Pain location matters: the impact of leg pain on health care use, work disability and quality of life in patients with low back pain

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with low back pain with and without radiating leg pain following the GLA:D back program

BACKGROUND

Some patients with low back pain (LBP) also report radiating leg pain which is a prognostic factor for poorer clinical outcomes. We aimed: 1) to compare the baseline characteristics of patients with LBP with - (LBP + leg pain) and without radiating leg pain (LBP - alone); 2) to investigate whether patients with LBP + leg pain show similar post-treatment outcomes as compared to LBP - alone, after participation in an exercise and patient education program, i.e. the GLA:D Back program.

METHODS

The patient sample included 3508 patients in the GLA:D Back program between March 2018 and August 2022. The outcomes were mean changes in LBP intensity, back-related activity limitation, self-efficacy and fear of movement measured from baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months. Baseline characteristics were compared with descriptive statistics, and linear mixed models were used to estimate group differences in changes from baseline to 3-, 6- and 12 months.

RESULTS

1915 (55%) of the patients were in the group LBP- alone and 1593 (45%) in the LBP + leg pain. The LBP + leg pain group displayed higher STarT back classification (greater risk of chronicity) compared to the LBP-alone. The LBP + leg pain group showed almost similar improvements in all outcomes compared to LBP - alone after the GLA:D Back program.

CONCLUSION

In long-lasting (chronic) LBP patients, the LBP + leg pain group improved to the same extent as LBP - alone regarding LBP intensity, disability, and fear of movement following an exercise and patient education program, GLA:D Back.

The prevalence, incidence and management of low back pain with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice: A population-based cohort study in the Rijnmond Primary Care Database

BACKGROUND

Radiating leg pain is common in patients with low back pain (LBP). In this study, we aimed to determine the prevalence and incidence of LBP with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice, and to describe the prescribed medications and requested imaging diagnostics.

METHODS

The Rijnmond Primary Care Database containing over 500,000 primary care patients was used to select patients ≥18 years with LBP with radiating leg pain between 2013 and 2021. Data on patient characteristics, LBP episodes, prescribed medication and requested imaging in the first 3 months of an episode was extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to present patient characteristics and diagnostic/therapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 27,695 patients were included. The total number of LBP with radiating leg pain episodes in these patients was 36,268. In 2021, the incidence and prevalence were 19.1 and 25.7 per 1000 patient years, respectively. In 60% of patients, the episode duration was shorter than 1 month. In 62% of the episodes, patients visited the general practitioner (GP) one to two times. In 59% of the episodes, at least one medication was prescribed, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being the most common one (45%). In approximately 11% of the episodes, additional diagnostic imaging was requested.

CONCLUSION

LBP with radiating leg pain is common in Dutch general practice patients. About 2/3rd were prescribed pain medications. Dutch request few to none diagnostic imaging for these patients which is in line with clinical practice guidelines.

SIGNIFICANCE

In this new study, we have gained insights into the incidence and prevalence of LBP with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice. Both remained fairly stable over the study period of 9 years (2013-2021). Overall, the care burden regarding seeking contact with the GPs and the requested diagnostics seem not to be that high. In 62% of the care episodes, there were one or two consultations with the GP, and in 11% of the episodes a diagnostic imaging was requested. Pain medications frequently prescribed (i.e. 2/3rd of the episodes), with NSAIDs being the most common ones.

The association of the STarT Back Screening Tool and type of leg pain with low back pain disability trajectories: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Multiple factors influence the recovery process of low back pain (LBP). The identification and increased knowledge of prognostic factors might contribute to a better understanding of the course of LBP. The purpose of this study is to investigate the association of the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) risk score and the type of leg pain (non-radiating LBP, referred non-radicular, and radicular radiating leg pain) with the disability trajectory (at baseline, the slope, and recovery at one year) in adults with low back pain.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study in 347 patients with low back pain who sought physiotherapy care at three primary care practices in the Netherlands. Linear mixed models were estimated to describe the association of the SBST risk score and the type of leg pain with disability at baseline, the slope in the disability trajectory, and at twelve months follow-up.

