Comparison of pain-resilient working individuals to population-based case controls with/without momentary low back pain

Background: Few studies have examined the 20% of individuals who never experience an episode of low back pain (LBP). To date, no investigation has been undertaken that examines a group who claim to have never experienced LBP in their lifetime in comparison to two population-based case–control groups with and without momentary LBP. This study investigates whether LBP-resilient workers between 50 and 65 years had better general health, demonstrated more positive health behaviour and were better able to achieve routine activities compared with both case–control groups. Methods: Forty-two LBP-resilient participants completed the same pain assessment questionnaire as a population-based LBP sample from a nationwide, large-scale cross-sectional survey in Switzerland. The LBP-resilient participants were pairwise compared to the propensity score-matched case controls by exploring differences in demographic and work characteristics, and by calculating odds ratios (ORs) and effect sizes. A discriminant analysis explored group differences, while the multiple logistic regression analysis specified single indicators which accounted for group differences. Results: LBP-resilient participants were healthier than the case controls with momentary LBP and achieved routine activities more easily. Compared to controls without momentary LBP, LBP-resilient participants had a higher vitality, a lower workload, a healthier attitude towards health and behaved more healthily by drinking less alcohol. Conclusions: By demonstrating a difference between LBP-resilient participants and controls without momentary LBP, the question that arises is what additional knowledge can be attained. Three underlying traits seem to be relevant about LBP-resilient participants: personality, favourable work conditions and subjective attitudes/attributions towards health. These rationales have to be considered with respect to LBP prevention.

Who is likely to develop persistent low back pain? A longitudinal analysis of prognostic occupational factors

OBJECTIVE: Occupational low back pain (LBP) is considered to be the most expensive form of work disability, with the socioeconomic costs of persistent LBP exceeding the costs of acute and subacute LBP by far. This makes the early identification of patients at risk of developing persistent LBP essential, especially in working populations. The aim of the study was to evaluate both risk factors (for the development of persistent LBP) and protective factors (preventing the development of persistent LBP) in the same cohort. PARTICIPANTS: An inception cohort of 315 patients with acute to subacute or with recurrent LBP was recruited from 14 health practitioners (twelve general practitioners and two physiotherapists) across New Zealand. METHODS: Patients with persistent LBP at six-month follow-up were compared to patients with non-persistent LBP looking at occupational, psychological, biomedical and demographic/lifestyle predictors at baseline using multiple logistic regression analyses. All significant variables from the different domains were combined into a one predictor model. RESULTS: A final two-predictor model with an overall predictive value of 78% included social support at work (OR 0.67; 95%CI 0.45 to 0.99) and somatization (OR 1.08; 95%CI 1.01 to 1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Social support at work should be considered as a resource preventing the development of persistent LBP whereas somatization should be considered as a risk factor for the development of persistent LBP. Further studies are needed to determine if addressing these factors in workplace interventions for patients suffering from acute, subacute or recurrent LBP prevents subsequent development of persistent LBP.

Comparison of cost and outcome of care in patients with low back pain who are managed by physicians or physical therapists in private practice

The purpose of this study was to determine if there were differences in the cost and outcome of care in patients with low back pain who were managed by physicians or physical therapists in private practice in the state of Arizona. A secondary purpose was to describe the current status of private practice physical therapy clinicians who treat patients with low back pain.^ A Survey on Practice was mailed to 194 physical therapists who were listed by the American Physical Therapy Association as being in private practice in Arizona. Eighty-three percent of the surveys were returned after three attempts. Of those which were returned, 72 were complete and included in the analysis.^ The 72 practices were screened to determine those eligible for the second phase of the study. Those eligible for the second phase numbered 52 clinics. Twenty-six practices agreed to participate; however, only 21 did participate. Clinics which participated were sent packets of information which were to be kept on each patient seen with a complaint of low back pain during a three month period. Packets contained a patient-oriented survey on functional activity to be completed before and after the physical therapy course of treatment, as well as a log which was completed by the physical therapist on the type of care given to the patient and an assessment of the outcome of treatment. The patient was asked to fill out a satisfaction survey relative to the care received from the physical therapist and physician, if applicable.^ Although 259 patients were entered into the study, 210 patient logs were available for analysis. Results indicated that generally, there was no difference in cost or outcome as measured by the final functional score, change between the initial and final functional scores, or the therapist-rated outcome between the patients who were managed by physicians or physical therapists when controlling for age and length of time the patient was experiencing pain. Patients were more satisfied with care received from physical therapists as compared to physicians. Age and length of pain were good predictors of the type of referral patients received according to a logistic regression procedure. The initial disability score (IRS) and the time spent in the facility predicted therapist-rated outcome, a good or poor final disability score (FRS), and a good or poor change score. In addition, age predicted FRS and change scores. The time that the therapist spent in direct contact with the patient also predicted the change score.^ These findings of no difference in the cost and outcome of care were discussed as they relate to the practice of medicine and physical therapy. ^

