Cognitive functional therapy compared with a group-based exercise and education intervention for chronic low back pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)

Efficacy of the cognitive functional therapy (CFT) in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a study protocol for a randomized sham-controlled trial

Background

Chronic low back pain is a public health problem, and there is strong evidence that it is associated with a complex interaction of biopsychosocial factors. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a promising new intervention that deals with potentially modifiable multidimensional aspects of pain (e.g., provocative cognitive, movement, and lifestyle behaviors).

Methods

To investigate the efficacy of CFT compared with a sham intervention for pain intensity and disability post-intervention (immediately after the last session) in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). This study is a randomized controlled trial in which 152 (18–60 years old) patients with CLBP will be enrolled. The patients will be randomly allocated to receive (1) CFT intervention or (2) sham intervention. The experimental group will receive individualized CFT in a pragmatic manner (5 to 7 sessions) based on the clinical progression of the participants. The sham group will attend six sessions: consisting of 30 min of photobiomodulation using a detuned device and more than 15 min of talking about neutral topics. Patients from both groups also will receive an educational booklet (for ethical reasons). Participants will be assessed pre and post-intervention, 3 months, and 6 months after randomization. The primary outcomes will be pain intensity and disability post-intervention. The secondary outcomes will be: pain intensity and disability at 3- and 6-month follow-up, as well as self-efficacy, global perceived effect of improvement, and functioning post-intervention, 3-, and 6-month follow-up. The patients and the assessor will be blinded to the treatment administered (active vs. sham).

Statistical analysis

The between-group differences (effects of treatment), as well as the treatment effect for the primary and secondary outcomes, and their respective 95% confidence intervals will be calculated by constructing linear mixed models.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, the current study will be the first to compare CFT vs. sham intervention. Sham-controlled RCTs may help to understand the influence of non-specific factors on treatment outcomes. Considering complex interventions as CFT, it is imperative to understand the impact of contextual factors on outcomes.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04518891. First Posted: August 19, 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06466-8.

A randomized controlled trial concerning the implementation of the postural Mézières treatment in elite athletes with low back pain

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of adding the Mézières Method (MM) to the standard rehabilitation protocol for the elite athletes with low back pain (LBP) in reducing lumbar pain than only using the traditional rehabilitation protocol treatment. The disciplines considered in this study were soccer, rhythmic gymnastics, and basketball.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Training Camp.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred thirty-nine elite athletes with low back pain of whom 69 were assigned to the experimental group.

INTERVENTION

The intervention consists of treatment with three lying postures in a 40-minutes long session twice a week. The session goal was to focus on breathing exercises, spine mobility, and stretching of the back muscles, with particular attention to the diaphragmatic, paravertebral, and latissimus dorsi muscles.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Assessments as Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Sit and Reach flexibility test, Roland-Morris Questionnaire, and health status questionnaire (SF12) were used.

RESULTS

The evaluation of all outcomes in 4 measurement periods of the study (baseline, 4, 12, and 24 weeks) showed a significant difference between groups. Also, at the 6-month of the intervention, a significant difference in the means (SD) was observed in pain (VAS), back flexibility (Sit & Reach) and back disability (QRM) outcomes in favor of the experimental group with a medium-large effect size comparing with the control group.

CONCLUSION

The MM approach can also be applied in established conventional protocols to alleviate pain and functionality. The obtained results include improving the quality of life of the athletes and their physical and emotional states.

Clinical trial registration number ID: NCT03849053.

The effect of cognitive functional therapy for chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To apply the Bio-Psych-Social (BPS) model into clinical practice, it is important not to focus on psychosocial domains only since biomedical factors can also contribute to chronic pain conditions. The cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is the management system based on the BPS model for chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare CFT with the other interventions for CNSLBP regarding pain, disability/functional status, QoL and psychological factors.

DESIGN

This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

METHOD

Literature Search was conducted in electronic search engines. Enrolled participants included 1) CNSLBP and 2) primary, secondary, or tertiary care patients. CFT was the interventions included. Comparisons were any types of treatment.

RESULTS

Three studies met the eligibility criteria. The total number of participants was 336. For pain intensity, MD [95% CIs] was -1.38 [-2.78 - 0.02] and -1.01 [-1.92 - -0.10] at intermediate and long term for two studies, respectively. About disability/functional status, SMD [95% CIs] was -0.76 [-1.46 - -0.07] at the intermediate for three studies and MD [95% CIs] was -8.48 [-11.47 - -5.49] at long term for two studies. About fear of physical activity, MD [95% CIs] was -3.01 [-5.14 - -0.88] and -3.56 [-6.43 - -0.68] at intermediate and long term for two studies, respectively. No studies reported scores associated with QOL. All the quality of the evidence was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Three studies were included and the quality of all the evidence was very low. Although the study found statistically significant differences in some measures, the effectiveness of the CFT will need to be re-evaluated in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42020158182 .

12 weeks high intensity interval training versus moderate intensity continuous training in chronic low back pain subjects: a randomised single-blinded feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Currently, very little is known about the effects of an endurance high intensity interval training (HIIT) in chronic low back pain patients. Therefore, the feasibility and safety of the HIIT must be assessed first before Currently, very little is known about the effects of an endurance high intensity interval training in chronic low back pain patients. Therefore, the feasibility and safety of the HIIT has to be assessed first before it can be integrated safely into research and daily practice it can be integrated safely into research and daily practice. This study aims to answers the question if high intensity interval training and moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) have comparable adherence and feasibility.

METHODS

Participants (age from 29 to 69 years) with non-specific chronic low back pain were recruited in this randomised, single-blinded, allocation concealed, feasibility study. The participants trained 30 min on a cycle ergometer for 12 weeks. One group had HIIT and the other MICT.

RESULTS

Of 45 screened subjects 30 participated. The adherence rate was 94% in the HIIT group (median 0.94, IQR 0.23) versus 96% in the MICT group (median 0.96, IQR 0.08), without between-group differences: estimated median of the difference of - 0,01 [95% CI, - 0.11 to 0.06; p = 0.76]. Similar results in enjoyability (median 3, IQR 1 vs median 2, IQR 1.8) and willingness to continue the training (median 3, IQR 1 vs median 3, IQR 0.4). Both groups improved in pain and disability, without between-group differences in pain [median of the difference, 0.5; 95% CI, - 1 to 2; p = 0.95] nor in disability [median of the difference, 1.78; 95% CI, - 6.44 to 9.56; p = 0.64].

CONCLUSION

There were no differences in adherence rates. HIIT is as feasible as MICT in non-specific chronic low back pain and can be used in future larger trials to deepen the knowledge about HIIT in this specific population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04055545 . Registered 13 August 2019.

Effect of m-health-based core stability exercise combined with self-compassion training for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Non-specific chronic low back pain (NCLBP) has a high incidence, which has a significant impact on a patient’s body and mind and is a common condition affecting people’s quality of life. Core stability exercise (CSE) is a modestly effective treatment for NCLBP; however, CSE has only been shown to be a useful treatment option in the short term. Many clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of a biopsychosocial framework to guide the management of NCLBP. Self-compassion training (SCT) is a promising psychotherapy treatment option for NCLBP; however, there is still a lack of research on CSE combined with SCT. In this study, we will seek to determine whether CSE combined with SCT is an effective treatment option for patients with NCLBP compared to CSE alone.

Methods

In this study, we will randomize 166 adults with NCLBP to a combined SCT and CSE arm or a CSE alone arm (83 participants per group). Both interventions will consist of four weekly 1.5-h group sessions of CSE supplemented by home practice. The combined group protocol also includes 2 h of SCT before CSE. Interviewers masked to the treatment assignments will assess the outcomes at 4 and 16 weeks post-randomization. The primary outcomes are back pain disability (based on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) and pain intensity (NRS; average pain, worst pain, average pain) at 16 weeks.

