946 resultados para Low back-related leg pain
Resumo:
Fibromyalgia is associated with an increased rate of mortality from suicide. In fact, this disease is associated with several characteristics that are linked to an increased risk of suicidal behaviors, such as being female and experiencing chronic pain, psychological distress, and sleep disturbances. However, the literature concerning suicidal behaviors and their risk factors in fibromyalgia is sparse. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the prevalence of suicidal ideation and the risk of suicide in a sample of patients with fibromyalgia compared with a sample of healthy subjects and a sample of patients with chronic low-back pain. We also aimed to evaluate the relevance of pain intensity, depression, and sleep quality as variables related to suicidal ideation and risks. Logistic regression was applied to estimate the likelihood of suicidal ideation and the risk of suicide adjusted by age and sex. We also used two logistic regression models using age, sex, pain severity score, depression severity, sleep quality, and disease state as independent variables and using the control group as a reference. Forty-four patients with fibromyalgia, 32 patients with low-back pain, and 50 controls were included. Suicidal ideation, measured with item 9 of the Beck Depression Inventory, was almost absent among the controls and was low among patients with low-back pain; however, suicidal ideation was prominent among patients with fibromyalgia (P<0.0001). The risk of suicide, measured with the Plutchik Suicide Risk Scale, was also higher among patients with fibromyalgia than in patients with low-back pain or in controls (P<0.0001). The likelihood for suicidal ideation and the risk of suicide were higher among patients with fibromyalgia (odds ratios of 26.9 and 48.0, respectively) than in patients with low-back pain (odds ratios 4.6 and 4.7, respectively). Depression was the only factor associated with suicidal ideation or the risk of suicide.
Resumo:
STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was performed. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the extent of low back pain as a public health problem. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Health surveys converge on very high estimates of low back pain in general populations, but few studies have included severity criteria in their definition and conclusions. Because it is unlikely that interventions will influence the prevalence of minimal and infrequent symptoms, greater attention should be paid to characteristics of low back pain that indicate some impact on the life of survey respondents. METHODS: Two regions participated in the MONICA (MONitoring of trends and determinants in CArdiovascular disease) project in Switzerland. Participants randomly selected from the general population completed a standard self-administered questionnaire on cardiovascular risk factors. A special section on low back pain was added in the third (1992-1993) MONICA survey and completed by 3227 participants. RESULTS: A regional difference found in the 12-month prevalence rate disappeared with the inclusion of severity criteria. Low back pain over more than seven cumulated days was reported among men by 20.2% (age range, 25-34 years) to 28.5% (age range, 65-74 years), respectively, among women by 31.1% to 38.5%. Similar rates of reduction in activity (professional, housekeeping, and leisure time) and medical consultation (conventional and nonconventional) motivated by low back pain characterized the two participating regions. The cumulative duration of pain was related to all the indicators showing the impact of low back pain on everyday life. CONCLUSIONS: Determining the cumulative duration of low back pain over the preceding year is a straightforward task, and a cutoff at 1 week seems appropriate for distinguishing between low- and high-impact low back pain.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Collaboration and interprofessional practices are highly valued in health systems, because they are thought to improve outcomes of care for persons with complex health problems, such as low back pain. Physiotherapists, like all health providers, are encouraged to take part in interprofessional practices. However, little is known about these practices, especially for private sector physiotherapists. This study aimed to: 1) explore how physiotherapists working in the private sector with adults with low back pain describe their interprofessional practices, 2) identify factors that influence their interprofessional practices, and 3) identify their perceived effects. METHODS: Participants were 13 physiotherapists, 10 women/3 men, having between 3 and 21 years of professional experience. For this descriptive qualitative study, we used face-to-face semi-structured interviews and conducted content analysis encompassing data coding and thematic regrouping. RESULTS: Physiotherapists described interprofessional practices heterogeneously, including numerous processes such as sharing information and referring. Factors that influenced physiotherapists' interprofessional practices were related to patients, providers, organizations, and wider systems (e.g. professional system). Physiotherapists mostly viewed positive effects of interprofessional practices, including elements such as gaining new knowledge as a provider and being valued in one's own role, as well as improvements in overall treatment and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study offers new insights into the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working with adults with low back pain, as perceived by the physiotherapists' themselves. Based on the results, the development of strategies aiming to increase interprofessionalism in the management of low back pain would most likely require taking into consideration factors associated with patients, providers, the organizations within which they work, and the wider systems.
