The impact of different intensities and domains of physical activity on analgesic use and activity limitation in people with low back pain: a prospective cohort study with a one-year follow-up

Health coaching intervention with or without the support of an exercise buddy to increase physical activity of people with chronic low back pain compared to usual care: a feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exercise buddies (people to exercise together with) might support people with low back pain (LBP) to become active. However, involving buddies in randomised controlled trials (RCT) might challenge recruitment, data collection and follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the feasibility of the intervention, recruitment and data collection approaches and potential effects of a health coaching intervention (focused on physical activity) with or without exercise buddies' support on physical activity of people with chronic LBP versus usual discharge care.

DESIGN

Feasibility and pilot RCT.

METHODS

Adults (n = 30) discharged from LBP treatment were randomised to the Buddy-Assisted (health coaching intervention with exercise buddy's support), Individual-Only (health coaching only), or usual care groups. Data were collected at baseline, three and six months. The feasibility of trial's procedures was assessed through recruitment rate (acceptable if >70%), data completion rate (acceptable if ≤ 20% missing data), and follow-up rate (successful if ≥ 85%). The intervention's acceptability was assessed via feedback questionnaires. Preliminary effects on physical activity and other outcomes were also explored.

RESULTS

Recruitment and baseline data completion were acceptable. However, data collection and follow-up rates post-randomisation were not. 85% of the Buddy-Assisted Group believed the buddies helped them to increase physical activity and would recommend the intervention. 70% of the Individual-Only and Control groups believed exercise buddies would help them to become further active.

CONCLUSION

The data collection and follow-up approaches were not successful and need amending before a large-scale RCT. Nonetheless, the buddy-assisted intervention was well-accepted. A future RCT will focus on differences in clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12620001118998).

Clinical guidelines are silent on the recommendation of physical activity and exercise therapy for low back pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise and evaluate the quality of the recommendations for exercise therapy and physical activity from guidelines for the prevention and/or management of low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Included clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain published between 2014 and 2022 and searched in 9 databases until September 2022. The quality of evidence was evaluated with the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation tool (AGREE-II instrument).

RESULTS

After screening 3448 studies, 18 clinical practice guidelines were included in this review. Only five (27 %) guidelines were judged as having a satisfactory quality of evidence (i.e., rigour of development and applicability), and 13 (72 %) of guidelines are discussed and rated as critical. Regarding physical activity, no guidelines provided recommendations for the primary prevention of low back pain or incorporated adequate physical activity aspects considering type, dosage, frequency, and intensity. For exercises, all (100 %) guidelines recommended at least one type of supervised exercise in the management of low back pain, and 16 (88 %) provided an overall recommendation for people to stay active.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines offer minimal or, sometimes, no detail regarding physical activity or specific exercise regimens for the management and prevention of low back pain. When some guidance is provided, the recommendations typically lack specificity concerning the type, intensity, duration, and frequency of exercise and, in many cases, they represent a combination of scarce available evidence and stakeholder perspectives.

Beneficial and harmful effects of physical activity on care-seeking for low back pain: the AUTBACK study

PURPOSE

People who seek more care for low back pain (LBP) tend to experience poorer recovery (e.g. higher pain and disability levels). Understanding the factors associated with care-seeking for LBP might improve patient outcomes and potentially alleviate the burden of LBP on global health systems. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between different intensities, volumes, and domains of physical activity and care-seeking behaviours, in people with a history of LBP.

METHODS

Longitudinal data from adult twins were drawn from the AUstralian Twin BACK study. The primary outcome was the total self-reported frequency (counts) of overall utilisation of care for LBP, over 1 year. Secondary outcomes were the utilisation of health services, and the utilisation of self-management strategies, for LBP (assessed as total frequency over 1 year). Explanatory variables were device-based measures of sedentary behaviour and moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity, and self-reported physical workload, and work, transport, household, and leisure domain physical activity, at baseline.

RESULTS

Data from 340 individuals were included. Median age was 56.4 years (IQR 44.9-62.3 years) and 73% of participants were female. Medium-to-high baseline volumes of sedentary behaviour were significantly associated with greater counts of overall care utilisation (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.04-2.44) and utilisation of self-management strategies (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.02-2.50) for LBP, over 1 year. Medium-to-high baseline volumes of household domain physical activity were significantly associated with greater counts of utilising self-management strategies for LBP over 1 year (IRR 1.62, 95%CI 1.04-2.53). No explanatory variables were associated with the utilisation of health services for LBP.

CONCLUSION

People who engage in higher baseline volumes of sedentary behaviour or physical activity in the household setting (e.g. housework, gardening, yard work, general household maintenance) utilise 1.6 times more care for LBP over 1 year. Findings suggest that higher volumes of these behaviours may be harmful for LBP. No intensities, volumes, or domains of physical activity demonstrated clear benefits for LBP. Where feasible, patients and clinicians should collaborate to screen and develop strategies to reduce engagement in sedentary behaviour or physical activity in the household setting. Contextual factors (e.g. patient symptom severity, sociocultural roles, occupational demands) should be considered when devising appropriate behaviour change strategies.