Discussion

If SCT is found to enhance the effectiveness of CSE for patients with chronic back pain, the results of the study may promote the development of mind-body therapies for chronic low back pain.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100042810. Registered on 21 January 2021

Cognitive functional therapy compared with core exercise and manual therapy in patients with chronic low back pain: randomised controlled trial

ABSTRACT

Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a physiotherapy-led intervention which has evolved from an integration of foundational behavioral psychology and neuroscience within the physiotherapist practice directed at the multidimensional nature of chronic low back pain (CLBP). The current evidence about the comparative effectiveness of CFT for CLBP is still scarce. We aimed to investigate whether CFT is more effective than core training exercise and manual therapy (CORE-MT) in pain and disability in patients with CLBP. A total of 148 adults with CLBP were randomly assigned to receive five one-hour individualised sessions of either CFT (n = 74) or CORE-MT (n = 74) within a period of 8 weeks. Primary outcomes were pain intensity (numeric pain rating scale, 0-10) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index, 0-100) at 8 weeks. Patients were assessed pre-intervention, at 8 weeks, 6 and 12 months after the first treatment session. Altogether, 97.3% (n=72) of patients in each intervention group completed the 8 weeks of the trial. CFT was more effective than CORE-MT in disability at 8 weeks (MD= -4.75; 95% CI -8.38 to -1.11; p=0.011, effect size= 0.55), but not in pain intensity (MD= -0.04; 95% CI -0.79 to 0.71; p=0.916). Treatment with CFT reduced disability, but the difference was not clinically important compared with CORE-MT post-intervention (short term) in patients with CLBP. There was no difference in pain intensity between interventions, and the treatment effect was not maintained in the mid-term and long-term follow-ups.

Psychological interventions for chronic, non-specific low back pain: systematic review with network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of psychological interventions for chronic low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review with network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and CINAHL from database inception to 31 January 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions with any comparison intervention in adults with chronic, non-specific low back pain. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and confidence in the evidence. Primary outcomes were physical function and pain intensity. A random effects network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach was performed at post-intervention (from the end of treatment to <2 months post-intervention); and at short term (≥2 to <6 months post-intervention), mid-term (≥6 to <12 months post-intervention), and long term follow-up (≥12 months post-intervention). Physiotherapy care was the reference comparison intervention. The design-by-treatment interaction model was used to assess global inconsistency and the Bucher method was used to assess local inconsistency.

RESULTS

97 randomised controlled trials involving 13 136 participants and 17 treatment nodes were included. Inconsistency was detected at short term and mid-term follow-up for physical function, and short term follow-up for pain intensity, and were resolved through sensitivity analyses. For physical function, cognitive behavioural therapy (standardised mean difference 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.58 to 1.44), and pain education (0.62, 0.08 to 1.17), delivered with physiotherapy care, resulted in clinically important improvements at post-intervention (moderate quality evidence). The most sustainable effects of treatment for improving physical function were reported with pain education delivered with physiotherapy care, at least until mid-term follow-up (0.63, 0.25 to 1.00; low quality evidence). No studies investigated the long term effectiveness of pain education delivered with physiotherapy care. For pain intensity, behavioural therapy (1.08, 0.22 to 1.94), cognitive behavioural therapy (0.92, 0.43 to 1.42), and pain education (0.91, 0.37 to 1.45), delivered with physiotherapy care, resulted in clinically important effects at post-intervention (low to moderate quality evidence). Only behavioural therapy delivered with physiotherapy care maintained clinically important effects on reducing pain intensity until mid-term follow-up (1.01, 0.41 to 1.60; high quality evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

For people with chronic, non-specific low back pain, psychological interventions are most effective when delivered in conjunction with physiotherapy care (mainly structured exercise). Pain education programmes (low to moderate quality evidence) and behavioural therapy (low to high quality evidence) result in the most sustainable effects of treatment; however, uncertainty remains as to their long term effectiveness. Although inconsistency was detected, potential sources were identified and resolved.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019138074.

Abnormalities of Thalamic Functional Connectivity in Patients with Migraine: A Resting-State fMRI Study

Introduction

Migraine is a common headache disorder. Many studies have used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to explore the possible pathogenesis of migraine, but they have not reached consistent conclusions and lack rigorous multiple comparison correction. Thus, this study investigates the mechanisms of migraine development from the perspective of altered functional connectivity (FC) in brain regions by using data-driven and regions of interest (ROI)-based approaches.

Methods

Resting-state functional MRI data were collected from 30 patients with migraine and 40 healthy controls (HCs) matched for age, gender, and years of education. For the data-driven method, we used a voxel-mirrored homotopic connectivity (VMHC) approach to compare the FC between the patients and HCs. For the ROI-based method, significant differences in VMHC maps between the patients and HCs were defined as ROI. The seed-based approach further revealed significant differences in FC between the seeds and the other brain regions. Furthermore, the correlations between abnormal FC and clinical characteristics of patients were investigated. A rigorous multiple comparison correction was used with false discovery rate and permutation test (5000 times).

Results

In comparison with the controls group, patients showed enhanced VMHC in the bilateral thalamus. We also observed enhanced FC between the left thalamus and the left superior frontal gyrus, and increased FC between the right thalamus and the left middle frontal gyrus (Brodmann area 45 and Brodmann area 8) in patients. Further analysis showed that the FC values in the left superior frontal gyrus and left middle frontal gyrus were negatively corrected with visual analogue scale scores or attack times for headaches.

Conclusions

Patients with migraine showed altered VMHC in the bilateral thalamus, and abnormal FC of bilateral thalamus and other brain regions. The abnormalities in thalamic FC are a likely mechanism for the development of migraine.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000033995. Registered on 20 June 2020.

Pain cognitions and impact of low back pain after participation in a self-management program: a qualitative study

Background

Benefits from low back pain (LBP) treatments seem to be related to patients changing their pain cognitions and developing an increased sense of control. Still, little is known about how these changes occur. The objective of this study was to gain insights into possible shifts in the understanding of LBP and the sense of being able to manage pain among patients participating in a LBP self-management intervention.

Methods

Using a qualitative study and a content analytic framework, we investigated the experiences of patients with LBP who participated in ‘GLA:D^® Back’, a group-based structured patient education and exercise program. Data were generated through qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted between January 2019 and October 2019. Interviews focused on experiences with pain and were analysed using a thematic analytical approach. The Common Sense Model and self-efficacy theory formed the theoretical framework for the interpretations. Participants were sampled to represent people who were either dissatisfied or satisfied with their participation in GLA:D^® Back. Fifteen participants aged 26–62, eight women and seven men, were interviewed from February to April 2020.

Results

Four main themes, corresponding to the characterisation of four patient groups, were identified: ‘Feeling miscast, ‘Maintaining reservations', ‘Struggling with habits’ and ‘Handling it’. The participants within each group differed in how they understood, managed, and communicated about their LBP. Some retained the perception of LBP as a threatening disease, some expressed a changed understanding that did not translate into new behaviors, while others had changed their understanding of pain and their reaction to pain.

Conclusions

The same intervention was experienced very differently by different people dependent on how messages and communication resonated with the individual patient's experiences and prior understanding of LBP. Awareness of the ways that individuals’ understanding of LBP interact with behaviour and physical activities appear central for providing adaptive professional support and meeting the needs of individual patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12998-022-00416-6.