Resumo:
STUDY DESIGN. Observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE. To investigate spinal coordination during preferred and fast speed walking in pain-free subjects with and without a history of recurrent low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Dynamic motion of the spine during walking is compromised in the presence of back pain (LBP), but its analysis often presents some challenges. The coexistence of significant symptoms may change gait because of pain or adaptation of the musculoskeletal structures or both. A history of LBP without the overlay of a current symptomatic episode allows a better model in which to explore the impact on spinal coordination during walking. METHODS. Spinal and lower limb segmental motions were tracked using electromagnetic sensors. Analyses were conducted to explore the synchrony and spatial coordination of the segments and to compare the control and subjects with LBP. RESULTS. We found no apparent differences between the groups for either overall amplitude of motion or most indicators of coordination in the lumbar region; however, there were significant postural differences in the mid-stance phase and other indicators of less phase locking in controls compared with subjects with LBP. The lower thoracic spinal segment was more affected by the history of back pain than the lumbar segment. CONCLUSION. Although small, there were indicators that alterations in spinal movement and coordination in subjects with recurrent LBP were due to adaptive changes rather than the presence of pain. © 2013, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Resumo:
Background: Investigation and discrimination of neuromuscular variables related to the complex aetiology of low back pain could contribute to clarifying the factors associated with symptoms. Objective: Analysing the discriminative power of neuromuscular variables in low back pain. Methods: This study compared muscle endurance, proprioception and isometric trunk assessments between women with low back pain (LBP, n=14) and a control group (CG, n=14). Multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant analysis of the data were performed. Results: The muscle endurance time (s) was shorter in the LBP group than in the CG (p=0.004) with values of 85.81 (37.79) and 134.25 (43.88), respectively. The peak torque (Nm/kg) for trunk extension was 2.48 (0.69) in the LBP group and 3.56 (0.88) in the GG (p=0.001); for trunk flexion, the mean torque was 1.49 (0.40) in the LBP group and 1.85 (0.39) in the CG (p=0.023). The repositioning error (degrees) before the endurance test was 2.66 (1.36) in the LBP group and 2.41 (1.46) in the CG (p=0.664), and after the endurance test, it was 2.95 (1.94) in the LBP group and 2.00 (1.16) in the CG (p=0.06). Furthermore, the variables showed discrimination between the groups (p=0.007), with 78.6% of the individuals with low back pain correctly classified in the LBP group. In turn, variables related to muscle activation showed no difference in discrimination between the groups (p=0.369). Conclusion: Based on these findings, the clinical management of low back pain should consist of both resistance and strength training, particularly in the extensor muscles.
Resumo:
Objective: To determine the prevalence of low back pain and some related variables among adults of both genders. Methods: Was conduct a cross-sectional study of population-based in the urban area of Presidente Prudente, São Paulo. The sample consisted of 743 adult residents for over two years in this city. Low back pain, quality of sleep and physical activity were collected through face to face interview at the residence of respondents. Was used the chi-square test to analyze the association between variables, later was created tree multivariate models with hierarchical inclusion of confounding factors. Results: The prevalence of low back pain reported last year was 50.2% (95% CI: 46.6, 53.8), and the last week 32.3% (95% CI: 28.9, 35.6). Was association among low back pain and females (p-value = 0.031), older age, lower education, altered sleep and overweight, the adjusted model found that people over the age of 45 years (45 to 59.9 years, OR = 13.1 [1.72-98.5] and ≥ 60 years, OR = 9.10 [1.15-71.7]), with some alteration of sleep (OR = 3.21 [1.84-5.61]) and obese (OR = 2.33 [1:26 to 4:33]) seems to be a risk group for low back pain. Conclusion: The prevalence of low back pain is high and obese people aged over 45 years, with any sleep disturbance are a group at higher risk for low back pain.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The relationships between obesity and low back pain (LBP) and lumbar disc degeneration (LDD) remain unclear. It is possible that familial factors, including genetics and early environment, affect these relationships.PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between obesity-related measures (eg, weight, body mass index [BMI]) and LBP and LDD using twin studies, where the effect of genetics and early environment can be controlled.STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis.METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched from the earliest records to August 2014. All cross-sectional and longitudinal observational twin studies identified by the search strategy were considered for inclusion. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility, conducted the quality assessment, and extracted the data. Metaanalyses (fixed or random effects, as appropriate) were used to pool studies'estimates of association.RESULTS: In total, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Five studies were included in the LBP analysis and seven in the LDD analysis. For the LBP analysis, pooling of the five studies showed that the risk of having LBP for individuals with the highest levels of BMI or weight was almost twice that of people with a lower BMI (odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-2.0; I-2 = 0%). A dose-response relationship was also identified. When genetics and the effects of a shared early environment were adjusted for using a within-pair twin case-control analysis, pooling of three studies showed a reduced but statistically positive association between obesity and prevalence of LBP (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.1; I-2 = 0%). However, the association was further diminished and not significant (OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.8-2.3; I-2 = 0%) when pooling included two studies on monozygotic twin pairs only. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria for LDD. When familial factors were not controlled for, body weight was positively associated with LDD in all five cross-sectional studies. Only two cross-sectional studies investigated the relationship between obesity-related measures and LDD accounting for familial factors, and the results were conflicting. One longitudinal study in LBP and three longitudinal studies in LDD found no increase in risk in obese individuals, whether or not familial factors were controlled for.CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this review suggest that genetics and early environment are possible mechanisms underlying the relationship between obesity and LBP; however, a direct causal link between these conditions appears to be weak. Further longitudinal studies using the twin design are needed to better understand the complex mechanisms underlying the associations between obesity, LBP, and LDD.