RESULTS

A medium/high risk score on the SBST is associated with higher baseline disability scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), faster initial recovery, and still a higher disability ODI score at 12 months follow-up. Non-radicular referred and radicular radiating leg pain were associated with worse baseline disability ODI scores in LBP. This association was not present for the initial recovery or at the 12 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The SBST is associated with the LBP recovery trajectory. The SBST might be a useful tool to predict the disability trajectory in a heterogeneous group of people with low back pain in primary care and might, therefore, be recommended in future clinical practice guidelines. The type of leg pain was not associated with the recovery trajectory of LBP. Future research might focus on evaluating different types of leg pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: 109,643.

The Effectiveness and Optimal Dose of Resistance Training in Patients With Subacute and Persistent Low Back-Related Leg Pain: A Systematic Review

A subgroup of patients with low back pain (LBP) suffers from low back-related leg pain (LBLP), which can be classified as radicular pain, or somatic referred pain without nerve root involvement. LBLP is considered an obstacle to recovery and a strong negative prognostic factor for medium- and long-term disability. In this review, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness and optimal dose of resistance training (RT) in patients with subacute or persistent LBLP to provide clinical recommendations for practice. This systematic review was conducted by adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. We conducted a literature search on PubMed, PEDro, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients ≥18 years of age were included. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using "the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias" (RoB) and the inter-rater agreement for full-text selection was evaluated using Cohen's Kappa (K). The search elicited a total of 4.537 records, and two RCTs involving a total of 196 participants were identified through a selection process based on title, abstract, and full-text assessment. Both studies had a low to moderate risk of bias. The inter-examiner concordance index for the selection of full text was excellent (K=1). RT seems to be an effective and safe intervention for patients with LBLP, but its long-term effectiveness, superiority over other types of exercise-based therapies, and optimal dosage still constitute a gray area in the literature.

Understanding How Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy Make Sense of and Cope With Their Symptoms

Lumbar radiculopathy, characterized by pain radiating along a nerve root, significantly diminishes the quality of life due to its neuropathic nature. Patients' understanding of their illness and the coping strategies they employ directly influence how they manage their condition. Understanding these illness representations from the patient's perspective is crucial for healthcare providers seeking to optimize treatment outcomes. This study adopted a qualitative interpretive/constructive paradigm to explore this dynamic. A qualitative evidence synthesis approach, utilizing best-fit framework synthesis for data extraction, was applied to analyze primary qualitative studies focused on patient experiences with lumbar radiculopathy. Using SPiDER (Sample, Phenomenon of interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type) to guide the search strategy, extracted data was mapped against the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM) framework. Sixteen studies, with moderate to minor methodological quality concerns, were included in the analysis. Data mapping across CSM domains generated 14 key review findings. Results suggest that patients with high-threat illness representations often exhibit maladaptive coping behaviors (e.g., activity avoidance) driven by emotional responses. In contrast, problem-solving techniques appear to contribute to positive outcomes (e.g., exercise adherence and effective self-management) in patients who perceive their condition as less threatening. These findings highlight the potential benefits of interventions designed to reduce perceived threat levels and enhance self-efficacy in patients with lumbar radiculopathy, leading to improved self-management and ultimately better health outcomes.

Do metrics derived from self-reported and clinician-reported pain drawings agree for individuals with chronic low back pain?

BACKGROUND

Clinicians commonly use pain drawings to define the spatial extent and location of a person's pain, but limited research has investigated who should perform the drawing.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the inter-rater reliability of pain extent and location derived from three sets of pain drawings for people with chronic low back pain: one self-reported and two clinician-reported. Additionally, convergent validity of pain extent was assessed using the same dataset.

DESIGN

Repeated-measures cross-sectional study.

