Specific rehabilitation exercise for the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain

[Purpose] To evaluate the efficacy of our special rehabilitation method for patients with low back pain (LBP). [Subjects and Methods] All participants (n=33) received at least five individual 30-minute therapy sessions per week using the INFINITY method^® and six group therapy sessions per week in a gymnasium and swimming pool, each lasting 30 minutes and including the INFINITY method^®. The treatment lasted between four to seven weeks. Plantar function using a graphic method (computer plantography), graphical quantification of postural control during static standing (posturography), and pain were measured and evaluated before and after rehabilitation therapy. The INFINITY method^® is a special rehabilitation method for patients with musculoskeletal problems. The method focuses on stabilization and strengthening of the trunk, dorsal and abdominal muscles, including the deep stabilization system which is closely linked with diaphragmatic breathing. It teaches the central nervous system to control muscles more precisely. [Results] Plantar functions, postural control in the upright stance and pain of LBP patients were significantly improved by 4−7 weeks of rehabilitation treatment with the INFINITY method^®. There were significant differences in all measured dependent variables of the patients between before and after treatment. [Conclusion] Rehabilitation therapy with the INFINITY method^® positively influences body stabilization and pain in patients with problems of the lumbar spine. This method presents a new improved approach (with enhanced effect) to rehabilitation therapy for LBP patients.Key words: Rehabilitation method, Plantography, Posturography     

The prediction of treatment outcome at a multidisciplinary pain center

The purpose of this study was to determine if some commonly used admission variables could predict treatment outcome on a multidisciplinary pain center. Specifically, it was designed as a prospective study of an index proposed by Maruta et al. The subjects were 104 patients. The 4 outcome measures used were staff judgment, patient judgment, change in pain scores and change in mood. With the exception of a negative correlation with age, none of the other variables predicted outcome. The index of Maruta did not predict outcome.     

Prevalence of and risk factors for low back pain among dentists

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence, symptoms of, and risk factors for low back pain among dentists as well as to discover the possible correlation of these factors with working posture and how to reduce their prevalence. [Subjects and Methods] The study was conducted among 60 dentists (28 male and 32 female) with a mean age of 25.7 years. Dentists were evaluated with the self-administered Nordic musculoskeletal evaluation chart, postural discomfort chart, and a self-prepared questionnaire. [Results] The data showed a 70% incidence of back pain among dentists, with low back pain predominating in 47.6% of cases. Most of the subjects (90.5%) had a mild-to-moderate level of severity, and only 9.5% had a severe level of low back pain. The majority of the dentists (57%) treated 1–3 patients per day. Only a few dentists (17%) exercised during their rest period even though 57% of them reported taking a break during their working hours. Although 63% of the dentists were aware of the advantages of assistive tools, only 40% of them used any kind of assistive devices. [Conclusion] Dental professionals demonstrate a high prevalence of low back pain.Key words: Dentists, Back, Risk     

Catastrophizing and internal pain control as mediators of outcome in the multidisciplinary treatment of chronic low back pain.

The aim of the present study was to examine (a) whether a cognitive-behavioral treatment (differentially) affects pain coping and cognition; and (b) whether changes in pain coping and cognition during treatment mediate treatment outcome. Participants in this randomized clinical trial were 148 patients with chronic low back pain attending a multidisciplinary treatment program consisting of operant-behavioral treatment plus cognitive coping skills training (N = 59) or group discussion (N = 58) or allocated to a waiting list control condition (N = 31). Patients improved with respect to level of depression, pain behavior and activity tolerance at posttreatment and 12-month follow-up. Treatment also resulted in a short- and long-term decrease in catastrophizing and an enhancement of internal pain control. Changes in catastrophizing and to a lesser degree in internal pain control mediated the reduction in level of depression and pain behavior following treatment. The use of behavioral and cognitive interventions aimed at decreasing catastrophizing thoughts about the consequences of pain and promoting internal expectations of pain control possibly constitute an important avenue of change irrespective of the type of treatment.     

