications: The results suggest that the HABD alone may not be primarily responsible for controlling a horizontal pelvic position during static and dynamic conditions. Increasing the strength of the hip abductors resulted in a reduction of pain in NSLBP patients providing evidence for further research to identify specific musculature responsible for controlling pelvic motion.

How Can Models of Motor Control Be Useful for Understanding Low Back Pain?

Introduction. The purpose of this chapter is to address the question raised in the chapter title. Specifically, how can models of motor control help us understand low back pain (LBP)? There are several classes of models that have been used in the past for studying spinal loading, stability, and risk of injury (see Reeves and Cholewicki (2003) for a review of past modeling approaches), but for the purpose of this chapter we will focus primarily on models used to assess motor control and its effect on spine behavior. This chapter consists of 4 sections. The first section discusses why a shift in modeling approaches is needed to study motor control issues. We will argue that the current approach for studying the spine system is limited and not well-suited for assessing motor control issues related to spine function and dysfunction. The second section will explore how models can be used to gain insight into how the central nervous system (CNS) controls the spine. This segues segue nicely into the next section that will address how models of motor control can be used in the diagnosis and treatment of LBP. Finally, the last section will deal with the issue of model verification and validity. This issue is important since modelling accuracy is critical for obtaining useful insight into the behavior of the system being studied. This chapter is not intended to be a critical review of the literature, but instead intended to capture some of the discussion raised during the 2009 Spinal Control Symposium, with some elaboration on certain issues. Readers interested in more details are referred to the cited publications.

The mechanical and inflammatory low back pain (MIL) index: development and validation

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was the development of a valid and reliable “Mechanical and Inflammatory Low Back Pain Index” (MIL) for assessment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). This 7-item tool assists practitioners in determining whether symptoms are predominantly mechanical or inflammatory. Methods Participants (n = 170, 96 females, age = 38 ± 14 years-old) with NSLP were referred to two Spanish physiotherapy clinics and completed the MIL and the following measures: the Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ), SF-12 and “Backache Index” (BAI) physical assessment test. For test-retest reliability, 37 consecutive patients were assessed at baseline and three days later during a non-treatment period. Face and content validity, practical characteristics, factor analysis, internal consistency, discriminant validity and convergent validity were assessed from the full sample. Results A total of 27 potential items that had been identified for inclusion were subsequently reduced to 11 by an expert panel. Four items were then removed due to cross-loading under confirmatory factor analysis where a two-factor model yielded a good fit to the data (χ2 = 14.80, df = 13, p = 0.37, CFI = 0.98, and RMSEA = 0.029). The internal consistency was moderate (α = 0.68 for MLBP; 0.72 for ILBP), test-retest reliability high (ICC = 0.91; 95%CI = 0.88-0.93) and discriminant validity good for either MLBP (AUC = 0.74) and ILBP (AUC = 0.92). Convergent validity was demonstrated through similar but weak correlations between the ILBP and both the RMQ and BAI (r = 0.34, p < 0.001) and the MLBP and BAI (r = 0.38, p < 0.001). Conclusions The MIL is a valid and reliable clinical tool for patients with NSLBP that discriminates between mechanical and inflammatory LBP. Keywords: Low back pain; Psychometrics properties; Pain measurement; Screening tool; Inflammatory; Mechanical

Functional and structural of the erector spinae muscle during isometric lumbar extension

Study Design Cross-sectional study. Objectives To compare erector spinae (ES) muscle fatigue between chronic non-specific lower back pain (CNLBP) sufferers and healthy subjects from a biomechanical perspective during fatiguing isometric lumbar extensions. Background Paraspinal muscle maximal contraction and fatigue are used as a functional predictor for disabilities. The simplest method to determine muscle fatigue is by evaluating the evolution during specific contractions, such as isometric contractions. There are no studies that evaluate the evolution of the ES muscle during fatiguing isometric lumbar extensions and analyse functional and architectural variables. Methods In a pre-calibrated system, participants performed a maximal isometric extension of the lumbar spine for 5 and 30 seconds. Functional variables (torque and muscle activation) and architecture (pennation angle and muscle thickness) were measured using a load cell, surface electromyography and ultrasound, respectively. The results were normalised and a reliability study of the ultrasound measurement was made. Results: The ultrasound measurements were highly reliable, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.951 0.981. All measured variables shown significant differences before and after fatiguing isometric lumbar extension. Conclusion During a lumbar isometric extension test, architecture and functional variables of the ES muscle could be analised using ultrasound, surface EMG and load cell. In adition, during an endurance test, ES muscle suffers an acute effect on architectural and functional variables.