METHOD

Fifteen patients with chronic low back pain and a pool of eight clinicians were involved to assess the reliability of pain extent and location extracted by self-report and clinician-reported pain drawings. Inter-rater reliability of pain extent was computed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland Altman analysis. Convergent validity of pain extent was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation. Inter-rater reliability of pain location was assessed using the Jaccard similarity index.

RESULTS

The inter-reliability analysis for pain extent, derived from self-reported and clinician-reported pain drawings, revealed ICC scores ranging from 0.39 to 0.51, all with wide confidence intervals. The mean Jaccard similarity indexes computed for pain location ranged from 0.60 to 0.65. Moderate to good correlation was found for pain extent derived by the sets of pain drawings.

CONCLUSIONS

Inter-rater reliability of pain extent and pain location derived from self-reported and clinician-reported pain drawings is poor in patients with chronic low back pain. The lack of reliability is also confirmed when considering only clinician-reported PDs. The convergent validity analysis of pain extent revealed that the two pain drawing approaches measure a similar construct.

Treatment effect modifiers for individuals with acute low back pain: secondary analysis of the TARGET trial

ABSTRACT

Treatment effect modifiers identify patient characteristics associated with treatment responses. The purpose of this secondary analysis was to identify potential treatment effect modifiers for disability from the TARGET trial that compared usual care (control) with usual care + psychologically informed physical therapy (PIPT). The sample consisted of a STarT Back tool identified high-risk patients with acute low back pain that completed Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) data at index visit and 6 months later (n = 1250). Candidate treatment effect modifiers were identified a priori and informed by the literature. Linear mixed models tested for treatment effect modification through tests of statistical interaction. All statistical interactions ( P ≤ 0.20) were stratified by modifier to inspect for specific effects ( P ≤ 0.05). Smoking was identified as a potential effect modifier (treatment * smoking interaction, P = 0.08). In participants who were smokers, the effect of PIPT was (ODI = 5.5; 95% CI: 0.6-10.4; P = 0.03) compared with usual care. In participants who were nonsmokers, the effect of PIPT was (ODI = 1.5; 95% CI: -1.4 to 4.4; P = 0.31) compared with usual care. Pain medication was also identified as a potential effect modifier (treatment × pain medication interaction, P = 0.10). In participants prescribed ≥3 pain medications, the effect of PIPT was (ODI = 7.1; 95% CI: -0.1 to 14.2; P = 0.05) compared with usual care. The PIPT effect for participants prescribed no pain medication was (ODI = 3.5; 95% CI: -0.4 to 7.4; P = 0.08) and for participants prescribed 1 to 2 pain medications was (ODI = 0.6; 95% CI: -2.5 to 3.7; P = 0.70) when compared with usual care. These findings may be used for generating hypotheses and planning future clinical trials investigating the effectiveness of tailored application of PIPT.

The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Leg Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement, and Patient Satisfaction After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in patients stratified by preoperative leg pain.

METHODS

Patients undergoing MIS-TLIF were collected through retrospective review of a prospectively maintained single-surgeon database. PROMs administered preoperatively/postoperatively included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 12-Item Short Form (SF-12) Physical/Mental Component Score (PCS/MCS). Patients were grouped based on preoperative VAS leg scores: VAS leg ≤7 or VAS leg >7. Inferential statistics were used to compare PROMs, MCID achievement rates, and postoperative satisfaction between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 562 patients were eligible (168 VAS leg score ≤7; 394 VAS leg score >7). Significant differences between cohorts in postoperative mean PROMs were noted for PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks/2 years, SF-12 PCS at 6 weeks/2 years, SF-12 MCS at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year, VAS back score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months, VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years and ODI at all postoperative time points (P < 0.045, all). In the VAS leg score >7 cohort, a greater proportion achieving MCID for VAS leg score at all postoperative time points and ODI at 12 weeks (P < 0.010, all). Postoperative satisfaction was greater in VAS back score ≤7 cohort for VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years, VAS back score at 12 weeks/2 years, and ODI at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years (P < 0.046, all).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe preoperative leg pain showed worse postoperative PROM scores and patient satisfaction for disability and back/leg pain. MCID achievement rates across cohorts were similar. Patients with severe leg pain may have expectations for surgical benefits incongruent with their postoperative outcomes, and physicians may seek to manage the preoperative expectations of their patients to reflect likely outcomes after MIS-TLIF.