The Influence of the Locus of Control Construct on the Efficacy of Physiotherapy Treatments in Patients with Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review

The biopsychosocial paradigm contemplates the patient's personality traits in physiotherapy treatments for chronic pain. Among these traits, the locus of control has a direct relationship with the person's coping strategies in the face of their health problems. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the influence of locus of control on the efficacy of physiotherapy treatments in patients with chronic pain. A systematic review of the publications of the last ten years in Pubmed, Scopus, Science Direct and Web of Science databases was conducting with the terms physical therapy modalities, chronic pain, internal-external control, self-management, physical therapy and physiotherapy. The inclusion criteria were participants with chronic pain lasting at least three months who have received at least one session of physical therapy; the studies should have collected the patient's locus of control as a prognostic factor at the beginning of physiotherapy treatment; the variables studied should include the pain intensity or clinical variables related to pain. A total of 13 articles were found, of which three were experimental studies and ten were observational studies. The included samples had chronic knee pain, nonspecific back pain, low back pain or neck pain; were people over 65 years of age or patients who had undergone hand surgery. In patients with chronic pain for more than three months, the locus of control construct participates as a predictor of the results of physiotherapy treatment. The presence of an internal locus of control favors better results. The personality traits of the subjects represent an important factor to take into account when planning physiotherapy treatments.

From Fear to Safety: A Roadmap to Recovery From Musculoskeletal Pain

Contemporary conceptualizations of pain emphasize its protective function. The meaning assigned to pain drives cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses. When pain is threatening and a person lacks control over their pain experience, it can become distressing, self-perpetuating, and disabling. Although the pathway to disability is well established, the pathway to recovery is less researched and understood. This Perspective draws on recent data on the lived experience of people with pain-related fear to discuss both fear and safety-learning processes and their implications for recovery for people living with pain. Recovery is here defined as achievement of control over pain as well as improvement in functional capacity and quality of life. Based on the common-sense model, this Perspective proposes a framework utilizing Cognitive Functional Therapy to promote safety learning. A process is described in which experiential learning combined with "sense making" disrupts a person's unhelpful cognitive representation and behavioral and emotional response to pain, leading them on a journey to recovery. This framework incorporates principles of inhibitory processing that are fundamental to pain-related fear and safety learning.

The Relationship Between Pain-Related Threat and Motor Behavior in Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although pain-related fear and catastrophizing are predictors of disability in low back pain (LBP), their relationship with guarded motor behavior is unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the relationship between pain-related threat (via pain-related fear and catastrophizing) and motor behavior during functional tasks in adults with LBP.

METHODS

This review followed PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched to April 2021. Included studies measured the association between pain-related fear or pain catastrophizing and motor behavior (spinal range of motion, trunk coordination and variability, muscle activity) during movement in adults with nonspecific LBP. Studies were excluded if participants were postsurgery or diagnosed with specific LBP. Two independent reviewers extracted all data. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess for risk of bias. Correlation coefficients were pooled using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Reduced spinal range of motion during flexion tasks was weakly related to pain-related fear (15 studies, r = -0.21, 95% CI = -0.31 to -0.11) and pain catastrophizing (7 studies, r = -0.24, 95% CI = -0.38 to -0.087). Pain-related fear was unrelated to spinal extension (3 studies, r = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.33 to 0.026). Greater trunk extensor muscle activity during bending was moderately related to pain-related fear (2 studies, r = -0.40, 95% CI = -0.55 to -0.23). Pain catastrophizing, but not fear, was related to higher trunk activity during gait (2 studies, r = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.063 to 0.42). Methodological differences and missing data limited robust syntheses of studies examining muscle activity, so these findings should be interpreted carefully.

CONCLUSION

This study found a weak to moderate relationship between pain-related threat and guarded motor behavior during flexion-based tasks, but not consistently during other movements.

IMPACT

These findings provide a jumping-off point for future clinical research to explore the advantages of integrated treatment strategies that target both psychological and motor behavior processes compared with traditional approaches.

Classification Approaches for Treating Low Back Pain Have Small Effects That Are Not Clinically Meaningful: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether classification systems improve patient-reported outcomes for people with low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception to June 21, 2021. Reference lists of prior systematic reviews and included trials were screened.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials comparing a classification system (eg, the McKenzie method or the STarT Back Tool) to any comparator. Studies evaluating participants with specific spinal conditions (eg, fractures or tumors) were excluded.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Outcomes were patient-reported LBP intensity, leg pain intensity, and disability. We used the revised Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool to assess risk of bias, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to judge the certainty of evidence. We used random-effects meta-analysis, with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik- Jonkman adjustment, to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD; Hedges' g) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analyses explored classification system, comparator type, pain type, and pain duration.

RESULTS

Twenty-four trials assessing classification systems and 34 assessing subclasses were included. There was low certainty of a small effect at the end of intervention for LBP intensity (SMD, -0.31; 95% CI: -0.54, -0.07; P = .014, n = 4416, n = 21 trials) and disability (SMD, -0.27; 95% CI: -0.46, -0.07; P = .011, n = 4809, n = 24 trials), favoring classified treatments compared to generalized interventions, but not for leg pain intensity. At the end of intervention, no specific type of classification system was superior to generalized interventions for improving pain intensity and disability. None of the estimates exceeded the effect size that one would consider clinically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

For patient-reported pain intensity and disability, there is insufficient evidence supporting the use of classification systems over generalized interventions when managing LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(2):67-84. Epub 15 Nov 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10761.

Culture and musculoskeletal pain: strategies, challenges, and future directions to develop culturally sensitive physical therapy care

BACKGROUND

Pain experience has a multidimensional nature. Assessment and treatment recommendations for pain conditions suggest clinicians use biopsychosocial approaches to treat pain and disability. The current pain research is overwhelmingly skewed towards the study of biological and psychological factors including interventions, whereas, cultural factors are often ignored.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this Masterclass is threefold: (1) to discuss cultural influences on pain, (2) to provide strategies for delivering appropriate pain education and exercises in culturally diverse people with chronic pain, and (3) to present challenges and future directions to clinicians and researchers.

DISCUSSION

Cultural factors have a relevant influence on the way individuals experience and manage health and illness. Thus, people with different cultural experience perceive, respond, communicate and manage their pain in different ways. In this aspect, the contents of pain education should be presented using different culturally appropriate examples, metaphors, images, and delivery methods that may enhance the impact of the message. Efforts should be made to produce and spread culturally adapted evidence-based materials and resources. In addition, a culturally sensitive approach may help to introduce patients to graded activities, so that they can apply these strategies in culturally acceptable and meaningful ways. Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of culturally-adapted interventions in pain-related outcomes in different pain conditions in patients with different cultural backgrounds.

Self-efficacy and fear of pain to movement in chronic low back pain: an intervention developed by nurses

OBJECTIVE

To test the effect of interventions to chronic low back pain developed by nurses in the Program to Increase Self-efficacy and Reduce the Fear of Pain and Avoidance of Movement.

METHOD

Clinical trial, with 81 patients, carried out in 2016, at the Pain Outpatient Clinic in São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil. The groups received: A (education and exposure), B (education) and C (control). Chi-square, Fisher's Exact, ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests were performed.

RESULTS

Patients in groups A and B improved self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, and disability, compared to group C. The reduction in fear of pain and avoidance of movement was greater in Group A, which also showed a decrease in current pain and overall scores compared to Group B and C.

CONCLUSION

Education was effective in increasing the Self-Efficacy Belief. For the Belief of Fear of Pain and Avoidance of Movement and pain intensity, the association with exposure showed better results.

The Moderating Effect of Treatment Engagement on Fear-avoidance Beliefs in People With Chronic Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

The fear-avoidance model (FAM) is used to explain pain-related disability and design targeted interventions for people with chronic low back pain. While treatment engagement is critical, it is unknown how treatment moderates the FAM.