Resumo:
Using latent class analysis (LCA), a previous study on patients attending primary care identified four courses of low back pain (LBP) over the subsequent 6 months. To date, no studies have used longitudinal pain recordings to examine the "natural" course of recurrent and chronic LBP in a population-based sample of individuals. This study examines the course of LBP in the general population and elaborates on the stability and criterion-related validity of the clusters derived. A random sample of 400 individuals reporting LBP in a population-based study was asked to complete a comprehensive questionnaire at the start and end of the year's survey, and 52 weekly pain diaries in between. The latter were analyzed using LCA. 305 individuals returned more than 50% of the diaries. Four clusters were identified (severe persistent, moderate persistent, mild persistent, and fluctuating). The clusters differed significantly with regards to pain and disability. Assessment of cluster stability showed that a considerable proportion of patients in the "fluctuating" group changed their classification over time. Three of the four clusters describing the typical course of pain matched the clusters described previously for patients in primary care. Due to the population-based design, this study achieves, for the first time, a close insight into the "natural" course of chronic and recurrent low back pain, including individuals that did not necessarily visit the general practitioner. The findings will help to understand better the nature of this pain in the general population.
Resumo:
This study examines predictors of sickness absence in patients presenting to a health practitioner with acute/ subacute low back pain (LBP). Aims of this study were to identify baseline-variables that detect patients with a new LBP episode at risk of sickness absence and to identify prognostic models for sickness absence at different time points after initial presentation. Prospective cohort study investigating 310 patients presenting to a health practitioner with a new episode of LBP at baseline, three-, six-, twelve-week and six-month follow-up, addressing work-related, psychological and biomedical factors. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify baseline-predictors of sickness absence at different time points. Prognostic models comprised 'job control', 'depression' and 'functional limitation' as predictive baseline-factors of sickness absence at three and six-week follow-up with 'job control' being the best single predictor (OR 0.47; 95%CI 0.26-0.87). The six-week model explained 47% of variance of sickness absence at six-week follow-up (p<0.001). The prediction of sickness absence beyond six-weeks is limited, and health practitioners should re-assess patients at six weeks, especially if they have previously been identified as at risk of sickness absence. This would allow timely intervention with measures designed to reduce the likelihood of prolonged sickness absence.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on differences across health care systems in choice and outcome of the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) with spinal surgery and conservative treatment as the main options. At least six randomised controlled trials comparing these two options have been performed; they show conflicting results without clear-cut evidence for superior effectiveness of any of the evaluated interventions and could not address whether treatment effect varied across patient subgroups. Cost-utility analyses display inconsistent results when comparing surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP. Due to its higher feasibility, we chose to conduct a prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: This study aims to examine if1. Differences across health care systems result in different treatment outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP2. Patient characteristics (work-related, psychological factors, etc.) and co-interventions (physiotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, return-to-work programs, etc.) modify the outcome of treatment for CLBP3. Cost-utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years differs between surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP.This study will recruit 1000 patients from orthopaedic spine units, rehabilitation centres, and pain clinics in Switzerland and New Zealand. Effectiveness will be measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline and after six months. The change in ODI will be the primary endpoint of this study.Multiple linear regression models will be used, with the change in ODI from baseline to six months as the dependent variable and the type of health care system, type of treatment, patient characteristics, and co-interventions as independent variables. Interactions will be incorporated between type of treatment and different co-interventions and patient characteristics. Cost-utility will be measured with an index based on EQol-5D in combination with cost data. CONCLUSION: This study will provide evidence if differences across health care systems in the outcome of treatment of CLBP exist. It will classify patients with CLBP into different clinical subgroups and help to identify specific target groups who might benefit from specific surgical or conservative interventions. Furthermore, cost-utility differences will be identified for different groups of patients with CLBP. Main results of this study should be replicated in future studies on CLBP.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of beliefs about low back pain (LBP) on reduced productivity at work ("presenteeism") caused by LBP. METHODS: Two thousand five hundred seven individuals completed the Back Beliefs Questionnaire, the Fear Avoidance Beliefs questionnaire (FABQ), and questions about LBP-related work-absence, reduced work-productivity, pain, comorbidity, and demographics. RESULTS: Six hundred seventy (25%) individuals were of working age, employed and reported current LBP. Univariate models showed beliefs were more "negative" in individuals with work-absence and reduced productivity (P = 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, controlling for confounders, "FABQwork" was a unique predictor of both absenteeism and presenteeism (each, P = 0.0001), though with small effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Negative beliefs about LBP are associated with both work absence and reduced work-productivity. Further investigations should examine their potential as a target for educational interventions when considering initiatives to reduce the socioeconomic costs of LBP.