Low Back Pain Versus Back-Related Leg Pain: How Do Patient Expectations and Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Surgery Compare?

Background: An increasing number of lumbar spine conditions are treated surgically. Such intervention, however, is commonly thought to be more effective in addressing leg pain than low back pain. Patient expectations may also contribute to self-reported surgical outcomes. Questions/Purposes: We sought to compare the expectations of patients in 2 groups undergoing lumbar spine surgery: those with predominantly low back pain and those with predominantly leg pain. We also sought to evaluate how these expectations were fulfilled for each group. Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a prior study in which patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery at a single institution completed validated surveys preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively, including a 20-item survey on expectations for lumbar spine surgery. The patients were enrolled in the study between February 2010 and August 2012, and were divided into 2 cohorts: a "Back > Leg" group that consisted of patients with back pain that was isolated or greater than leg pain, and a "Leg ≥ Back" group that consisted of patients with leg pain that equaled or exceeded back pain. The primary analysis compared composite expectation scores (range, 0-100) between groups. Results: A total of 366 patients were deemed eligible for the study; of these, 162 patients were allocated to the Back > Leg group and 204 patients were allocated to the Leg ≥ Back group. Patients in the Leg ≥ Back group had a greater mean preoperative expectation score compared with those in the Back > Leg group. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that higher preoperative expectations were associated with leg pain symptoms after controlling for disease diagnosis. Both groups reported similar proportions of fulfilled expectations. Conclusion: Patients with predominantly leg pain hold greater preoperative expectations for lumbar spine surgery than do patients with predominantly back pain. That these patient groups reported similar fulfillment of their expectations at 2 years postoperatively illustrates the greater clinical outcomes achieved among patients who presented with predominantly leg pain.

Is Chronic Pain Temporal Pattern Associated with Middle-Aged and Older Adults’ Perceptions of their Futures?

A psychological consequence of chronic pain may be an inappropriately limited future time perspective (FTP) for middle-aged and older adults. FTP is defined as one’s perception of time as limited or expansive. Potentially meaningful measures, like pain temporal pattern, are often ignored in the chronic pain literature. The present study uses secondary data to assess the association between pain temporal pattern and FTP, and the moderating effect of pain duration. Among 140 individuals with chronic pain, there was no significant association between pain pattern and FTP. However, both pain-related activity interference and pain duration were associated with FTP where greater interference predicted more limited FTP (b = −0.16, p = .03) and longer pain duration contributed to more expansive FTP (b = 0.001, p = .03). The temporal pattern x pain duration interaction terms were non-significant. We discuss implications, limitations, and future directions of these findings.

The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Disability on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion stratified by preoperative disability.

METHODS

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions were grouped by preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score: ODI <41 or ODI ≥41. PROMs administered pre/postoperatively included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg, ODI, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS)/12-Item Short-Form Mental Composite Score (SF-12 MCS). Satisfaction scores were collected for VAS back/leg and ODI. Coarsened exact match controlled for differences between cohorts. T tests compared mean PROMs and postoperative improvement/satisfaction between cohorts. Simple logistic regression compared MCID achievement.

RESULTS

After coarsened exact matching, there were 118 patients in the ODI ≤41 and 377 patients in the ODI >41 cohort. The ODI >41 cohort saw greater postoperative inpatient VAS pain score and narcotic consumption on days 0/1 (P < 0.018, all). PROMs differed between cohorts: PROMIS-PF, SF-12 PCS, ODI, VAS back/leg at all postoperative time points and SF-12 MCS at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year (P < 0.045, all). Patients in the ODI >41 cohort demonstrated greater proportion achieving MCID for ODI at all postoperative time points and for SF-12 MCS 6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year (P < 0.040, all). The ODI ≤41 cohort demonstrated greater MCID achievement for overall PROMIS-PF and SF-12 PCS 6 months (P < 0.047, all). Postoperative satisfaction was greater in the ODI ≤41 cohort for VAS leg 6 weeks/12 weeks, VAS back 6 weeks/12 weeks, and ODI all postoperative time points (P < 0.048, all).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative disability associated with worse postoperative PROMs and patient satisfaction for disability, back/leg pain at multiple time points. MCID achievement rates across cohorts were similar for most PROMs at most postoperative time points. Patients with severe disability may have unrealistic expectations for surgical benefits, influencing corresponding postoperative satisfaction.