Contributions of prognostic factors for poor outcome in primary care low back pain patients

Background: Back pain is common and some sufferers consult GPs, yet many sufferers develop persistent problems. Combining information on risk of persistence and prognostic indicator prevalence provides more information on potential intervention targets than risk estimates alone. Aims: To determine the proportion of primary care back pain patients with persistent problems whose outcome is related to measurable prognostic factors. Methods: Prospective cohort study of back pain patients (30–59 years) at five general practices in Staffordshire, UK (n =389). Baseline factors (demographic; episode duration; symptom severity; pain widespreadness; anxiety; depression; catastrophising; fear‐avoidance; self‐rated health) were assessed for their association with disabling and limiting pain after 12‐months. The proportion of those with persistent problems whose outcome was related to each factor was calculated. Results: Prevalence of prognostic factors ranged from 23% to 87%. Strongest predictors were unemployment (adjusted relative risk (RR) 4.2; 95% CI 2.0, 8.5) and high pain intensity (4.1; 1.7, 9.9). The largest proportions of persistent problems were related to high pain intensity (68%; 95% CI 27, 87%) and unemployment (64%; 33, 82%). Combining these indicated that 85% of poor back pain outcome is related to these two factors. Poor self‐rated health, functional disability, upper body pain and pain bothersomeness were related with outcome for over 40% of those with persistent problems. Conclusions: Several factors increased risk of poor outcome in back pain patients, notably high pain and unemployment. These risks in combination with high prevalence of risk factors in this population distinguish factors that can help identify targets or sub‐groups for intervention.     

Psychological factors in low back pain

Even though low back pain is one of the commonest diseases, little is known about its aetiology, its natural history and its treatment. This may explain why the myth exists that low back pain is often psychogenic in origin or that psychological factors are often at least involved in low back pain. The aim of the early studies on low back pain and psychological factors was to try to divide these pains into functional (psychogenic) and organic, according to the aetiology. The aim of the studies was to predict the quality and success of the treatment. According to the current view, it is not meaningful to try to dichotomize low back pain in this way. According to the earlier literature, both conversion hysteria and psychoses were the main cause of psychogenic low back pain. More recent studies do not, however, support this view. It seems that the most common psychiatric disturbances associated with low back pain are neuroses and neurotic traits. There is controversy as to how often psychological factors are involved in low back pain. Population studies have shown that this association may be weaker than was thought earlier. It seems that individuals who suffer from low back pain, more often than others, have aggression problems and weaknesses in their ego function and more frequently have problems in interpersonal relations and sexual problems. There is no clear picture of what kind of psychotherapy is best suited to low back pain patients who have mental problems. The results attained by learning therapy and also with multidisciplinary ward programs seem quite promising.     

Mindfulness, functioning and catastrophizing after multidisciplinary pain management for chronic low back pain

We examined mindfulness in people with chronic low back pain who were attending a multidisciplinary pain management programme. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline (n=116) and after a 3-month cognitive-behaviourally informed multidisciplinary intervention (n=87). Self-reported mindfulness was measured before and after the intervention, and relationships were explored between mindfulness, disability, affect and pain catastrophizing. Mindfulness increased following participation in the intervention, and greater mindfulness was predictive of lower levels of disability, anxiety, depression and catastrophizing, even when pain severity was controlled. Mediator analyses suggested that the relationship between mindfulness and disability was mediated by catastrophizing. It is possible that cognitive-behavioural interventions and processes can affect both catastrophizing and mindfulness.     