METHODS

This study examined whether pathways within the FAM were moderated by treatment engagement in 508 people with chronic low back pain. Measures of disability, pain, fear, catastrophizing, anxiety, depression, and self-efficacy were collected through self-report, and descriptors of treatment engaged within the last month (physical activity type, medication, allied and medical health practitioner). Moderated mediation analyses were performed to examine the conditional effect of treatment engagement on fear-avoidance pathways.

RESULTS

The conditional effect of anxiety on disability was only significant for people who did not report any treatment engagement in the last month (B=1.03, 95% confidence interval: 0.53-1.53, P<0.001). The effect of depression increased for people reporting more different types of treatment in the last month (1 level of treatment increase, B=0.27, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-0.50, P=0.019). Conversely, greater treatment engagement had a positive influence on the mediating effect of self-efficacy. That is, the effect of pain on efficacy reduced with greater treatment engagement, with a concomitant increased effect of self-efficacy on disability.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians should explore the history and rationale behind patient treatment seeking behavior to ensure this is not reinforcing the negative effects of depressive symptoms on pain-related disability.

How does individualised physiotherapy work for people with low back pain? A Bayesian Network analysis using randomised controlled trial data

PURPOSE

Individualised physiotherapy is an effective treatment for low back pain. We sought to determine how this treatment works by using randomised controlled trial data to develop a Bayesian Network model.

METHODS

300 randomised controlled trial participants (153 male, 147 female, mean age 44.1) with low back pain (of duration 6-26 weeks) received either individualised physiotherapy or advice. Variables with potential to explain how individualised physiotherapy works were included in a multivariate Bayesian Network model. Modelling incorporated the intervention period (0-10 weeks after study commencement-"early" changes) and the follow-up period (10-52 weeks after study commencement-"late" changes). Sequences of variables in the Bayesian Network showed the most common direct and indirect recovery pathways followed by participants with low back pain receiving individualised physiotherapy versus advice.

RESULTS

Individualised physiotherapy directly reduced early disability in people with low back pain. Individualised physiotherapy exerted indirect effects on pain intensity, recovery expectations, sleep, fear, anxiety, and depression via its ability to facilitate early improvement in disability. Early improvement in disability, led to an early reduction in depression both directly and via more complex pathways involving fear, recovery expectations, anxiety, and pain intensity. Individualised physiotherapy had its greatest influence on early change variables (during the intervention period).

CONCLUSION

Individualised physiotherapy for low back pain appears to work predominately by facilitating an early reduction in disability, which in turn leads to improvements in other biopsychosocial outcomes. The current study cannot rule out that unmeasured mechanisms (such as tissue healing or reduced inflammation) may mediate the relationship between individualised physiotherapy treatment and improvement in disability. Further data-driven analyses involving a broad range of plausible biopsychosocial variables are recommended to fully understand how treatments work for people with low back pain.

TRIALS REGISTRATION

ACTRN12609000834257.

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain has been the leading cause of disability globally for at least the past three decades and results in enormous direct healthcare and lost productivity costs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of exercise treatment on pain and functional limitations in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo and other conservative treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which includes the Cochrane Back and Neck trials register), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), and conducted citation searching of relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies. The review includes data for trials identified in searches up to 27 April 2018. All eligible trials have been identified through searches to 7 December 2020, but have not yet been extracted; these trials will be integrated in the next update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed exercise treatment compared to no treatment, usual care, placebo or other conservative treatment on the outcomes of pain or functional limitations for a population of adult participants with chronic non-specific low back pain of more than 12 weeks' duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened and assessed studies independently, with consensus. We extracted outcome data using electronic databases; pain and functional limitations outcomes were re-scaled to 0 to 100 points for meta-analyses where 0 is no pain or functional limitations. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool and used GRADE to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence. When required, we contacted study authors to obtain missing data. To interpret meta-analysis results, we considered a 15-point difference in pain and a 10-point difference in functional limitations outcomes to be clinically important for the primary comparison of exercise versus no treatment, usual care or placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 249 trials of exercise treatment, including studies conducted in Europe (122 studies), Asia (38 studies), North America (33 studies), and the Middle East (24 studies). Sixty-one per cent of studies (151 trials) examined the effectiveness of two or more different types of exercise treatment, and 57% (142 trials) compared exercise treatment to a non-exercise comparison treatment. Study participants had a mean age of 43.7 years and, on average, 59% of study populations were female. Most of the trials were judged to be at risk of bias, including 79% at risk of performance bias due to difficulty blinding exercise treatments. We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise treatment is more effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons for pain outcomes at earliest follow-up (MD -15.2, 95% CI -18.3 to -12.2), a clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to heterogeneity. For the same comparison, there was moderate-certainty evidence for functional limitations outcomes (MD -6.8 (95% CI -8.3 to -5.3); this finding did not meet our prespecified threshold for minimal clinically important difference. Certainty of evidence was downgraded mainly due to some evidence of publication bias.  Compared to all other investigated conservative treatments, exercise treatment was found to have improved pain (MD -9.1, 95% CI -12.6 to -5.6) and functional limitations outcomes (MD -4.1, 95% CI -6.0 to -2.2). These effects did not meet our prespecified threshold for clinically important difference. Subgroup analysis of pain outcomes suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than education alone (MD -12.2, 95% CI -19.4 to -5.0) or non-exercise physical therapy (MD -10.4, 95% CI -15.2 to -5.6), but with no differences observed for manual therapy (MD 1.0, 95% CI -3.1 to 5.1). In studies that reported adverse effects (86 studies), one or more adverse effects were reported in 37 of 112 exercise groups (33%) and 12 of 42 comparison groups (29%). Twelve included studies reported measuring adverse effects in a systematic way, with a median of 0.14 (IQR 0.01 to 0.57) per participant in the exercise groups (mostly minor harms, e.g. muscle soreness), and 0.12 (IQR 0.02 to 0.32) in comparison groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-certainty evidence that exercise is probably effective for treatment of chronic low back pain compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo for pain. The observed treatment effect for the exercise compared to no treatment, usual care or placebo comparisons is small for functional limitations, not meeting our threshold for minimal clinically important difference. We also found exercise to have improved pain (low-certainty evidence) and functional limitations outcomes (moderate-certainty evidence) compared to other conservative treatments; however, these effects were small and not clinically important when considering all comparisons together. Subgroup analysis suggested that exercise treatment is probably more effective than advice or education alone, or electrotherapy, but with no differences observed for manual therapy treatments.

The Immediate Adverse Events of Lumbar Interventional Pain Procedures in 4209 Patients; an Observational Clinical Study

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar interventional pain procedures (LIPP) are frequently used in low back pain and show an increasing trend in recent years. LIPP are highly effective when performed by properly trained physicians. However, some adverse events are seen during interventional procedures. Our aim in this study is to determine the immediate adverse events rates of LIPP and to inform our colleagues about possible adverse events.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

A university hospital pain management center.

METHODS

After approval of the institutional ethics committee, a retrospectively evaluation of patients, who received fluoroscopy guided LIPP between January 2015 and December 2020, were performed. This observational study was conducted with 4209 patients who underwent LIPP including epidural steroid injections, sacroiliac and facet joint injections, medial branch blocks or RF, dorsal root ganglion pulse RF, epidural catheter or spinal cord stimulator applications.

RESULTS

No major adverse events were detected during the procedures. Minor adverse events were detected in a 60 patients and adverse events rate was found to be 1.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0-1.8%). Minor adverse events rates vary between 0.7-2.3% according to the procedures type. The most common adverse events was determined as vasovagal reactions (26/60). Facial numbness, cramps, and seizures were detected as rare adverse events.

