Rationale,design, and protocol for the prevention of low back pain in the military (POLM) trial (NCT00373009)

Background  

There are few effective strategies reported for the primary prevention of low back pain (LBP). Core stabilization exercises targeting the deep abdominal and trunk musculature and psychosocial education programs addressing patient beliefs and coping styles represent the current best evidence for secondary prevention of low back pain. However, these programs have not been widely tested to determine if they are effective at preventing the primary onset and/or severity of LBP. The purpose of this cluster randomized clinical trial is to determine if a combined core stabilization exercise and education program is effective in preventing the onset and/or severity of LBP. The effect of the combined program will be compared to three other standard programs.     

PACE - The first placebo controlled trial of paracetamol for acute low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial

Background  

Clinical practice guidelines recommend that the initial treatment of acute low back pain (LBP) should consist of advice to stay active and regular simple analgesics such as paracetamol 4 g daily. Despite this recommendation in all international LBP guidelines there are no placebo controlled trials assessing the efficacy of paracetamol for LBP at any dose or dose regimen. This study aims to determine whether 4 g of paracetamol daily (in divided doses) results in a more rapid recovery from acute LBP than placebo. A secondary aim is to determine if ingesting paracetamol in a time-contingent manner is more effective than paracetamol taken when required (PRN) for recovery from acute LBP.     

An educational approach based on a non-injury model compared with individual symptom-based physical training in chronic LBP. A pragmatic, randomised trial with a one-year follow-up

Background  

In the treatment of chronic back pain, cognitive methods are attracting increased attention due to evidence of effectiveness similar to that of traditional therapies. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of performing a cognitive intervention based on a non-injury model with that of a symptom-based physical training method on the outcomes of low back pain (LBP), activity limitation, LBP attitudes (fear-avoidance beliefs and back beliefs), physical activity levels, sick leave, and quality of life, in chronic LBP patients.     

The effect of continuous ultrasound on chronic low back pain: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background  

Chronic non-specific low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most common and expensive musculoskeletal disorders in industrialized countries. Similar to other countries in the world, LBP is a common health and socioeconomic problem in Iran. One of the most widely used modalities in the field of physiotherapy for treating LBP is therapeutic ultrasound. Despite its common use, there is still inconclusive evidence to support its effectiveness in this group of patients. This randomised trial will evaluate the effectiveness of continuous ultrasound in addition to exercise therapy in patients with chronic LBP.     

Comparison of two self-reported measures of physical work demands in hospital personnel: A cross-sectional study

Background  

Low back pain (LBP) is a frequent health complaint among health care personnel. Several work tasks and working postures are associated with an increased risk of LBP. The aim of this study was to compare two self-reported measures of physical demands and their association with LBP (the daily number of patient handling tasks and Hollmann's physical load index).     

Manipulative therapy and/or NSAIDs for acute low back pain: design of a randomized controlled trial [ACTRN012605000036617]

Background  

Acute low back pain is a common condition resulting in pain and disability. Current national and international guidelines advocate general practitioner care including advice and paracetamol (4 g daily in otherwise well adults) as the first line of care for people with acute low back pain. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) are advocated in many guidelines as second line management options for patients with acute low back pain who are not recovering. No studies have explored the role of NSAIDs and/or SMT in addition to first line management for acute low back pain. The primary aim of this study is to investigate if NSAIDs and/or SMT in addition to general practitioner advice and paracetamol results in shorter recovery times for patients with acute low back pain. The secondary aims of the study are to evaluate whether the addition of SMT and/or NSAIDs influences pain, disability and global perceived effect at 1, 2, 4 and 12 weeks after onset of therapy for patients with significant acute low back pain.     

Can we predict response to the McKenzie method in patients with acute low back pain? A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Purpose

To evaluate whether patients’ treatment preferences, characteristics, or symptomatic response to assessment moderated the effect of the McKenzie method for acute low back pain (LBP).

Methods

This study involved a secondary analysis of a previous RCT on the effect of adding the McKenzie method to the recommended first-line care for patients with acute non-specific LBP. 148 patients were randomized to the First-line Care Group (recommended first-line care alone) or the McKenzie Group (McKenzie method in addition to the first-line care) for a 3-week course of treatment. The primary outcome was pain intensity at 3 weeks. The ability of six patient characteristics to identify those who respond best to McKenzie method was assessed using interaction terms in linear regression models.

Results

The six investigated potential effect modifiers for response to the McKenzie method did not predict a more favorable response to this treatment. None of the point estimates for effect modification met our pre-specified criterion of clinical importance of a 1 point greater improvement in pain. For five of the six predictors, the 95% CI did not include our criterion for meaningful clinical improvement.

Conclusion

We were unable to find any clinically useful effect modifiers for patients with acute LBP receiving the McKenzie method.     

Physical characteristics of the back are not predictive of low back pain in healthy workers: A prospective study

Background  

In the working population, back disorders are an important reason for sick leave and permanent work inability. In the context of fitting the job to the worker, one of the primary tasks of the occupational health physician is to evaluate the balance between work-related and individual variables. Since this evaluation of work capacity often consists of a physical examination of the back, the objective of this study was to investigate whether a physical examination of the low back, which is routinely performed in occupational medicine, predicts the development of low back pain (LBP).     