Health-related quality of life deviations from population norms in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: associations with pain, pain cognitions, and endogenous nociceptive modulation

PURPOSE

The primary goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people with lumbar radiculopathy to age- and sex-adjusted population norms. Additionally, it aimed to explore the associations between the HRQoL difference scores and measures related to pain cognitions, pain intensity, and endogenous nociceptive modulation.

METHODS

Using answers from the Short Form 36-item Health Survey and UK population norms, SF-6D difference scores were calculated. A one-sample t test was used to assess the SF-6D difference scores. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to assess the associations between SF-6D difference scores and pain intensity [Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain], pain cognitions [Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ)], and correlates for endogenous nociceptive modulation using quantitative sensory testing.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty people with lumbar radiculopathy scheduled for surgery were included in this study. The mean SF-6D difference score of - 0.26 [SD = 0.09] was found to be significantly less than 0 [95%CI: - 0.27 to - 0.24]. Univariate analyses showed a significant influence from PCS, TSK, and PVAQ on the SF-6D difference scores. The final multivariate regression model included PCS and PVAQ, with only PCS maintaining a statistically significant regression coefficient [b = - 0.002; 95% CI: - 0.004 to - 0.001].

CONCLUSION

People diagnosed with lumbar radiculopathy report significantly lower HRQoL scores when compared with age- and sex-adjusted UK norm values. Even though all examined pain cognitions were found to have a significant association, pain catastrophizing showed the most significant relation to the SF-6D difference scores.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier No. NCT02630732. Date of registration: November 25, 2015.

Recommendations for Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines

The management of patients with lumbosacral radicular pain (LRP) is of primary importance to healthcare professionals. This study aimed to: identify international clinical practice guidelines on LRP, assess their methodological quality, and summarize their diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations. A systematic search was performed (August 2019) in MEDLINE, PEDro, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG), International Guideline Library, Guideline central, and Google Scholar. Guidelines presenting recommendations on diagnosis and/or treatment of adult patients with LRP were included. Two independent reviewers selected eligible guidelines, evaluated quality with Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II, and extracted recommendations. Recommendations were classified into 'should do', 'could do', 'do not do', or 'uncertain'; their consistency was labelled as 'consistent', 'common', or 'inconsistent'. Twenty-three guidelines of varying quality (AGREE II overall assessment ranging from 17% to 92%) were included. Consistent recommendations regarding diagnosis are ('should do'): Straight leg raise (SLR) test, crossed SLR test, mapping pain distribution, gait assessment, congruence of signs and symptoms. Routine use of imaging is consistently not recommended. The following therapeutic options are consistently recommended ('should do'): educational care, physical activity, discectomy under specific circumstances (e.g., failure of conservative treatment). Referral to a specialist is recommended when conservative therapy fails or when steppage gait is present. These recommendations provide a clear overview of the management options in patients with LRP.

Physical Therapy Referral From Primary Care for Acute Back Pain With Sciatica : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined primary care management for acute sciatica, including referral to physical therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether early referral to physical therapy reduced disability more than usual care (UC) alone for patients with acute sciatica.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02391350).

SETTING

2 health care systems in Salt Lake City, Utah.

PATIENTS

220 adults aged 18 to 60 years with sciatica of less than 90 days' duration who were making an initial primary care consultation.