CONCLUSION

There were no major adverse events were seen during 4209 patients. The rate of minor adverse events were 1.4% with no sequelae in any of the events. When evidence-based guidelines are followed, interventional pain procedures are performed safely.

Self-management at the core of back pain care: 10 key points for clinicians

BACKGROUND

A paradigm shift away from clinician-led management of people with chronic disorders to people playing a key role in their own care has been advocated. At the same time, good health is recognised as the ability to adapt to changing life circumstances and to self-manage. Under this paradigm, successful management of persistent back pain is not mainly about clinicians diagnosing and curing patients, but rather about a partnership where clinicians help individuals live good lives despite back pain.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we discuss why there is a need for clinicians to engage in supporting self-management for people with persistent back pain and which actions clinicians can take to integrate self-management support in their care for people with back pain.

DISCUSSION

People with low back pain (LBP) self-manage their pain most of the time. Therefore, clinicians and health systems should empower them to do it well and provide knowledge and skills to make good decisions related to LBP and general health. Self-management does not mean that people are alone and without health care, rather it empowers people to know when to consult for diagnostic assessment, symptom relief, or advice. A shift in health care paradigm and clinicians' roles is not only challenging for individual clinicians, it requires organisational support in clinical settings and health systems. Currently, there is no clear evidence showing how exactly LBP self-management is most effectively supported in clinical practice, but core elements have been identified that involve working with cognitions related to pain, behaviour change, and patient autonomy.

Effects of behavioural exercise therapy on the effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The long-term effects of behavioural medical rehabilitation (BMR), as a type of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain (CLBP) have been shown. However, the specific effects of behavioural exercise therapy (BET) compared to standard exercise therapy (SET) within BMR are not well understood. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of BMR + BET compared to BMR + SET in individuals with CLBP in a two-armed, pre-registered, multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

A total of 351 adults with CLBP in two rehabilitation centres were online randomised based on an 'urn randomisation' algorithm to either BMR + SET (n = 175) or BMR + BET (n = 176). Participants in both study groups were non-blinded and received BMR, consisting of an multidisciplinary admission, a psychosocial assessment, multidisciplinary case management, psychological treatment, health education and social counselling. The intervention group (BMR + BET) received a manualised, biopsychosocial BET within BMR. The aim of BET was to develop self-management strategies in coping with CLBP. The control group (BMR + SET) received biomedical SET within BMR with the aim to improve mainly physical fitness. Therapists in both study groups were not blinded. The BMR lasted on average 27 days, and both exercise programmes had a mean duration of 26 h. The primary outcome was functional ability at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were e.g. pain, avoidance-endurance, pain management and physical activity. The analysis was by intention-to-treat, blinded to the study group, and used a linear mixed model.

RESULTS

There were no between-group differences observed in function at the end of the BMR (mean difference, 0.08; 95% CI - 2.82 to 2.99; p = 0.955), at 6 months (mean difference, - 1.80; 95% CI; - 5.57 to 1.97; p = 0.349) and at 12 months (mean difference, - 1.33; 95% CI - 5.57 to 2.92; p = 0.540). Both study groups improved in the primary outcome and most secondary outcomes at 12 months with small to medium effect sizes.

CONCLUSION

BMR + BET was not more effective in improving function and other secondary outcomes in individuals with CLBP compared to BMR + SET.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current controlled trials NCT01666639 , 16/08/2012.

Changes in physiotherapy students' beliefs and attitudes about low back pain through pre-registration training

BACKGROUND

Implementation of best-practice care for patients with low back pain (LBP) is an important issue. Physiotherapists' who hold unhelpful beliefs are less likely to adhere to guidelines and may negatively influence their patients' beliefs. Pre-registration education is critical in moving towards a biopsychosocial model of care. This study aimed to investigate the changes in 2nd year physiotherapy students' beliefs about LBP after a module on spinal pain management and determine whether these changes were maintained at the end of academic training.

METHODS

During three consecutive calendar years, this longitudinal cohort study assessed physiotherapy students' beliefs with the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaires (Back-PAQ) in their 1st year, before and after their 2nd year spinal management learning module, and at the end of academic training (3rd year). Unpaired t-tests were conducted to explore changes in Back-PAQ score.

RESULTS

The mean response rate after the spinal management module was 90% (128/143 students). The mean (± SD) Back-PAQ score was 87.73 (± 14.21) before and 60.79 (± 11.44) after the module, representing a mean difference of - 26.95 (95%CI - 30.09 to - 23.80, p < 0.001). Beliefs were further improved at the end of 3rd year (- 7.16, 95%CI - 10.50 to - 3.81, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A spinal management learning module considerably improved physiotherapy students' beliefs about back pain. Specifically, unhelpful beliefs about the back being vulnerable and in need of protection were substantially decreased after the module. Improvements were maintained at the end of academic training one-year later. Future research should investigate whether modifying students' beliefs leads to improved clinical practice in their first years of practice.

A Cognitive Functional Therapy+ Pathway Versus an Interdisciplinary Pain Management Pathway for Patients With Severe Chronic Low Back Pain (CONFeTTI Trial): Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is the leading cause of disability. Interdisciplinary pain management is recommended for patients with severe/high-impact cLBP. Such programs are expensive, not easily accessible, and have limited effect; therefore, new cost-effective strategies are warranted. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) has shown promising results but has not been compared with an interdisciplinary pain management approach. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to investigate if a pathway starting with CFT including psychologist support (CFT+) with the option of additional usual care (if needed) is superior in improving disability and more cost-effective at 12 months compared with an interdisciplinary pain management pathway (usual care).

METHODS

This pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial will randomly allocate patients (n = 176) aged 18 to 75 years referred to an interdisciplinary pain center due to severe cLBP to 1 of 2 groups (1:1 ratio). Participants randomized to CFT+ will participate in a 3-month functional rehabilitation pathway with the option of additional usual care (if needed), and participants randomized to the interdisciplinary pain management pathway will participate in an individualized program of longer duration designed to best suit the individual's situation, needs, and resources. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with an 8-point improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index score at 12 months. Exploratory outcomes are change in Oswestry Disability Index scores over time and an economic analysis of quality-adjusted life years using the 3-level version of the EuroQol EQ-5D.

IMPACT

The study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of CFT+ with the option of additional usual care (if needed) for individuals with severe cLBP. Findings can potentially improve future care pathways and reduce cost for the health care system.

CBT and CFT for Chronic Pain

Purpose of Review

Chronic pain is a widespread public and physical health crisis, as it is one of the most common reasons adults seek medical care and accounts for the largest medical reason for disability in the USA (Glombiewski et al., J Consult Clin Psychol. 86(6):533-545, 2018; Schemer et al., Eur J Pain. 23(3):526-538, 2019). Chronic pain is associated with decreased functional status, opioid dependence and substance abuse disorders, mental health crises, and overall lower perceived quality of life (Korff et al., J Pain. 17(10):1068-1080, 2016). For example, the leading cause of chronic pain and the leading cause of long-term disability is low back pain (LBP) (Bjorck-van Dijken et al. J Rehabil Med. 40:864–9, 2008). Evidence suggests that persistent low back pain (pLBP) is a multidimensional biopsychosocial problem with various contributing factors (Cherkin et al., JAMA. 315(12):1240-1249, 2016). Emotional distress, pain-related fear, and protective movement behaviors are all unhelpful lifestyle factors that previously were more likely to go unaddressed when assessing and treating patient discomfort (Pincus et al., Spine. 38:2118–23, 2013). Those that are not properly assisted with these psychosocial issues are often unlikely to benefit from treatment in the primary care setting and thus are referred to multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation physicians. This itself increases healthcare costs, and treatments can be invasive and have risks of their own. Therefore, less expensive and more accessible management strategies targeting these psychosocial issues should be started to facilitate improvement early. As a biopsychosocial disorder, chronic pain is influenced by a range of factors including lifestyle, mental health status, familial culture, and socioeconomic status. Physicians have moved toward multi-modal pain approaches in order to combat this public health dilemma, ranging from medications with several different mechanisms of action, lifestyle changes, procedural pain control, and psychological interventions (Fashler et al., Pain Res Manag. 2016:5960987, 2016). Part of the rehabilitation process now more and more commonly includes cognitive behavioral and cognitive functional therapy. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) are both multidimensional psychological approaches to combat the mental portion of difficult pain control. While these therapies are quite different in their approach, they lend to the idea that chronic pain can and should be targeted using coping mechanisms, helping patients understand the pathophysiological process of pain, and altering behavior.