The predictive effect of fear-avoidance beliefs on low back pain among newly qualified health care workers with and without previous low back pain: a prospective cohort study

Background  

Health care workers have a high prevalence of low back pain (LBP). Although physical exposures in the working environment are linked to an increased risk of LBP, it has been suggested that individual coping strategies, for example fear-avoidance beliefs, could also be important in the development and maintenance of LBP. Accordingly, the main objective of this study was to examine (1) the association between physical work load and LBP, (2) the predictive effect of fear-avoidance beliefs on the development of LBP, and (3) the moderating effect of fear-avoidance beliefs on the association between physical work load and LBP among cases with and without previous LBP.     

The cost-effectiveness of a treatment-based classification system for low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation

Background

Systematic reviews have shown that exercise therapy and spinal manipulation are both more effective for low back pain (LBP) than no treatment at all. However, the effects are at best modest. To enhance the clinical outcomes, recommendations are to improve the patient selection process, and to identify relevant subgroups to guide clinical decision-making. One of the systems that has potentials to improve clinical decision-making is a treatment-based classification system that is intended to identify those patients who are most likely to respond to direction-specific exercises, manipulation, or stabilisation exercises.

Methods/Design

The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial will be to assess the effectiveness of a classification-based system. A sample of 150 patients with subacute and chronic LBP who attend a private physical therapy clinic for treatment will be recruited. At baseline, all participants will undergo a standard evaluation by trained research physical therapists and will be classified into one of the following subgroups: direction-specific exercises, manipulation, or stabilisation. The patient will not be informed about the results of the examination. Patients will be randomly assigned to classification-based treatment or usual care according to the Dutch LBP guidelines, and will complete questionnaires at baseline, and 8, 26, and 52 weeks after the start of the treatment. The primary outcomes will be general perceived recovery, functional status, and pain intensity. Alongside this trial, an economic evaluation of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility will be conducted from a societal perspective.

Discussion

The present study will contribute to our knowledge about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of classification-based treatment in patients with LBP.

Trial registration

Trial registration number: NTR1176     

Randomized open-labbel non-inferiority trial of acetaminophen or loxoprofen for patients with acute low back pain

Background

Current worldwide clinical practice guidelines recommend acetaminophen as the first option for the treatment of acute low back pain. However, there is no concrete evidence regarding whether acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is more effective for treating acute low back pain (LBP) in Japan. The present study aimed to investigate whether acetaminophen treatment for acute musculoskeletal pain was comparable with loxoprofen (a traditional NSAID in Japan) treatment.

The McKenzie method for the management of acute non-specific low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial [ACTRN012605000032651]

Background  

Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem. Effective treatment of acute LBP is important because it prevents patients from developing chronic LBP, the stage of LBP that requires costly and more complex treatment.     

Is comorbidity in adolescence a predictor for adult low back pain? A prospective study of a young population

Background  

It has previously been shown that low back pain (LBP) often presents already in the teenage years and that previous LBP predicts future LBP. It is also well documented that there is a large degree of comorbidity associated with LBP, both in adolescents and adults. The objective of this study is to gain a deeper insight into the etiology of low back pain and to possibly develop a tool for early identification of high-risk groups. This is done by investigating whether different types of morbidity in adolescence are associated with LBP in adulthood.     

Development of a risk score for low back pain in office workers - a cross-sectional study

Background  

Low back pain (LBP) is common among office workers and is the most common cause of work-related disability in people under 45 years of age. The aetiology of LBP is widely accepted to be multi-factorial. Prognostic research into office workers at risk of developing LBP has received limited attention. The aims of this study were to develop a risk score to identify office workers likely to have LBP and to evaluate its predictive power.     

Low back pain status in elite and semi-elite Australian football codes: a cross-sectional survey of football (soccer), Australian rules, rugby league, rugby union and non-athletic controls

Background  

Our understanding of the effects of football code participation on low back pain (LBP) is limited. It is unclear whether LBP is more prevalent in athletic populations or differs between levels of competition. Thus it was the aim of this study to document and compare the prevalence, intensity, quality and frequency of LBP between elite and semi-elite male Australian football code participants and a non-athletic group.     

Stay@Work: Participatory Ergonomics to prevent low back and neck pain among workers: design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness

Background  

Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) are a major public health problem with considerable costs for individuals, companies and society. Therefore, prevention is imperative. The Stay@Work study investigates the (cost-)effectiveness of Participatory Ergonomics (PE) to prevent LBP and NP among workers.     

Effectiveness of a 'Global Postural Reeducation' program for persistent Low Back Pain: a non-randomized controlled trial

Background  

The aim of this non-randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of a Global Postural Reeducation (GPR) program as compared to a Stabilization Exercise (SE) program in subjects with persistent low back pain (LBP) at short- and mid-term follow-up (ie. 3 and 6 months).     

Lumbar segmental mobility disorders: comparison of two methods of defining abnormal displacement kinematics in a cohort of patients with non-specific mechanical low back pain

Background  

Lumbar segmental rigidity (LSR) and lumbar segmental instability (LSI) are believed to be associated with low back pain (LBP), and identification of these disorders is believed to be useful for directing intervention choices. Previous studies have focussed on lumbar segmental rotation and translation, but have used widely varying methodologies. Cut-off points for the diagnosis of LSR & LSI are largely arbitrary. Prevalence of these lumbar segmental mobility disorders (LSMDs) in a non-surgical, primary care LBP population has not been established.