INTERVENTION

All participants received imaging and medication at the discretion of the primary care provider before enrollment. A total of 110 participants randomly assigned to UC were provided 1 session of education, and 110 participants randomly assigned to early physical therapy (EPT) were provided 1 education session and then referred for 4 weeks of physical therapy, including exercise and manual therapy.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (OSW) score after 6 months. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity, patient-reported treatment success, health care use, and missed workdays.

RESULTS

Participants in the EPT group had greater improvement from baseline to 6 months for the primary outcome (relative difference, -5.4 points [95% CI, -9.4 to -1.3 points]; P = 0.009). The OSW and several secondary outcomes favored EPT after 4 weeks. After 1 year, between-group differences favored EPT for the OSW (relative difference, -4.8 points [CI, -8.9 to -0.7 points]) and back pain intensity (relative difference, -1.0 points [CI, -1.6 to -0.4 points]). The EPT group was more likely to self-report treatment success after 1 year (45.2%) than the UC group (27.6%) (relative risk, 1.6 [CI, 1.1 to 2.4]). There were no significant differences in health care use or missed workdays.

LIMITATION

The patients and providers were unblinded, and specific physical therapy interventions responsible for effects could not be determined.

CONCLUSION

Referral from primary care to physical therapy for recent-onset sciatica improved disability and other outcomes compared with UC.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Low Back Pain with and Without Lower Extremity Pain

OBJECTIVE

Low back pain is one of the most common reasons for which people visit their doctor. Between 12% and 15% of the US population seek care for spine pain each year, with associated costs exceeding $200 billion. Up to 80% of adults will experience acute low back pain at some point in their lives. This staggering prevalence supports the need for increased research to support tailored clinical care of low back pain. This work proposes a multidimensional conceptual taxonomy.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary task force of the ACTTION-APS-AAPM Pain Taxonomy (AAAPT) with clinical and research expertise performed a focused review and analysis, applying the AAAPT five-dimensional framework to acute low back pain.

RESULTS

Application of the AAAPT framework yielded the following: 1) Core Criteria: location, timing, and severity of acute low back pain were defined; 2) Common Features: character and expected trajectories were established in relevant subgroups, and common pain assessment tools were identified; 3) Modulating Factors: biological, psychological, and social factors that modulate interindividual variability were delineated; 4) Impact/Functional Consequences: domains of impact were outlined and defined; 5) Neurobiological Mechanisms: putative mechanisms were specified including nerve injury, inflammation, peripheral and central sensitization, and affective and social processing of acute low back pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The goal of applying the AAAPT taxonomy to acute low back pain is to improve its assessment through a defined evidence and consensus-driven structure. The criteria proposed will enable more rigorous meta-analyses and promote more generalizable studies of interindividual variation in acute low back pain and its potential underlying mechanisms.

Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica: An Abridged Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic with meta-analysis OBJECTIVES.: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection in reducing leg pain and disability in patients with sciatica.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Conservative treatments, including pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, are typically the first treatment options for sciatica but the evidence to support their use is limited. The overall quality of evidence found by previous systematic reviews varies between moderate and high, which suggests that future trials may change the conclusions. New placebo-controlled randomized trials have been published recently which highlights the importance of an updated systematic review.

METHODS

The searches were performed without language restrictions in the following databases from 2012 to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and trial registers. We included placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating epidural corticosteroid injections in patients with sciatica. The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, overall pain, and back pain intensity. We grouped similar trials according to outcome measures and their respective follow-up time points. Short-term follow-up (>2 weeks but ≤3 months) was considered the primary follow-up time point due to the expected mechanism of action of epidural corticosteroid injection. Weighted mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. We assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and conducted the analyses using random effects.

RESULTS

We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) providing data for a total of 2470 participants with sciatica, an increase of six trials when compared to the previous review. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably more effective than placebo in reducing short-term leg pain (MD -4.93, 95% CI -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0-100 scale), short-term disability (MD -4.18, 95% CI: -6.04 to -2.17 on a 0-100 scale) and may be slightly more effective in reducing short-term overall pain (MD -9.35, 95% CI -14.05 to -4.65 on a 0-100 scale). There were mostly minor adverse events (i.e., without hospitalization) after epidural corticosteroid injections and placebo injections without difference between groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.91-1.42). The quality of evidence was at best moderate mostly due to problems with trial design and inconsistency.