Recent Findings

CFT differs from CBT functionally, as instead of improving managing/coping mechanisms of pain control from a solely mental approach, CFT directly points out maladaptive behaviors and actively challenges the patient to change them in a cognitively integrated, progressive overloading functional manner (Bjorck-van Dijken et al. J Rehabil Med. 40:864–9, 2008). This allows CFT to be targeted to each individual patient, with the goal of personalized reconceptualization of the pain response. The end goal is to overcome the barriers that prevent functional status improvement, a healthy lifestyle, and reaching their personal goals.

Summary

Chronic pain is a major public health issue. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) are both multidimensional psychological approaches to combat the mental portion of difficult pain control. While these therapies are quite different in their approach, they lend to the idea that chronic pain can and should be targeted using coping mechanisms, helping patients understand the pathophysiological process of pain, and altering behavior.

Implementing a behavioral medicine approach in physiotherapy for patients with musculoskeletal pain: a scoping review

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

The interventions in the scoping review were in agreement with the definition of behavioral medicine in physiotherapy, but reported behavior change techniques were few.

In intervention research on musculoskeletal pain, physiotherapists often study behavioral and cognitive components. Evidence on applying these components has increased during the past decade. However, how to effectively integrate behavioral and cognitive components in the biopsychosocial management of musculoskeletal pain is challenging. The aim was to study the intervention components and patient outcomes of studies integrating behavioral and cognitive components in physiotherapy, to match the interventions with a definition of behavioral medicine in physiotherapy and to categorize the behavior change techniques targeted at patients with musculoskeletal pain in (1) randomized controlled effect trials or (2) implementation in clinical practice trials. A scoping review was used to conduct this study, and the PRISMA-ScR checklist was applied. Relevant studies were identified from the PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science Core databases separately for the (1) randomized controlled effect trials and (2) implementation in clinical practice trials. Synthesis for the matching of the patient interventions with the existing definition of behavior medicine in physiotherapy showed that the interventions mostly integrated psychosocial, behavioral, and biomedical/physical aspects, and were thus quite consistent with the definition of behavioral medicine in physiotherapy. The reported behavior change techniques were few and were commonly in categories such as “information of natural consequences,” “feedback and monitoring,” and “goals and planning.” The patient outcomes for long-term follow-ups often showed positive effects. The results of this scoping review may inform future research, policies, and practice.

Changes in pain sensitivity and spinal stiffness in relation to responder status following spinal manipulative therapy in chronic low Back pain: a secondary explorative analysis of a randomized trial

Background

In a prior randomized trial, we demonstrated that participants receiving spinal manipulative therapy at a pain-sensitive segment instead of a stiff segment experienced increased mechanical pressure pain thresholds. We hypothesized that the targeted segment mediated this increase through a segment-dependent neurophysiological reflective pathway. Presently, it is not known if this decrease in pain sensitivity is associated with clinical improvement. Therefore, we performed an explorative analysis to examine if changes in experimental pain sensitivity (mechanical and thermal) and lumbar stiffness were further dependent on clinical improvement in disability and patient-reported low back pain.

Methods

This study is a secondary explorative analysis of data from the randomized trial that compared 132 participants with chronic low back pain who received lumbar spinal manipulative therapy applied at either i) the stiffest segment or ii) the segment having the lowest pain threshold (i.e., the most pain-sensitive segment). We collected data at baseline, after the fourth session of spinal manipulation, and at 14-days follow-up. Participants were dichotomized into responders/non-responders using different clinical variables (disability and patient-reported low back pain) with varying threshold values (0, 30, and 50% improvement). Mixed models were used to assess changes in experimental outcomes (stiffness and pain sensitivity). The fixed interaction terms were time, segment allocation, and responder status.

Results

We observed a significant increase in mechanical pressure pain thresholds for the group, which received spinal manipulative therapy at the most pain-sensitive segment independent of whether they improved clinically or not. Those who received spinal manipulation at the stiffest segment also demonstrated increased mechanical pain sensitivity, but only in the subgroup with clinical improvement. We did not observe any changes in lumbar stiffness.

Conclusion

Our results suggest the existence of two different mechanistic pathways associated with the spinal manipulation target. i) A decrease of mechanical pain sensitivity independent of clinical outcome (neurophysiological) and ii) a decrease as a reflection of the clinical outcome. Together, these observations may provide a novel framework that improves our understanding of why some respond to spinal manipulative therapy while others do not.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04086667 registered retrospectively September 11th 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-020-03873-3.

Evaluation of Absenteeism, Pain, and Disability in Nurses With Persistent Low Back Pain Following Cognitive Functional Therapy: A Case Series Pilot Study With 3-Year Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE

Persistent low back pain (PLBP) is a common and costly health problem worldwide. Better strategies to manage it are required. The purpose of this study was to longitudinally evaluate absenteeism, pain, and disability in nurses with PLBP following a cognitive functional therapy (CFT) intervention.

METHODS

In this case series pilot study, 33 eligible nurses with PLBP were recruited. During the baseline phase (phase A; no intervention), outcome measures were collected on 2 occasions 6 months apart (A1 and A2). During phase B, participants received an individualized CFT intervention for 14 weeks. During phase C (no intervention), outcomes were measured immediately after the intervention, as well as 3, 6, 9, 12, and 36 months after the intervention (secondary outcomes only until 12 months). LBP-related work absenteeism, pain intensity (numerical pain rating scale) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index) were the primary outcomes. Health care seeking, a range of psychological and lifestyle variables, and global perceived effect were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Days of absenteeism due to LBP were significantly reduced in the first and second calendar years after the CFT intervention but not the third and fourth. Disability was significantly reduced immediately after (-4.4; 95% CI = -6.5 to -2.2) and at 3 months (-4.3; 95% CI = -6.6 to -2.0), 9 months (-6.0; 95% CI = -8.1 to -3.9), and 12 months (-4.9; 95% CI = -7.0 to -2.8) after the intervention. Pain was significantly reduced immediately after (-1.2; 95% CI = -1.7 to -0.8) and at 3 months (-1.5; 95% CI = -2.0 to -0.9), 9 months (-1.1; 95% CI = -1.9 to -0.3), and 12 months (-0.9; 95% CI = -1.5 to -0.2) after the intervention. Total health care seeking (consults and proportion of participants) was significantly reduced after the intervention. All psychosocial variables, except for 1, demonstrated significant improvements at all follow-up assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

This case series pilot study demonstrated significant reductions in LBP-related absenteeism, pain intensity, disability, health care seeking, and several psychological and lifestyle behaviors until the 1-year follow-up among nurses with PLBP following an individualized CFT intervention. Further evaluation of the efficacy of CFT in high-quality randomized clinical trials among nurses is recommended.

