An overview of conservative treatment for lower back pain

This article summarizes the available evidence on the management of patients with subacute or chronic low back pain. The largest part is devoted to nonspecific low back pain but the models of spinal stenosis and disk herniation/sciatica are also specifically addressed. The authors point out the limited evidence available and the importance of a tailored approach for the individual patient. As the effect sizes of most therapies are rather small (close to that of a placebo), patients' preferences and other variables important for individualized management are highlighted. The task for the practitioner is difficult and awareness of this is important. Some speculation regarding potential future ways of improving patient care are presented.

Manual therapy followed by specific active exercises versus a placebo followed by specific active exercises on the improvement of functional disability in patients with chronic non specific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical recommendations still propose active exercises (AE) for CNSLBP. However, acceptance of exercises by patients may be limited by pain-related manifestations. Current evidences suggest that manual therapy (MT) induces an immediate analgesic effect through neurophysiologic mechanisms at peripheral, spinal and cortical levels. The aim of this pilot study was first, to assess whether MT has an immediate analgesic effect, and second, to compare the lasting effect on functional disability of MT plus AE to sham therapy (ST) plus AE. METHODS: Forty-two CNSLBP patients without co-morbidities, randomly distributed into 2 treatment groups, received either spinal manipulation/mobilization (first intervention) plus AE (MT group; n = 22), or detuned ultrasound (first intervention) plus AE (ST group; n = 20). Eight therapeutic sessions were delivered over 4 to 8 weeks. Immediate analgesic effect was obtained by measuring pain intensity (Visual Analogue Scale) before and immediately after the first intervention of each therapeutic session. Pain intensity, disability (Oswestry Disability Index), fear-avoidance beliefs (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire), erector spinae and abdominal muscles endurance (Sorensen and Shirado tests) were assessed before treatment, after the 8th therapeutic session, and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Thirty-seven subjects completed the study. MT intervention induced a better immediate analgesic effect that was independent from the therapeutic session (VAS mean difference between interventions: -0.8; 95% CI: -1.2 to -0.3). Independently from time after treatment, MT + AE induced lower disability (ODI mean group difference: -7.1; 95% CI: -12.8 to -1.5) and a trend to lower pain (VAS mean group difference: -1.2; 95% CI: -2.4 to -0.30). Six months after treatment, Shirado test was better for the ST group (Shirado mean group difference: -61.6; 95% CI: -117.5 to -5.7). Insufficient evidence for group differences was found in remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the immediate analgesic effect of MT over ST. Followed by specific active exercises, it reduces significantly functional disability and tends to induce a larger decrease in pain intensity, compared to a control group. These results confirm the clinical relevance of MT as an appropriate treatment for CNSLBP. Its neurophysiologic mechanisms at cortical level should be investigated more thoroughly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: NCT01496144.

Appropriateness criteria for surgery improve clinical outcomes in patients with low back pain and/or sciatica.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled, observational outcome study using clinical, radiographic, and patient/physician-based questionnaire data, with patient outcomes at 12 months follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To validate appropriateness criteria for low back surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Most surgical treatment failures are attributed to poor patient selection, but no widely accepted consensus exists on detailed indications for appropriate surgery. METHODS: Appropriateness criteria for low back surgery have been developed by a multispecialty panel using the RAND appropriateness method. Based on panel criteria, a prospective study compared outcomes of patients appropriately and inappropriately treated at a single institution with 12 months follow-up assessment. Included were patients with low back pain and/or sciatica referred to the neurosurgical department. Information about symptoms, neurologic signs, the health-related quality of life (SF-36), disability status (Roland-Morris), and pain intensity (VAS) was assessed at baseline, at 6 months, and at 12 months follow-up. The appropriateness criteria were administered prospectively to each clinical situation and outside of the clinical setting, with the surgeon and patients blinded to the results of the panel decision. The patients were further stratified into 2 groups: appropriate treatment group (ATG) and inappropriate treatment group (ITG). RESULTS: Overall, 398 patients completed all forms at 12 months. Treatment was considered appropriate for 365 participants and inappropriate for 33 participants. The mean improvement in the SF-36 physical component score at 12 months was significantly higher in the ATG (mean: 12.3 points) than in the ITG (mean: 6.8 points) (P = 0.01), as well as the mean improvement in the SF-36 mental component score (ATG mean: 5.0 points; ITG mean: -0.5 points) (P = 0.02). Improvement was also significantly higher in the ATG for the mean VAS back pain (ATG mean: 2.3 points; ITG mean: 0.8 points; P = 0.02) and Roland-Morris disability score (ATG mean: 7.7 points; ITG mean: 4.2 points; P = 0.004). The ATG also had a higher improvement in mean VAS for sciatica (4.0 points) than the ITG (2.8 points), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.08). The SF-36 General Health score declined in both groups after 12 months, however, the decline was worse in the ITG (mean decline: 8.2 points) than in the ATG (mean decline: 1.2 points) (P = 0.04). Overall, in comparison to ITG patients, ATG patients had significantly higher improvement at 12 months, both statistically and clinically. CONCLUSION: In comparison to previously reported literature, our study is the first to assess the utility of appropriateness criteria for low back surgery at 1-year follow-up with multiple outcome dimensions. Our results confirm the hypothesis that application of appropriateness criteria can significantly improve patient outcomes.