Resumo:
Diagnostic pitfalls about a specific case of low back pain Low back pain is classified into two principle categories: specific and non specific. This difference is important in terms of screening, medical care and treatment. Specific low back pain has various etiologies that imply specific treatment. This report describes one case of rare specific low back pain. The purpose of this article is to highlight the pitfalls that can represent such a common pathology, to show that obtaining an early diagnosis can be challenging, and finally to prevent care providers from stereotypes related to low back pain management.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: There is little knowledge in the literature on the role of time-related variables for the prognosis of acute and subacute low back pain (LBP). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the relationship between time-related LBP characteristics and prognostic factors for acute/subacute LBP. METHODS: We performed a prospective inception cohort study of 315 patients attending a health practitioner for acute/subacute LBP or recurrent LBP. One-tailed correlations were conducted between patient characteristics and time-related variables. RESULTS: The pattern of correlation between risk factors for and resources against persistent LBP differed between three time-related variables. 'Subacute LBP' and 'delayed presentation' were positively associated with psychological factors. Both indicators were negatively correlated with resources against development of persistent LBP. Moreover, 'delayed presentation' was related positively with occupational stressors. In contrast, 'recurrent LBP' was only related to more impaired health-related factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with current LBP waiting longer until seeking help in primary care have a more disadvantageous profile of occupational and psychological risk factors and lower resource levels. A similar but less pronounced pattern occurred in those with subacute LBP compared to those with acute LBP. Consideration of time characteristics of LBP may help to better understand LBP.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Reliability is an essential condition for using quantitative sensory tests (QSTs) in research and clinical practice, but information on reliability in patients with chronic pain is sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of different QST in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS Eighty-nine patients with chronic low back pain participated in 2 identical experimental sessions, separated by at least 7 days. The following parameters were recorded: pressure pain detection and tolerance thresholds at the toe, electrical pain thresholds to single and repeated stimulation, heat pain detection and tolerance thresholds at the arm and leg, cold pain detection threshold at the arm and leg, and conditioned pain modulation using the cold pressor test.Reliability was analyzed using the coefficient of variation, the coefficient of repeatability, and the intraclass correlation coefficient. It was judged as acceptable or not based primarily on the analysis of the coefficient of repeatability. RESULTS The reliability of most tests was acceptable. Exceptions were cold pain detection thresholds at the leg and arm. CONCLUSIONS Most QST measurements have acceptable reliability in patients with chronic low back pain.
Resumo:
Objectives: Cognitive-behavioral pain management programs typically achieve improvements in pain cognitions, disability, and physical performance. However, it is not known whether the neurophysiology education component of such programs contributes to these outcomes. In chronic low back pain patients, we investigated the effect of neurophysiology education on cognitions, disability, and physical performance. Methods: This study was a blinded randomized controlled trial. Individual education sessions on neurophysiology of pain (experimental group) and back anatomy and physiology (control group) were conducted by trained physical therapist educators. Cognitions were evaluated using the Survey of Pain Attitudes (revised) (SOPA(R)), and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Behavioral measures included the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and 3 physical performance tasks; (1) straight leg raise (SLR), (2) forward bending range, and (3) an abdominal drawing-in task, which provides a measure of voluntary activation of the deep abdominal muscles. Methodological checks evaluated non-specific effects of intervention. Results: There was a significant treatment effect on the SOPA(R), PCS, SLR, and forward bending. There was a statistically significant effect on RMDQ; however, the size of this effect was small and probably not clinically meaningful. Discussion: Education about pain neurophysiology changes pain cognitions and physical performance but is insufficient by itself to obtain a change in perceived disability. The results suggest that pain neurophysiology education, but not back school type education, should be included in a wider pain management approach.