Risk factors for low back pain and sciatica

So far, eight prospective studies and 50 cross-sectional or retrospective studies have focused on risk factors for low back syndromes. Half of these have been published during the 1980s. Hard physical work and, in particular, frequent lifting and postural stress are likely to result in disc degeneration, low back pain and sciatica. Physical strain may also have prophylactic effects, as physical leisure activity and muscular strength are negatively associated with the risk of low back pain. Much evidence points to driving motor vehicles being causally associated with low back pain and sciatica. A probably causal relationship exists between body height and risk of sciatica, but height is not necessarily predictive of other types of low back pain. Obesity, smoking, psychological distress and poor general health also carry increased risk of low back pain, but their causal role is questionable. Although none of the suspected risk factors can be described as having been conclusively investigated epidemiologically, the results of published studies show that there are modifiable factors contributing to low back pain. The overall potential of primary prevention is great if adequate tools for intervention can be developed.     

The role of exercise and alternative treatments for low back pain

The determination of whether a patient should pursue an active or passive treatment program is often made by medical practitioners. Knowledge about all forms of treatment, including complementary and alternative (CAM) treatments, is essential in the treatment of low back pain. Medical practitioner-directed active treatments that have been shown to be effective for the treatment of low back pain include physical therapy-directed exercise programs such as core stabilization and mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT). Based on the current literature, it appears that yoga is the most effective nonphysician-directed active treatment approach to nonspecific low back pain when comparing other CAM treatments. Acupuncture is a medical practitioner-directed passive treatment that has been shown to be a good adjunct treatment. More randomized controlled studies are needed to support both CAM treatments and exercise in the treatment of low back pain.     

Predictive factors for 1-year and 5-year outcome for disability in a working population of patients with low back pain treated in primary care

Many patients seeking primary care for low back pain continue to report disability several years after their initial visit. The aims of this study were to assess the independent predictive value of a number of potential predictive factors for disability at the 1-year and 5-year follow-ups, and to examine whether prediction models were improved by replacing baseline health-state-related variables with corresponding variables after treatment. A further aim was to describe possible differences between those on sick leave, early retirement or disability pension, and those who were not. Baseline factors were age, gender, self-reported physical-activity-related and work-related factors, expectations of treatment, similar problems previously, duration of episode, more than one localization, sick leave, pain frequency, disability, and well-being. The study sample comprised 148 participants in a previous randomized trial who were eligible for sick-leave benefits. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors. At the 5-year follow-up, 37% (n=19/52) of the patients with disability were on sick leave or were receiving early retirement or disability pension. For those without disability the corresponding figure was 9% (n=8/92). Being a woman, duration of the current episode, similar problems during the previous 5 years, exercise level before the current episode, pain frequency at baseline, and disability after treatment emerged as predictive factors for disability at the 5-year follow-up. Replacing baseline health-state-related measures with corresponding measures after the treatment period, and adding physical-activity-related and possibly work-related factors might improve the likelihood of predicting future disability.     

Spouse‐assisted training in pain coping skills and the outcome of multidisciplinary pain management for chronic low back pain treatment: A 1‐year randomized controlled trial

This study examined the comparative efficacy of three interventions: a spouse‐assisted coping skills training protocol for patients undergoing a multidisciplinary pain management programme (SA‐MPMP), conventional patient‐oriented multidisciplinary pain management programme (P‐MPMP) and standard medical care (SMC). Thirty‐six chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients and their spouses were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions. The SA‐MPMP condition consisted of seven, weekly, 2‐h, group sessions of training in dyadic pain coping and couple skills, delivered by a clinical psychologist with support of a multidisciplinary team of specialists, to patients together with their spouses. P‐MPMP consisted of the SA‐MPMP training delivered to the patient only (i.e., no spouse participation and assistance). The SMC condition entailed continuation of routine treatment, entailing medical care only. Data analysis revealed that, at the 12‐month follow‐up time point, patients receiving SA‐MPMP had significant improvements in kinesiophobia and rumination about pain compared to those receiving P‐MPMP and SMC. In patients suffering from CLBP, an intervention that combines spouse‐assisted coping skills training with a multidisciplinary pain management programme can improve fear of movement and rumination about low back pain.     