Evolution of endurance during a multidisciplinary treatment of chronic low back pain and its influence of work capacity

Introduction: Low back pain is a common disorder touching up to 80% of the population, with redundancies of up to 70%. A small proportion would go on to develop chronic low back pain (LBP) with reduced work capacity and they would count for the majority of the costs. Up to day, a multi-disciplinary treatment program is one of the best approaches. In the program one of the mile-stones is restoration of function. The aim of this study was to follow patients, according to the endurance change after the program and its influence on workability during one year after inclusion in a such program. Method: Patients were following a multidisciplinary treatment for 3 weeks including physiotherapy, occupation measures combined with an educational program with behavioural and psychological interventions on an outpatient program. We studied the endurance with the help of the Bruce test, accomplished at the beginning and at the end of the program. On the other hand the patients filled out pain questionnaires and PACT score according their own impression on workability. Results: There were a clear relation between the increase in the cardiovascular endurance and the increased workability. Almost every patient presented an increase in the VO2 max, even though the workability did not follow. This increase were associated with a decrease in pain apprehension. Conclusion: A multidisciplinary treatment program, teaching the patients how to care with their pain and to accept it even if it persist is successful in lowering the global pain. If the program allows the patients to strengthen the endurance, the workability will increase in parallel. In this way the patients were able to reduce the consummation of medicaments and to increase the work capacity.

A novel tool for the assessment of pain: validation in low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Adequate pain assessment is critical for evaluating the efficacy of analgesic treatment in clinical practice and during the development of new therapies. Yet the currently used scores of global pain intensity fail to reflect the diversity of pain manifestations and the complexity of underlying biological mechanisms. We have developed a tool for a standardized assessment of pain-related symptoms and signs that differentiates pain phenotypes independent of etiology. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a structured interview (16 questions) and a standardized bedside examination (23 tests), we prospectively assessed symptoms and signs in 130 patients with peripheral neuropathic pain caused by diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or radicular low back pain (LBP), and in 57 patients with non-neuropathic (axial) LBP. A hierarchical cluster analysis revealed distinct association patterns of symptoms and signs (pain subtypes) that characterized six subgroups of patients with neuropathic pain and two subgroups of patients with non-neuropathic pain. Using a classification tree analysis, we identified the most discriminatory assessment items for the identification of pain subtypes. We combined these six interview questions and ten physical tests in a pain assessment tool that we named Standardized Evaluation of Pain (StEP). We validated StEP for the distinction between radicular and axial LBP in an independent group of 137 patients. StEP identified patients with radicular pain with high sensitivity (92%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 83%-97%) and specificity (97%; 95% CI 89%-100%). The diagnostic accuracy of StEP exceeded that of a dedicated screening tool for neuropathic pain and spinal magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, we were able to reproduce subtypes of radicular and axial LBP, underscoring the utility of StEP for discerning distinct constellations of symptoms and signs. CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel method of identifying pain subtypes that we believe reflect underlying pain mechanisms. We demonstrate that this new approach to pain assessment helps separate radicular from axial back pain. Beyond diagnostic utility, a standardized differentiation of pain subtypes that is independent of disease etiology may offer a unique opportunity to improve targeted analgesic treatment.

Factors influencing interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working in private settings with people with low back pain: a qualitative study

