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.

Supervised walking in comparison with fitness training for chronic back pain in physiotherapy: results of the SWIFT single-blinded randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17592092)

Effectiveness of brief/minimal contact self-activation interventions that encourage participation in physical activity (PA) for chronic low back pain (CLBP >12 weeks) is unproven. The primary objective of this assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was to investigate the difference between an individualized walking programme (WP), group exercise class (EC), and usual physiotherapy (UP, control) in mean change in functional disability at 6 months. A sample of 246 participants with CLBP aged 18 to 65 years (79 men and 167 women; mean age ± SD: 45.4 ± 11.4 years) were recruited from 5 outpatient physiotherapy departments in Dublin, Ireland. Consenting participants completed self-report measures of functional disability, pain, quality of life, psychosocial beliefs, and PA were randomly allocated to the WP (n = 82), EC (n = 83), or UP (n = 81) and followed up at 3 (81%; n = 200), 6 (80.1%; n = 197), and 12 months (76.4%; n = 188). Cost diaries were completed at all follow-ups. An intention-to-treat analysis using a mixed between-within repeated-measures analysis of covariance found significant improvements over time on the Oswestry Disability Index (Primary Outcome), the Numerical Rating Scale, Fear Avoidance-PA scale, and the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Weighted Health Index (P < 0.05), but no significant between-group differences and small between-group effect sizes (WP: mean difference at 6 months, 6.89 Oswestry Disability Index points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.64 to -10.15; EC: -5.91, CI: -2.68 to -9.15; UP: -5.09, CI: -1.93 to -8.24). The WP had the lowest mean costs and the highest level of adherence. Supervised walking provides an effective alternative to current forms of CLBP management.

Do people with recurrent back pain constrain spinal motion during seated horizontal and downward reaching?

Background: Although the effect of symptomatic back pain on functional movement has been investigated, changes to spinal movement patterns in essentially pain-free people with a history of recurrent back pain are largely unreported. Reaching activities, important for everyday and occupational function, often present problems to such people, but have not been considered in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare the amplitude and timing of spinal and hip motions during two, seated reaching activities in people with and without a history of recurrent low back pain (RLBP).Methods: Spinal and hip motions during reaching downward and across the body, in both directions, were tracked using electromagnetic sensors. Analyses were conducted to explore the amplitudes, velocities and timings of 3D segmental movements and to compare controls with subjects with recurrent, but asymptomatic lumbar or lumbosacral pain.Findings: We detected significant differences in the amplitude and timing of movement in the lower thoracic region, with the RLBP group restricting movement and demonstrating compensatory increased motion at the hip. The lumbar region displayed no significant between-group differences. The order in which the spinal segments achieved peak velocity in cross-reaching was reversed in RLBP compared to controls, with lumbar motion leading in controls and lagging in RLBP.Interpretation: Subjects with a history of RLBP show a number of altered kinematic features during reaching activities which are not related to the presence or intensity of pain, but which suggest adaptive changes to movement control. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Beliefs about back pain predict the recovery rate over 52 consecutive weeks

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the course of low-back pain over 52 weeks following current pain at baseline. Initial beliefs about the inevitability of the pain's negative consequences and fear avoidance beliefs were examined as potential risk factors for persistent low-back pain. METHODS: On a weekly basis over a period of one year, 264 participants reported both the intensity and frequency of their low-back pain and the degree to which it impaired their work performance. In a multilevel regression analysis, predictor variables included initial low-back pain intensity, age, gender, body mass index, anxiety/depression, participation in sport, heavy workload, time (1-52 weeks), and scores on the "back beliefs" and "fear-avoidance beliefs" questionnaires. RESULTS: The group mean values for both the intensity and frequency of weekly low-back pain, and the impairment of work performance due to such pain showed a recovery within the first 12 weeks. In a multilevel regression of 9497 weekly measurements, greater weekly low-back pain and impairment were predicted by higher levels of work-related fear avoidance beliefs. A significant interaction between time and the scores on both the work-related fear-avoidance and back beliefs questionnaires indicated faster recovery and pain relief over time in those who reported less fear-avoidance and fewer negative beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Negative beliefs about the inevitability of adverse consequences of low-back pain and work-related, fear-avoidance beliefs are independent risk factors for poor recovery from low-back pain.

Superior outcomes of decompression with an interlaminar dynamic device versus decompression alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and back pain: a cross registry study.