慢性下腰痛患者社会心理因素分析

目的探讨慢性下腰痛(CLBP)患者的心理特征.方法对65例慢性下腰痛(CLBP)患者进行了明尼苏达多相人格问卷 (MMPI),症状自评量表(SCL-90)测评,并与对照组比较.统计学处理采用t检验.结果慢性下腰痛患者MMPI测试在疑病症、抑郁症、歇斯底里及精神衰弱量表得分上与对照组有显著性差异 (P<0.01),SCL-90测试在躯体化、人际关系、强迫症、忧郁、焦虑、恐怖及精神病性等因子上与对照组均有显著性差异(P<0.05 ),病例组呈心身症特征.结论慢性下腰痛患者呈"疑病-抑郁癔病"神经三联征民主自由特征,其它尚有焦虑、强迫行为和一般适应障碍增多等.建议临床专科医师或治疗师在CLBP 的处理中应同样重视患者的心理和躯体成份.     

Change factors explaining reductions of "interference" in a multidisciplinary and an exercise prevention program for low back pain

OBJECTIVES: To identify relevant changes in process variables that are associated with outcome following an exercise and a multidisciplinary secondary prevention program for low back pain. METHODS: Data from a randomized controlled clinical trial to examine the effectiveness of an exercise and a multidisciplinary prevention program were analyzed using multiple regression analyses. The specific goal was to examine the amount of variance in changes in "interference" postintervention that could be explained by prechanges to postchanges in physical and psychologic parameters, and to determine if there are interactions between physical/psychologic parameters and the program type. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two (89%) participants were included in the regression analyses. Reductions of interference at postmeasurement were explained best by reductions of pain intensity and catastrophizing in the multidisciplinary and the exercise prevention program. No significant interaction between the changes in process variables and the program type was found. The final model could explain 68.7% of variance. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to methodologic limitations, strong conclusions cannot be drawn from this study. The findings suggest that treatment success in exercise and multidisciplinary interventions might be influenced by the same change factors, namely changes in pain and psychologic factors. The results raise the question of whether the mechanism through which exercise works, is improve in physical variables, or rather a change in psychologic attributes, in that people correct their irrational cognitions by making experiences that differ from their expectations. If these findings can be confirmed in longitudinal studies with more measurement points, they would have implications for treatment refinement.     

Prevalence of low back pain and associated factors among farmers during the rice transplanting process

[Purpose] The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of low back pain and associated factors in Thai rice farmers during the rice transplanting process. [Subjects and Methods] Three hundred and forty-four farmers, aged 20–59 years old, were asked to answer a questionnaire modified from the Standard Nordic Questionnaire (Thai version). The questionnaire sought demographic, back-related, and psychosocial data. [Results] The results showed that the prevalence of low back pain was 83.1%. Farmers younger than 45 years old who worked in the field fewer than six days were more likely to experience low back pain than those who worked for at least six days. Farmers with high stress levels were more likely to have low back pain. [Conclusion] In the rice transplanting process, the low back pain experienced by the farmers was associated with the weekly work duration and stress.Key words: Low back pain, Rice farmers, Rice transplanting process     

Predictive validity of the Chronic Pain Coping Inventory in subacute low back pain

The Chronic Pain Coping Inventory (CPCI) was developed to assess eight behavioral coping strategies hypothesized to be important for pain adaptation. But the predictive validity of the CPCI has yet to be tested in a longitudinal study. Here, 321 workers on sick leave after a work accident affecting the low back pain (LBP) region completed the CPCI during the subacute stage (T1) of LBP as well as the Catastrophizing scale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ). Disability, pain intensity and depressive mood were assessed simultaneously as well as 6 months later (T2). Work status was also determined at follow-up. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that the CPCI (Guarding scale) predicted T1 disability and T2 disability (Relaxation scale), but T1 disability was the best predictor of T2 disability. For T1 pain intensity, the CSQ's Catastrophizing dimension was the best predictor and the CPCI Guarding scale added a small contribution. T1 pain intensity was the best predictor of T2 pain intensity. Catastrophizing and Guarding were the most strongly associated with depressive mood at T1 but at T2, only depressive mood at T1 predicted this same variable. Results indicated also that the Guarding and Catastrophizing scales were able to predict future work status. The present study clearly reveals the usefulness of Guarding from the CPCI and Catastrophizing from the CSQ, when predicting different outcomes of adjustment to low back pain.     