Purpose: Collaboration and interprofessional practices are highly valued in health systems everywhere, partly based on the rationale that they improve outcomes of care for people with complex health problems, such as low back pain. Research in the area of low back pain also supports the involvement of different health professionals in the interventions for people who present this condition. The aim of this studywas to identify factors influencing the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working in private settings with people with low back pain. Relevance: Physiotherapists, like other health professionals, are encouraged to engage in interprofessional practices in their dailywork. However, to date, very little is known of their interprofessional practices, especially in private settings. Understanding physiotherapists' interprofessional practices and their influencing factors will notably advance knowledge relating to the organisation of physiotherapy services for people with low back pain. Participants: Participants in this study were 13 physiotherapists including 10 women and 3 men, having between 3 and 22 years of professional experience, and working in one of 10 regions of the Province of Quebec (Canada). In order to obtain maximal variation in the perspectives, participants were selected using a recruitment matrix including three criteria: duration of professional experience, work location, and physical proximity with other professionals. Methods: Thiswas a descriptive qualitative study using faceto- face semi-structured interviews as the main method of data collection. An interview guide was developed based on an evidence-derived frame of reference. Each interview lasted between 55 and 95 minutes and was transcribed verbatim. Analysis: Qualitative analyses took the form of content analysis, encompassing data coding and general thematic regrouping. NVivo version 8 was used to assist data organisation and analysis. Results: Multiple factors influencing the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists were identified. The main factors include the consulting person's health condition, the extent of knowledge on health professionals' roles and fields of practice, the proximity and availability of professional resources, as well as daily work schedules. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the influence of multiple factors on physiotherapists' interprofessional practices, including professional practice and organisational issues. However, further research on the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists is still required. Research priorities targeting the views of other health professionals, as well as those of services users, would enhance our comprehension of interprofessional practices of physiotherapists. Implications: This study provides new insights that improve our understanding of the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working in private settings with people with low back pain, more specifically on the factors influencing these practices. Based on our findings, implementing changes such as improving current and future health professionals' knowledge of the fields and roles of other health professionals through training may contribute to positively influencing interprofessional practices. Keywords: Interprofessional practices; Private practice; Low back pain Funding acknowledgements: This research was supported in part by a B.E. Schnurr Memorial Fund Research Grant administered by the Physiotherapy Foundation of Canada, as well as from a clinical research partnership in physiotherapy between the Quebec Rehabilitation Research Network (REPAR) and the Ordre professionnel de la physiothérapie du Québec (OPPQ). KP received doctoral-level scholarships from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST). CE Dionne is a FRSQ senior Research Scholar. Ethics approval: This project was approved by the ethics research committee of the Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec.

Functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation versus outpatient physiotherapy for non specific low back pain: randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: In recent decades the treatment of non-specific low back pain has turned to active modalities, some of which were based on cognitive-behavioural principles. Non-randomised studies clearly favour functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation over outpatient physiotherapy. However, systematic reviews and meta-analysis provide contradictory evidence regarding the effects on return to work and functional status. The aim of the present randomised study was to compare long-term functional and work status after 3-week functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation or 18 supervised outpatient physiotherapy sessions. METHODS: 109 patients with non-specific low back pain were randomised to either a 3-week functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme, including physical and ergonomic training, psychological pain management, back school and information, or 18 sessions of active outpatient physiotherapy over 9 weeks. Primary outcomes were functional disability (Oswestry) and work status. Secondary outcomes were lifting capacity (Spinal Function Sort and PILE test), lumbar range-of-motion (modified-modified Schöber and fingertip-to-floor tests), trunk muscle endurance (Shirado and Biering-Sörensen tests) and aerobic capacity (modified Bruce test). RESULTS: Oswestry disability index was improved to a significantly greater extent after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation compared to outpatient physiotherapy at follow-up of 9 weeks (P = 0.012), 9 months (P = 0.023) and 12 months (P = 0.011). Work status was significantly improved after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation only (P = 0.012), resulting in a significant difference compared to outpatient physiotherapy at 12 months' follow-up (P = 0.012). Secondary outcome results were more contrasted. CONCLUSIONS: Functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation was better than outpatient physiotherapy in improving functional and work status. From an economic point of view, these results should be backed up by a cost-effectiveness study.

Epidemiologic study of low back pain in 1398 Swiss conscripts between 1985 and 1992.

The two objectives of this study, based on a sample of 1398 Swiss army conscripts born in 1966 who participated in a first study in 1985, were to measure the prevalence of low back pain (LBP) at age 26 years and its incidence between 19 and 26 years and to analyze the relationship between LBP and occupational, nonoccupational, or physical risk factors. The lifetime prevalence of LBP at age 26 was 69.1% and the incidence of LBP between 19 and 26, 44.7%. A history of LBP or a pathological physical examination result at age 19 did not predict the prevalence or the incidence at age 26. Standing, twisting, vibration, and heavy work were significantly associated with chronic LBP and/or the 1-year prevalence of LBP at age 26 (P<0.05). The evolution of sport and leisure-time activities from age 19 to 26 did not differ between people with or without LBP. The ergonomic organization of the workplace should represent a major element of future strategies to prevent LBP.

Approche multidisciptinaire des coûts humains des lombalgies [Human cost of low back pain: a multi-disciplinary approach]

The valuation of human costs is a necessity, but this task poses many problems of method. A team made of a philosopher, a psychologist and a physician has been working with economist researchers in order to look into the meaning that the preferences announced at the time of the inquiries on human costs by QALY methods could assume. These methods are often used to obtain a valuation of the impact of a health attack on people's quality of life. The methods--in the frame of the argument assumed by the economic theory on well-being--hypothesize that people's choices depend mainly on cognitive work. The qualitative interviews show that the psychological construction process for the announced preferences largely overlap this frame. In this paper the authors hastily tackle the factors which have an effect on the preferences. They conclude that the QALY methods don't seem to be able to assess the quality of life nori to valuate the damage that the quality of life could include.