Relationship between depressive symptoms and acute low back pain at first medical consultation, three and six weeks of primary care

Background: Aim of the study was to test lagged reciprocal effects of depressive symptoms and acute low back pain (LBP) across the first weeks of primary care. Methods: In a prospective inception cohort study, 221 primary care patients with acute or subacute LBP were assessed at the time of initial consultation and then followed up at three and six weeks. Key measures were depressive symptoms (modified Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale) and LBP (sensory pain, present pain index and visual analogue scale of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire). Results: When only cross-lagged effects of six weeks were tested, a reciprocal positive relationship between LBP and depressive symptoms was shown in a cross-lagged structural equation model (β = .15 and .17, p < .01). When lagged reciprocal paths at three- and six-week follow-up were tested, depressive symptoms at the time of consultation predicted higher LBP severity after three weeks (β = .23, p < .01). LBP after three weeks had in turn a positive cross-lagged effect on depression after six weeks (β = .27, p < .001). Conclusions: Reciprocal effects of depressive symptoms and LBP seem to depend on time under medical treatment. Health practitioners should screen for and treat depressive symptoms at the first consultation to improve the LBP treatment.

Prolotherapy injections for chronic low back pain - A systematic review

Study Design. A systematic review of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Objectives. To determine the efficacy of prolotherapy injections in adults with chronic low back pain. Summary of Background Data. Prolotherapy is an injection-based treatment for chronic low back pain. Proponents of prolotherapy suggest that some back pain stems from weakened or damaged ligaments. Repeatedly injecting them with irritant solutions is thought to strengthen the ligaments and reduce pain and disability. Prolotherapy protocols usually include co-interventions to enhance the effectiveness of the injections. Methods. The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Science Citation Index up to January 2004, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register 2004, issue 1, and consulted content experts. Both randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing prolotherapy injections to control injections, either alone or in combination with other treatments, were included. Studies had to include measures of pain and disability before and after the intervention. Two reviewers independently selected the trials and assessed them for methodologic quality. Treatment and control group protocols varied from study to study, making meta-analysis impossible. Results. Four studies, all of high quality and with a total of 344 participants, were included. All trials measured pain and disability levels at 6 months, three measured the proportion of participants reporting a greater than 50% reduction in pain or disability scores from baseline to 6 months. Two studies showed significant differences between the treatment and control groups for those reporting more than 50% reduction in pain or disability. Their results could not be pooled. In one, cointerventions confounded interpretation of results; in the other, there was no significant difference in mean pain and disability scores between the groups. In the third study, there was little or no difference between groups in the number of individuals who reported more than 50% improvement in pain and disability. The fourth study reporting only mean pain and disability scores showed no differences between groups. Conclusions. There is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of prolotherapy injections in reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. Conclusions are confounded by clinical heterogeneity among studies and by the presence of co-interventions. There was no evidence that prolotherapy injections alone were more effective than control injections alone. However, in the presence of co-interventions, prolotherapy injections were more effective than control injections, more so when both injections and co-interventions were controlled concurrently.

Prolotherapy injections, saline injections, and exercises for chronic low-back pain: A randomized trial

Objectives. To assess the efficacy of a prolotherapy injection and exercise protocol in the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Design. Randomized controlled trial with two- by- two factorial design, triple- blinded for injection status, and single- blinded for exercise status. Setting. General practice. Participants. One hundred ten participants with nonspecific low- back pain of average 14 years duration were randomized to have repeated prolotherapy ( 20% glucose/ 0.2% lignocaine) or normal saline injections into tender lumbo- pelvic ligaments and randomized to perform either flexion/ extension exercises or normal activity over 6 months. Main outcome measures: Pain intensity ( VAS) and disability scores ( Roland- Morris) at 2.5, 4, 6, 12, and 24 months. Results. Follow- up was achieved in 96% at 12 months and 80% at 2 years. Ligament injections, with exercises and with normal activity, resulted in significant and sustained reductions in pain and disability throughout the trial, but no attributable effect was found for prolotherapy injections over saline injections or for exercises over normal activity. At 12 months, the proportions achieving more than 50% reduction in pain from baseline by injection group were glucose- lignocaine: 0.46 versus saline: 0.36. By activity group these proportions were exercise: 0.41 versus normal activity: 0.39. Corresponding proportions for > 50% reduction in disability were glucose- lignocaine: 0.42 versus saline 0.36 and exercise: 0.36 versus normal activity: 0.38. There were no between group differences in any of the above measures. Conclusions. In chronic nonspecific low- back pain, significant and sustained reductions in pain and disability occur with ligament injections, irrespective of the solution injected or the concurrent use of exercises.