INTRODUCTION Surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has been associated with poorer outcomes in patients with pronounced low back pain (LBP) as compared to patients with predominant leg pain. This cross registry study assessed potential benefits of the interlaminar coflex® device as an add-on to bony decompression alone. METHODS Patients with lumbar decompression plus coflex® (SWISSspine registry) were compared with decompressed controls (Spine Tango registry). Inclusion criteria were LSS and a preoperative back pain level of ≥5 points. 1:1 propensity score-based matching was performed. Outcome measures were back and leg pain relief, COMI score improvement, patient satisfaction, complication, and revision rates. RESULTS 50 matched pairs without residual significant differences but age were created. At the 7-9 months follow-up interval the coflex® group had higher back (p=0.014) and leg pain relief (p<0.001) and COMI score improvement (p=0.029) than the decompression group. Patient satisfaction was 90% in both groups. No revision was documented in the coflex® and one in the decompression group (2.0%). DISCUSSION In the short-term, lumbar decompression with coflex® compared with decompression alone in patients with LSS and pronounced LBP at baseline is a safe and effective treatment option that appears beneficial regarding clinical and functional outcomes. However, residual confounding of non-measured covariables may have partially influenced our findings. Also, despite careful inclusion and exclusion of cases the cross registry approach introduces a potential for selection bias that we could not totally control for and that makes additional studies necessary.

Do Central Hypersensitivity and Altered Pain Modulation Predict the Course of Chronic Low Back and Neck Pain?

OBJECTIVES:: Widespread central hypersensitivity and altered conditioned pain modulation (CPM) have been documented in chronic pain conditions. Information on their prognostic values is limited. This study tested the hypothesis that widespread central hypersensitivity (WCH) and altered CPM, assessed during the chronic phase of low back and neck pain, predict poor outcome. METHODS:: A total of 169 consecutive patients with chronic low back or neck pain, referred to the pain clinic during 1 year, were analyzed. Pressure pain tolerance threshold at the second toe and tolerance time during cold pressor test at the hand assessed WCH. CPM was measured by the change in pressure pain tolerance threshold (test stimulus) after cold pressor test (conditioning stimulus). A structured telephone interview was performed 12 to 15 months after testing to record outcome parameters. Linear regression models were used, with average and maximum pain intensity of the last 24 hours at follow-up as endpoints. Multivariable analyses included sex, age, catastrophizing scale, Beck Depression Inventory, pain duration, intake of opioids, and type of pain syndrome. RESULTS:: Statistically significant reductions from baseline to follow-up were observed in pain intensity (P<0.001). No evidence for an association between the measures of WCH or CPM and intensity of chronic pain at follow-up was found. DISCUSSION:: A major predictive value of the measures that we used is unlikely. Future studies adopting other assessment modalities and possibly standardized treatments are needed to further elucidate the prognostic value of WCH and altered CPM in chronic pain.

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.

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.

“Well this is it. Just get on with it”: Pain willingness and activity engagement in people with chronic pain

Pain is recognised as a problem of significant concern worldwide and in the latest Global Burden of Disease Study, low back pain was identified as the biggest contributor worldwide to Years Lived with Disability. There is evidence to suggest that people who accept their chronic pain have a higher quality of life, lower levels of disability and distress, and function better emotionally, socially and physically. Findings on the specific pathways linking pain acceptance to quality of life outcomes are less clear. the two widely accepted pain acceptance factors, pain willingness and activity engagement, have not been well explored in qualitative studies on acceptance of chronic pain. To address this deficit in the literature, the current study has two related aims: 1) to explore pain willingness and activity engagement in the lives of people with chronic pain, and ; 2) to find out what people believe helps them to successfully get on with life in spite of chronic pain.

Allopregnanolone Levels Are Inversely Associated with Self-Reported Pain Symptoms in U.S. Iraq and Afghanistan-Era Veterans: Implications for Biomarkers and Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pain symptoms are common among Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans, many of whom continue to experience persistent pain symptoms despite multiple pharmacological interventions. Preclinical data suggest that neurosteroids such as allopregnanolone demonstrate pronounced analgesic properties, and thus represent logical biomarker candidates and therapeutic targets for pain. Allopregnanolone is also a positive GABAA receptor modulator with anxiolytic, anticonvulsant, and neuroprotective actions in rodent models. We previously reported inverse associations between serum allopregnanolone levels and self-reported pain symptom severity in a pilot study of 82 male veterans. METHODS: The current study investigates allopregnanolone levels in a larger cohort of 485 male Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans to attempt to replicate these initial findings. Pain symptoms were assessed by items from the Symptom Checklist-90-R (SCL-90-R) querying headache, chest pain, muscle soreness, and low back pain over the past 7 days. Allopregnanolone levels were quantified by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Associations between pain ratings and allopregnanolone levels were examined with Poisson regression analyses, controlling for age and smoking. Bivariate nonparametric Mann–Whitney analyses examining allopregnanolone levels across high and low levels of pain were also conducted. Allopregnanolone levels were inversely associated with muscle soreness [P = 0.0028], chest pain [P = 0.032], and aggregate total pain (sum of all four pain items) [P = 0.0001]. In the bivariate analyses, allopregnanolone levels were lower in the group reporting high levels of muscle soreness [P = 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are generally consistent with our prior pilot study and suggest that allopregnanolone may function as an endogenous analgesic. Thus, exogenous supplementation with allopregnanolone could have therapeutic potential. The characterization of neurosteroid profiles may also have biomarker utility.