Once-yearly zoledronic acid and days of disability, bed rest, and back pain: randomized, controlled HORIZON Pivotal Fracture Trial.

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of once-yearly zoledronic acid on the number of days of back pain and the number of days of disability (ie, limited activity and bed rest) owing to back pain or fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 240 clinical centers in 27 countries. Participants included 7736 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to receive either a single 15-minute intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid (5 mg) or placebo at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. The main outcome measures were self-reported number of days with back pain and the number of days of limited activity and bed rest owing to back pain or a fracture, and this was assessed every 3 months over a 3-year period. Our results show that although the incidence of back pain was high in both randomized groups, women randomized to zoledronic acid experienced, on average, 18 fewer days of back pain compared with placebo over the course of the trial (p = .0092). The back pain among women randomized to zoledronic acid versus placebo resulted in 11 fewer days of limited activity (p = .0017). In Cox proportional-hazards models, women randomized to zoledronic acid were about 6% less likely to experience 7 or more days of back pain [relative risk (RR) = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-0.99] or limited activity owing to back pain (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.87-1.00). Women randomized to zoledronic acid were significantly less likely to experience 7 or more bed-rest days owing to a fracture (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.72) and 7 or more limited-activity days owing to a fracture (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.78). Reductions in back pain with zoledronic acid were independent of incident fracture. Our conclusion is that in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, a once-yearly infusion with zoledronic acid over a 3-year period significantly reduced the number of days that patients reported back pain, limited activity owing to back pain, and limited activity and bed rest owing to a fracture.

Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in patients with low back pain.

PURPOSE: To conduct a cross-cultural adaptation of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) into French according to established guidelines. METHODS: Seventy outpatients with chronic low back pain were recruited from six spine centres in Switzerland and France. They completed the newly translated COMI, and the Roland Morris disability (RMQ), Dallas Pain (DPQ), adjectival pain rating scale, WHO Quality of Life, and EuroQoL-5D questionnaires. After ~14 days RMQ and COMI were completed again to assess reproducibility; a transition question (7-point Likert scale; "very much worse" through "no change" to "very much better") indicated any change in status since the first questionnaire. RESULTS: COMI whole scores displayed no floor effects and just 1.5% ceiling effects. The scores for the individual COMI items correlated with their corresponding full-length reference questionnaire with varying strengths of correlation (0.33-0.84, P < 0.05). COMI whole scores showed a very good correlation with the "multidimensional" DPQ global score (Rho = 0.71). 55 patients (79%) returned a second questionnaire with no/minimal change in their back status. The reproducibility of individual COMI 5-point items was good, with test-retest differences within one grade ranging from 89% for 'social/work disability' to 98% for 'symptom-specific well-being'. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the COMI whole score was 0.85 (95% CI 0.76-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the French version of this short, multidimensional questionnaire showed good psychometric properties, comparable to those reported for German and Spanish versions. The French COMI represents a valuable tool for future multicentre clinical studies and surgical registries (e.g. SSE Spine Tango) in French-speaking countries.

An easy functional capacity evaluation in chronic low back pain

Lifting is said to be on of the major risk factors for the onset of low back pain, several different measures has been developed to study this. Several programs are available in order to measure these components, or to determine the ability of an individual to perform a certain job or to discover if the job creates dangerous positions for the worker. In these different fields reliable and valid instruments exist but they are costly and time spending. We present a simplified functional capacity measuring that we use daily in practise. Method: 280 patients have been evaluated on this base. The majority was referred to multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment. The patients had recurrent back problems for months or years. Inclusion criteria were between 18 and 64 years, currently of work, no work compensation. Exclusion criteria were chronic low back pain with a specific cause. They followed a one-hour evaluation test as a functional capacity evaluation at the end of the multidisciplinary treatment period, it was compared to the PILE-test done at the beginning and at the end. Results: We included 280 subjects: 160 men and 120 women. Mean age 43.6 by the women and 44 years by the men. We studied the caring foot-hip, hip-shoulder, 5 m carrying, pushing and tiring and the global weight carried during the test. We found this global value to be 696 kg by men and 422 kg by women suffering from chronic lumbar pain. The increase in this value had a clear incidence on a greater work ability, as had a decrease. Conclusions: We were able to develop a lifting capacity program that is easy to reproduce and not expensive, giving us the possibility to have an idea on how to reorient the patients according to their work place and their capacities. We could also have an information of work performance and power consumption. It should be more tested and compared to standard capacity in the healthy population.