Functional capacity evaluation as a performance measure - Evidence for a new approach for clients with chronic back pain

Objectives: To report the research and development of a new approach to Functional Capacity Evaluation, the Gibson Approach to Functional Capacity Evaluation (GAPP FCE) for chronic back pain clients. Methods: Four Studies, including pilot and feasibility testing, expert review, and preliminary interrater reliability examination, are described here. Participants included 7 healthy young adults and 19 rehabilitation clients with back pain who underwent assessment using the GAPP FCE. Thirteen therapists were trained in the approach and were silently observed administering the Functional Capacity Evalutions by at least 1 other trained therapists or the first investigator Or both. An expert review using 5 expert occupational therapists was also conducted. Results: Study 1, the pilot with healthy individuals, indicated that the GAPP FCE was a feasible approach with good utility. Study 2, a pilot using 2 trained therapists assessing 5 back pain clients, supported the clinical feasibility of the approach. The expert review in Study 3 found support for GAPP FCE. Study 4, a trial of the approach with 14 rehabilitation clients, found support for the interrater reliability of recommendations for return to work based on performance in the GAPP FCE. Discussion: The evidence thus far available supports the GAPP FCE as ail approach that provides a Sound method for evaluating the performance of the physical demands of work with clients with chronic back pain. The tool has been shown to have good face and content validity, to meet acceptable test standards, and to have reasonable interrater reliability. Further research is occurring to look at a larger interrater reliability study, to further examine content validity, and to examine predictive validity.

The effect of motor control exercise versus placebo in patients with chronic low back pain

Background: While one in ten Australians suffer from chronic low back pain this condition remains extremely difficult to treat. Many contemporary treatments are of unknown value. One potentially useful therapy is the use of motor control exercise. This therapy has a biologically plausible effect, is readily available in primary care and it is of modest cost. However, to date, the efficacy of motor control exercise has not been established. Methods: This paper describes the protocol for a clinical trial comparing the effects of motor control exercise versus placebo in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain. One hundred and fifty-four participants will be randomly allocated to receive an 8-week program of motor control exercise or placebo (detuned short wave and detuned ultrasound). Measures of outcomes will be obtained at follow-up appointments at 2, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcomes are: pain, global perceived effect and patient-generated measure of disability at 2 months and recurrence at 12 months. Discussion: This trial will be the first placebo-controlled trial of motor control exercise. The results will inform best practice for treating chronic low back pain and prevent its occurrence.

Widespread brain activity during an abdominal task markedly reduced after pain physiology education: fMRI evaluation of a single patient with chronic low back pain

The way people with chronic low back pain think about pain can affect the way they move. This case report concerns a patient with chronic disabling low back pain who underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging scans during performance of a voluntary trunk muscle task under three conditions: directly after training in the task and, after one week of practice, before and after a 2.5 hour pain physiology education session. Before education there was widespread brain activity during performance of the task, including activity in cortical regions known to be involved in pain, although the task was not painful. After education widespread activity was absent so that there was no brain activation outside of the primary somatosensory cortex. The results suggest that pain physiology education markedly altered brain activity during performance of the task. The data offer a possible mechanism for difficulty in acquisition of trunk muscle training in people with pain and suggest that the change in activity associated with education may reflect reduced threat value of the task.

Defining worthwhile and desired responses to treatment of chronic low back pain

Objective To describe patients' perceptions of minimum worthwhile and desired reductions in pain and disability upon commencing treatment for chronic low back pain. Design and Setting Descriptive study nested within a community-based randomized controlled trial on prolotherapy injections and exercises. Patients A total of 110 participants with chronic low back pain. Interventions Prior to treatment, participants were asked what minimum percentage reductions in pain and disability would make treatment worthwhile and what percentage reductions in pain and disability they desired with treatment. Outcome Measures. Minimum worthwhile reductions and desired reductions in pain and disability. Results. Median (inter-quartile range) minimum worthwhile reductions were 25% (20%, 50%) for pain and 35% (20%, 50%) for disability. This compared with desired reductions of 80% (60%, 100%) for pain and 80% (50%, 100%) for disability. The internal consistency between pain and disability responses was high (Spearman's coefficient of association of 0.81 and 0.87, respectively). A significant association existed between minimum worthwhile reductions and desired reductions, but no association was found between these two factors and patient age, gender, pain severity or duration, disability, anxiety, depression, response to treatment, or treatment satisfaction. Conclusions. Inquiring directly about patients' expectations of reductions in pain and in disability is important in establishing realistic treatment goals and setting benchmarks for success. There is a wide disparity between the reductions that they regard as minimum worthwhile and reductions that they hope to achieve. However, there is a high internal consistency between reductions in pain and disability that they expect.