Psychosocial Moderators and Mediators of Sensorimotor Exercise in Low Back Pain: A Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial

The effects of exercise interventions on unspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP) have been investigated in many studies, but the results are inconclusive regarding exercise types, efficiency, and sustainability. This may be because the influence of psychosocial factors on exercise induced adaptation regarding CLBP is neglected. Therefore, this study assessed psychosocial characteristics, which moderate and mediate the effects of sensorimotor exercise on LBP. A single-blind 3-arm multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted for 12-weeks. Three exercise groups, sensorimotor exercise (SMT), sensorimotor and behavioral training (SMT-BT), and regular routines (CG) were randomly assigned to 662 volunteers. Primary outcomes (pain intensity and disability) and psychosocial characteristics were assessed at baseline (M1) and follow-up (3/6/12/24 weeks, M2-M5). Multiple regression models were used to analyze whether psychosocial characteristics are moderators of the relationship between exercise and pain, meaning that psychosocial factors and exercise interact. Causal mediation analysis were conducted to analyze, whether psychosocial characteristics mediate the exercise effect on pain. A total of 453 participants with intermittent pain (mean age = 39.5 ± 12.2 years, f = 62%) completed the training. It was shown, that depressive symptomatology (at M4, M5), vital exhaustion (at M4), and perceived social support (at M5) are significant moderators of the relationship between exercise and the reduction of pain intensity. Further depressive mood (at M4), social-satisfaction (at M4), and anxiety (at M5 SMT) significantly moderate the exercise effect on pain disability. The amount of moderation was of clinical relevance. In contrast, there were no psychosocial variables which mediated exercise effects on pain. In conclusion it was shown, that psychosocial variables can be moderators in the relationship between sensorimotor exercise induced adaptation on CLBP which may explain conflicting results in the past regarding the merit of exercise interventions in CLBP. Results suggest further an early identification of psychosocial risk factors by diagnostic tools, which may essential support the planning of personalized exercise therapy. Level of Evidence: Level I. Clinical Trial Registration: DRKS00004977, LOE: I, MiSpEx: grant-number: 080102A/11-14. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00004977.

Comparing the effectiveness of group-based exercise to other non-pharmacological interventions for chronic low back pain: A systematic review

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide with a substantial financial burden on individuals and health care systems. To address this, clinical practice guidelines often recommend non-pharmacological, non-invasive management approaches. One management approach that has been recommended and widely implemented for chronic LBP is group-based exercise programs, however, their clinical value compared with other non-pharmacological interventions has not been investigated systematically.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of group-based exercise with other non-pharmacological interventions in people with chronic LBP.

Methods

Four electronic databases were searched by two independent reviewers. Only randomized controlled trials that compared group-based exercise with other non-pharmacological interventions for chronic LBP were eligible. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of Interventions by two independent reviewers.

Results

Eleven studies were eligible. We identified strong evidence of no difference between group exercise and other non-pharmacologic interventions for disability level and pain scores 3-month post-intervention in people with chronic LBP. We could not find any strong or moderate evidence for or against the use of group-based exercise in the rehabilitation of people with chronic LBP for other time-points and health measurement outcomes. We found no statistically significant differences in disability and quality of life and pain between the group and individual non-pharmacological interventions that included exercise.

Conclusion

With this equivocal finding, group-based exercise may be a preferred choice given potential advantages in other domains not reviewed here such as motivation and cost. Further research in this area is needed to evaluate this possibility.

The Role of Fear-Avoidance Beliefs on Low Back Pain-Related Disability in a Developing Socioeconomic and Conservative Culture: A Cross-Sectional Study of a Pakistani Population

Background

The relationship of low back pain, the world’s top disabling condition, with functional disability is often explained by the mediation effect of fear, catastrophizing, and psychological distress. These relationships have not been explored within chronic back pain patients from a low socio-economic, predominantly Muslim country. Thus, it was unclear whether previously established pathways would be consistent in Pakistani pain patients to help guide Pakistani clinicians caring for back pain patients. This cross-sectional study translated English versions of questionnaires within the fear-avoidance model into Urdu, tested the clinimetric properties of the Urdu versions for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) in Pakistan, and performed mediation analysis to investigate pathways of the fear-avoidance model.

Methods

Translation of questionnaires was completed in 4 steps using the forward-backward technique, with subsequent analyses for internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), construct validity (Pearson’s r-value), and test–retest reliability (ICC r-value). Multiple mediation analysis with bootstrapping was performed to analyze pathways within the fear-avoidance model from the Urdu translated questionnaires.

Results

A total of 151 people from Pakistan with CLBP completed the questionnaires, with good results for internal consistency (r > 0.85), convergent validity (r > 0.59), and test–retest reliability (ICC r > 0.85). The association of pain with disability was significant (B=2.36, r² = 0.19, p<0.001), and the indirect effect of the mediators explained 81% of pain intensity’s total effect on disability. All mediators, apart from physical activity-related fear-avoidance beliefs, were significant mediators of the effect of pain intensity on disability.

Conclusion

The Urdu versions of the fear-avoidance questionnaires show good clinimetric properties for use in clinical settings and research in Pakistan. These analyses support existing data for the mediation effect of catastrophizing, psychological distress, and self-efficacy on pain-related disability, and extends these findings to suggest that fear about work may be more important in a relatively lower socioeconomic sample of pain patients.

Psychological interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol of a systematic review with network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Psychological factors such as fear avoidance beliefs, depression, anxiety, catastrophic thinking and familial and social stress, have been associated with high disability levels in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). Guidelines endorse the integration of psychological interventions in the management of chronic LBP. However, uncertainty surrounds the comparative effectiveness of different psychological approaches. Network meta-analysis (NMA) allows comparison and ranking of numerous competing interventions for a given outcome of interest. Therefore, we will perform a systematic review with a NMA to determine which type of psychological intervention is most effective for adults with chronic non-specific LBP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, SCOPUS and CINAHL) from inception until 22 August 2019 for randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions to any comparison interventions in adults with chronic non-specific LBP. There will be no restriction on language. The primary outcomes will include physical function and pain intensity, and secondary outcomes will include health-related quality of life, fear avoidance, intervention compliance and safety. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) tool and confidence in the evidence will be assessed using the Confidence in NMA (CINeMA) framework. We will conduct a random-effects NMA using a frequentist approach to estimate relative effects for all comparisons between treatments and rank treatments according to the mean rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. All analyses will be performed in Stata.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019138074.

Yoga compared to non-exercise or physical therapy exercise on pain, disability, and quality of life for patients with chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a common and often disabling musculoskeletal condition. Yoga has been proven to be an effective therapy for chronic low back pain. However, there are still controversies about the effects of yoga at different follow-up periods and compared with other physical therapy exercises.

Objective

To critically compare the effects of yoga for patients with chronic low back pain on pain, disability, quality of life with non-exercise (e.g. usual care, education), physical therapy exercise.

Methods

This study was registered in PROSPERO, and the registration number was CRD42020159865. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of online databases included PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase which evaluated effects of yoga for patients with chronic low back pain on pain, disability, and quality of life were searched from inception time to November 1, 2019. Studies were eligible if they assessed at least one important outcome, namely pain, back-specific disability, quality of life. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included randomized controlled trials. The continuous outcomes were analyzed by calculating the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) according to whether combining outcomes measured on different scales or not.