Effect of low back pain on the muscles controlling the sitting posture

[Purpose] The purpose of the current study was to reveal the association between posture control and muscle activity by measuring the trunk and hip joint muscle activities in the upright and slump sitting positions in both the healthy participants and patients with recurrent lower back pain. [Participants and Methods] We recruited eleven patients of recurrent lower back pain and ten healthy participants. During the maintenance of the two types of posture, upright and slump, we collected the surface electromyography data. We assessed the following muscles: rectus abdominis, external oblique, thoracic erector spinae, lumbar erector spinae, internal oblique, lumbar multifidus, iliacus, serratus anterior, rectus femoris, tensor fascia latae, and gluteus maximus. We studied the differences in spinal–pelvic curvature and muscle activity between the upright and slump positions in each group. [Results] In the healthy group, comparison of the muscle activity in upright and slump positions for both the trunk (external oblique, internal oblique, lumbar erector spinae, and lumbar multifidus), and the hip muscles (iliacus and gluteus maximus) showed a significant decrease in activity in the slump position. In the group with recurrent lower back pain, although the external oblique, lumbar erector spinae and lumbar multifidus showed reduced activity in slump position, these values were smaller when compared to those in the healthy group. [Conclusion] This study aimed to clarify the relationship between posture (upright and slump) and the activity of the trunk and hip joint muscles in the healthy participants and the patients with recurrent lower back pain. The results indicated that postural changes caused by recurrent lower back pain significantly affected the activity of the muscles involved in controlling the posture.Key words: Sitting posture, Muscle control, Low back pain     

Predictive factors for 1-year outcome of chronic low back pain following manipulation, stabilizing exercises, and physician consultation or physician consultation alone.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relative influences of sociodemographic and episode-specific factors on change in low back pain intensity and self-rated disability. METHODS: Of 204 patients with chronic low back pain, 102 were randomized to a combined manipulation, exercise and physician consultation group and 102 to a consultation-alone group. These groups were each divided into 2 clusters based on change in both pain intensity and self-rated disability at 1 year. The first cluster included patients whose symptoms clearly decreased, and the second those whose trouble persisted. Association between sociodemographic and episode-specific factors and poor recovery from low back pain and disability were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Severe affective distress (OR 3.81; 95% CI 1.3-10.8) predicted poor response to the manipulative treatment. Over a 25-day sick leave during previous year (19.64; 3.8-102.5), poor life control (9.40; 1.9-47.0), and generalized somatic symptoms (3.18; 0.9-11.6) were the risk factors for not benefiting from the informative approach. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial differences seem to be important determinants for treatment outcomes, and should be the focus of future studies.     

Rehabilitation of non-specific low back pain. Results of a multidisciplinary in-patient program

In this study we documented the effectiveness of a 3-week multidisciplinary rehabilitative intervention in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. We compared the therapy group (136 patients: 91 female, 45 male) with a waiting list control group (34 patients: 25 female, 9 male). The patients showed chronic pain grades 1 and 2 (according to the Mainz Pain Staging System) and mild restriction of activity. Pain intensity, activity, participation, and health-related quality of life improved significantly in the intervention group (VAS from 46.34 to 25.91; FFbH-R from 19.79 to 18; PDI from 21.02 to 14.57; NHP from 161.83 to 120.97); the waiting list control group remained unchanged. The improvement was independent of age, gender, duration of disease, work status, or workplace satisfaction.