French good practice guidelines for medical and occupational surveillance of the low back pain risk among workers exposed to manual handling of loads

International audience

La rieducazione posturale globale (RPG) e efficace in soggetti con low back pain cronico aspecifico? Una revisione sistematica della letteratura

Background: La lombalgia (o Low Back Pain -LBP) è una condizione multifattoriale e complessa che rappresenta una delle principali cause di disabilità al mondo. Si definisce “cronica” quando persiste per più di 12 settimane e “aspecifica” quando non risultano identificabili i meccanismi eziologici alla base della patologia. La Rieducazione Posturale Globale (RPG) è una metodica fisioterapica il cui scopo è quello di allungare i muscoli accorciati, migliorare la contrazione dei muscoli antagonisti e controllare la respirazione, migliorando la morfologia corporea. Obiettivo: Valutare, nei soggetti con LBP cronico aspecifico, l’efficacia della RPG rispetto a dolore, disabilità, articolarità, forza muscolare, qualità della vita, prevenzione delle recidive. Metodi: Sono state consultate le seguenti banche dati biomediche: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, SportDiscus e PEDro, nel periodo tra il 1° maggio e il 30 settembre 2022. Sono stati inclusi studi randomizzati controllati (RCTs) e studi sperimentali non randomizzati (NRSI) in lingua italiana, inglese o francese, senza restrizione inerente all’anno di pubblicazione. Un solo autore indipendente ha estratto i dati. Per valutare il rischio di bias degli studi inclusi sono stati impiegati il Cochrane Rob2 tool per gli RCT e il ROBINS-I per i NRSI. Risultati: 7 studi (5 RCT e 2 NRSI) hanno soddisfatto i criteri di eleggibilità e sono stati inclusi. Si è riscontrata una bassa qualità metodologica: cinque studi con alto rischio di bias e due studi con moderato rischio di bias. In tutti i trials la metodica RPG si è mostrata efficace nel ridurre dolore e disabilità, soprattutto a breve termine; tuttavia non ci sono sufficienti prove per affermarne la superiorità rispetto ad altre terapie. Conclusioni: La RPG è in grado di ridurre il dolore e la disabilità in soggetti con LBP cronico aspecifico nel breve termine. Studi futuri con maggiore validità interna sono necessari per conferire maggior certezza alle evidenze.

Does anticipation of back pain predispose to back trouble?

Limb movement imparts a perturbation to the body. The impact of that perturbation is limited via anticipatory postural adjustments. The strategy by which the CNS controls anticipatory postural adjustments of the trunk muscles during limb movement is altered during acute back pain and in people with recurrent back pain, even when they are pain free. The altered postural strategy probably serves to protect the spine in the short term, but it is associated with a cost and is thought to predispose spinal structures to injury in the long term. It is not known why this protective strategy might occur even when people are pain free, but one possibility is that it is caused by the anticipation of back pain. In eight healthy subjects, recordings of intramuscular EMG were made from the trunk muscles during single and repetitive arm movements. Anticipation of experimental back pain and anticipation of experimental elbow pain were elicited by the threat of painful cutaneous stimulation. There was no effect of anticipated experimental elbow pain on postural adjustments. During anticipated experimental back pain, for single arm movements there was delayed activation of the deep trunk muscles and augmentation of at least one superficial trunk muscle. For repetitive arm movements, there was decreased activity and a shift from biphasic to monophasic activation of the deep trunk muscles and increased activity of superficial trunk muscles during anticipation of back pain. In both instances, the changes were consistent with adoption of an altered strategy for postural control and were similar to those observed in patients with recurrent back pain. We conclude that anticipation of experimental back pain evokes a protective postural strategy that stiffens the spine. This protective strategy is associated with compressive cost and is thought to predispose to spinal injury if maintained long term. © Guarantors of Brain 2004; all rights reserved

Delayed postural contraction of transversus abdominis in low back pain associated with movement of the lower limb

The temporal parameters of the response of the trunk muscles associated with movement of the lower limb were investigated in people with and without low back pain (LBP). The weight shift component of the task was completed voluntarily prior to a stimulus to move to allow investigation of the movement component of the response. In the control subjects the onset of electromyographic (EMG) activity of all trunk muscles preceded that of the muscle responsible for limb movement, thus contributing to the feed forward postural response. The EMG onset of transversus abdominis was delayed in the LBP subjects with movement in each direction, while the EMG onsets of rectus abdominis, erector spinae, and oblique abdominal muscles were delayed with specific movement directions. This result provides evidence of a change in the postural control of the trunk in people with LBP.