Results

A total of 18 randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. Yoga could significantly reduce pain at 4 to 8 weeks (MD = -0.83, 95% CI = -1.19 to -0.48, p<0.00001, I² = 0%), 3 months (MD = -0.43, 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.23, p<0.0001, I² = 0%), 6 to 7 months (MD = -0.56, 95% CI = -1.02 to -0.11, p = 0.02, I² = 50%), and was not significant in 12 months (MD = -0.52, 95% CI = -1.64 to 0.59, p = 0.36, I² = 87%) compared with non-exercise. Yoga was better than non-exercise on disability at 4 to 8 weeks (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.51 to -0.10, p = 0.003, I² = 0%), 3 months (SMD = -0.31, 95% CI = -0.45 to -0.18, p<0.00001, I² = 30%), 6 months (SMD = -0.38, 95% CI = -0.53 to -0.23, p<0.00001, I² = 0%), 12 months (SMD = -0.33, 95% CI = -0.54 to -0.12, p = 0.002, I² = 9%). There was no significant difference on pain, disability compared with physical therapy exercise group. Furthermore, it suggested that there was a non-significant difference on physical and mental quality of life between yoga and any other interventions.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis provided evidence from very low to moderate investigating the effectiveness of yoga for chronic low back pain patients at different time points. Yoga might decrease pain from short term to intermediate term and improve functional disability status from short term to long term compared with non-exercise (e.g. usual care, education). Yoga had the same effect on pain and disability as any other exercise or physical therapy. Yoga might not improve the physical and mental quality of life based on the result of a merging.

Movement, posture and low back pain. How do they relate? A replicated single-case design in 12 people with persistent, disabling low back pain

BACKGROUND

Movement and posture are commonly believed to relate to non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). While people with NSLBP appear to move and posture themselves differently from those without NSLBP, changes in movement and posture infrequently relate to improvements in NSLBP when analysed at a group-level. Additionally, little is known about how movement or posture change when clinical outcome improves.

METHODS

Within-person relationships were investigated using a replicated, repeated measures, single-case design in 12 people with persistent, disabling NSLBP. Individually relevant movement and posture were captured using wearable sensors on up to 20 occasions over a 22-week period (5-week baseline, 12-week physiotherapy-led intervention, 5-week follow-up), while pain and activity limitation were collected concomitantly. A series of cross-correlation analyses estimated the presence, strength, and direction of relationships.

RESULTS

Many participants (n = 10/12) had strong (e.g. r = 0.91, p = <0.001) relationships between changes in movement or posture and changes in pain and activity limitation, while some showed no strong association. Where relationships were observed, clinical improvement predominantly (93% or 57/61 relationships) related to increased spinal movement range and velocity during forward bending and lifting, reduced lumbar muscle EMG activity at maximum voluntary flexion, and increased posterior-pelvic-tilt during sitting and standing.

CONCLUSION

Within-person changes to individually relevant movement and posture appear to often relate to clinical outcome, but not always. When changes were related, movement and posture appear to return towards being 'less protective', however causal directions remain unknown. Important activities, movements, and postural parameters varied across the participants, highlighting the potential importance of individualized management.

SIGNIFICANCE

Changes to individually relevant movement and posture appear to often relate to clinical outcome, but not always. Patient-specific activities, and movement or postural parameters that related to improved pain and activity limitation, varied across the 12 participants, highlighting the potential importance of individualised management. Where clinical improvements were related to changes in movement or posture, participants consistently returned towards being 'less protective' (increased range and speed of movement, increased posterior-pelvic-tilt during sitting and standing). Mechanisms and generalizability remain unclear.

Beliefs about the body and pain: the critical role in musculoskeletal pain management

BACKGROUND

Beliefs about the body and pain play a powerful role in behavioural and emotional responses to musculoskeletal pain. What a person believes and how they respond to their musculoskeletal pain can influence how disabled they will be by pain. Importantly, beliefs are modifiable and are therefore considered an important target for the treatment of pain-related disability. Clinical guidelines recommend addressing unhelpful beliefs as the first line of treatment in all patients presenting with musculoskeletal pain. However, many clinicians hold unhelpful beliefs themselves; while others feel ill-equipped to explore and target the beliefs driving unhelpful responses to pain. As a result, clinicians may reinforce unhelpful beliefs, behaviours and resultant disability among the patients they treat.

METHODS

To assist clinicians, in Part 1 of this paper we discuss what beliefs are; how they are formed; the impact they can have on a person's behaviour, emotional responses and outcomes of musculoskeletal pain. In Part 2, we discuss how we can address beliefs in clinical practice. A clinical case is used to illustrate the critical role that beliefs can have on a person's journey from pain and disability to recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

We encourage clinicians to exercise self-reflection to explore their own beliefs and better understand their biases, which may influence their management of patients with musculoskeletal pain. We suggest actions that may benefit their practice, and we propose key principles to guide a process of behavioural change.

Frequently repeated measurements -our experience of collecting data with SMS

Background

As technology is advancing, so are the possibilities for new data collection methods in research, potentially improving data quality and validity of the results. In Sweden, a system using frequent repeated data collection using text messages, SMS Track, has been used in clinical research for more than a decade. In this paper, compliance with repeated text message questions was examined across five different studies, i.e. if compliance was

1: associated with study-specific factors (age or gender of the subjects, the condition, its’ severity or course, i.e. improvement, relapse or steady state) and/or.

2: associated with the methodology itself (the question being asked, the frequency and number of questions, duration of data collection, initial compliance or the management of the system).

Methods

Descriptive comparisons were done across five studies. Three studies were collecting weekly responses over at least 52 weeks (“Weekly studies”) and were used to investigate the effect of age, sex and pain severity on compliance, the effect of early compliance for late compliance, and finally the early occurrence of two successive weeks with non-compliance.

Result

Compliance was excellent across all five studies, and only influenced somewhat by age, sex and pain-level. The factor “study” remained significant in the final model thus the observed differences may be a result of the conditions studied but does not seem to be attributable to severity or development of these conditions. Number and frequency of questions did not influence compliance, nor did study duration.

Conclusions

Compliance was excellent in the included studies and was not affected by population factors. However, differences in compliance were observed that cannot be easily explained and warrant further investigation. In particular, the nature of the variables or the management of the study are potential areas for further investigations.

Improvements in clinical pain and experimental pain sensitivity after cognitive functional therapy in patients with severe persistent low back pain

Introduction:

Multidisciplinary care is recommended for disabling persistent low back pain (pLBP) nonresponsive to primary care. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a physiotherapy-led individualised intervention targeting psychological, physical, and lifestyle barriers to recovery, to self-manage pLBP.

Objectives:

This pilot study investigated clinical outcomes and pain thresholds after a 12-week CFT pathway in patients with severe pLBP referred to a University Pain Center. Exploratory analyses compared changes in clinical outcomes, opioid consumption, and costs after CFT with changes after a multidisciplinary pain management (MPM) pathway.

Methods:

In total, 47 consecutively referred pLBP patients consented to the CFT pathway. At baseline, 3 and 6 months, clinical outcomes and PPTs were assessed. Control patients (n = 99) who had completed an MPM pathway in the last 3 years were matched from the clinical pain registry used in the Pain Center in a 3:1 ratio based on propensity scores derived from relevant baseline variables of the CFT cases.

Results:

Most clinical outcomes and low back pressure pain threshold were improved at 3 and 6 months after the CFT pathway. Compared with MPM, CFT patients had significantly larger reductions in disability and improved quality of life after the interventions at a lower cost (−3688€ [confidence interval: −3063 to −4314€]). Reduction in pain intensity and proportion of patients withdrawing from opioids (18.2% vs 27.8%) were similar between CFT and MPM groups.

Conclusion:

Improvements in clinical and experimental pain were found after the CFT pathway. Fully powered randomized controlled trials comparing CFT with an MPM program in patients with disabling pLBP are warranted to control for the current limitations.