CONCLUSION

A review of 25 placebo-controlled trials provides moderate-quality evidence that epidural corticosteroid injections are effective, although the effects are small and short-term. There is uncertainty on safety due to very low-quality evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial

Background

Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care.

Methods

We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as “completely recovered” or “much better” on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581.

Findings

Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4–13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4–14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89–1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care.

Interpretation

The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

Is the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Associated With Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort.

OBJECTIVES

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was developed to provide clinicians a reliable, valid, and practical tool to identify and quantify the anxiety and depression in medical patients. Several studies have shown that patients with chronic low back pain may have subclinical depression and impairments in mental health and that these in turn may lead to less than optimal results after lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine if there are associations between preoperative HADS and differences in pre- and postoperative health-related quality-of-life (HRQOLs) scores after spine surgery.

METHODS

From a single center, a consecutive series of patients completed the HADS, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-36 (SF-36), EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain. Except for HADS, the patients completed the same HRQOLs 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Of 308 eligible cases, 208 (68%) had follow-up data available and were included in the analysis. Patients in the HADS-Anxiety (HADS-A) Abnormal category had the worst preoperative HRQOLs but had the greatest improvement in 1-year postoperative scores. Except for VAS Leg Pain, preoperative HRQOLs were better in patients in the HADS-Depressed (HADS-D) Normal category. Patients in the HADS-D Abnormal category had statistically significantly greater improvement in 1-year postoperative EQ-5D and ODI scores when compared with the other cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Worse HADS-A and HADS-D scores are associated with worse preoperative HRQOL scores in patients with lumbar degenerative disorders scheduled for spine surgery. However, similar improvements in HRQOLs can be expected 1 year postoperative regardless of the patients' HADS scores.

Epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbosacral radicular pain

BACKGROUND

Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a corticosteroid dose into the epidural space, with the aim of reducing the local inflammatory process and, consequently, relieving the symptoms of lumbosacral radicular pain. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review published in Annals of Internal Medicine in 2012. Some placebo-controlled trials have been published recently, which highlights the importance of updating the previous review.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection on pain and disability in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language limitations up to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Back and Neck group trial register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and two trial registers. We also performed citation tracking of included studies and relevant systematic reviews in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that compared epidural corticosteroid injections of any corticosteroid drug to placebo injections in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. We accepted all three anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) to delivering corticosteroids into the epidural space. We considered trials that included a placebo treatment as delivery of an inert substance (i.e. one with no pharmacologic activity), an innocuous substance (e.g. normal saline solution), or a pharmacologically active substance but not one considered to provide sustained benefit (e.g. local anaesthetic), either into the epidural space (i.e. to mimic epidural corticosteroid injection) or adjacent spinal tissue (i.e. subcutaneous, intramuscular, or interspinous tissue). We also included trials in which a local anaesthetic with a short duration of action was used as a placebo and injected together with corticosteroid in the intervention group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed the screening, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessments. In case of insufficient information, we contacted the authors of the original studies or estimated the data. We grouped the outcome data into four time points of assessment: immediate (≤ 2 weeks), short term (> 2 weeks but ≤ 3 months), intermediate term (> 3 months but < 12 months), and long term (≥ 12 months). We assessed the overall quality of evidence for each outcome and time point using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) investigating the effects of epidural corticosteroid injections compared to placebo in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. The included studies provided data for a total of 2470 participants with a mean age ranging from 37.3 to 52.8 years. Seventeen studies included participants with lumbosacral radicular pain with a diagnosis based on clinical assessment and 15 studies included participants with mixed duration of symptoms. The included studies were conducted mainly in North America and Europe. Fifteen studies did not report funding sources, five studies reported not receiving funding, and five reported receiving funding from a non-profit or government source. Eight trials reported data on pain intensity, 12 reported data on disability, and eight studies reported data on adverse events. The duration of the follow-up assessments ranged from 12 hours to 1 year. We considered eight trials to be of high quality because we judged them as having low risk of bias in four out of the five bias domains. We identified one ongoing trial in a trial registry. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing leg pain at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -4.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0 to 100 scale; 8 trials, n = 949; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). For disability, epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing disability at short-term follow-up (MD -4.18, 95% CI -6.04 to -2.17, on a 0 to 100 scale; 12 trials, n = 1367; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). The treatment effects are small, however, and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. MD lower than 10%). Most trials provided insufficient information on how or when adverse events were assessed (immediate or short-term follow-up) and only reported adverse drug reactions - that is, adverse events that the trialists attributed to the study treatment. We are very uncertain that epidural corticosteroid injections make no difference compared to placebo injection in the frequency of minor adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.42; 8 trials, n = 877; very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision)). Minor adverse events included increased pain during or after the injection, non-specific headache, post-dural puncture headache, irregular periods, accidental dural puncture, thoracic pain, non-local rash, sinusitis, vasovagal response, hypotension, nausea, and tinnitus. One study reported a major drug reaction for one patient on anticoagulant therapy who had a retroperitoneal haematoma as a complication of the corticosteroid injection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This study found that epidural corticosteroid injections probably slightly reduced leg pain and disability at short-term follow-up in people with lumbosacral radicular pain. In addition, no minor or major adverse events were reported at short-term follow-up after epidural corticosteroid injections or placebo injection. Although the current review identified additional clinical trials, the available evidence still provides only limited support for the use of epidural corticosteroid injections in people with lumbosacral radicular pain as the treatment effects are small, mainly evident at short-term follow-up and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. mean difference lower than 10%). According to GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate, suggesting that further studies are likely to play an important role in clarifying the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment. We recommend that further trials should attend to methodological features such as appropriate allocation concealment and blinding of care providers to minimise the potential for biased estimates of treatment and harmful effects.

Clinical indicators to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain: protocol for a modified Delphi study

INTRODUCTION

Neuropathic low back-related leg pain (LBLP) can be a challenge to healthcare providers to diagnose and treat. Accurate diagnosis of neuropathic pain is fundamental to ensure appropriate intervention is given. However, to date there is no gold standard to diagnose neuropathic LBLP. A Delphi study will therefore be conducted to obtain an expert-derived consensus list of clinical indicators to identify a neuropathic component to LBLP.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

Included participants will be considered experts within the field as measured against a predefined eligibility criterion. Through an iterative multistage process, participants will rate their agreement with a list of clinical indicators and suggest any missing clinical indicators during each round. Agreement will be measured using a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics will be used to measure agreement; median, IQR and percentage of agreement. A priori consensus criteria will be defined for each round. Data analysis at the end of round three will enable a list of clinical indicators to be derived.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was gained from the University of Birmingham (ERN_19-1142). On completion of the study, findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Low Back Pain

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) conditions are highly prevalent and constitute the leading cause of disability worldwide. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration and the American Pain Society (APS), have combined to create the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT). The AAPT initiative convened a working group to develop diagnostic criteria for CLBP. The working group identified 3 distinct low back pain conditions which result in a vast public health burden across the lifespan. This article focuses on: 1) the axial predominant syndrome of chronic musculoskeletal low back pain, 2) the lateralized, distally-radiating syndrome of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain 3) and neurogenic claudication associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. This classification of CLBP is organized according to the AAPT multidimensional framework, specifically 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors. PERSPECTIVE: An evidence-based classification of CLBP conditions was constructed for the AAPT initiative. This multidimensional diagnostic framework includes: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.

The addition of neurodynamic exercises to extension-oriented exercises among patients with chronic back-related leg pain: A study protocol

BACKGROUND

Patients with back-related leg pain exhibit nociceptive and neuropathic characteristics. Few studies have investigated the combination of interventions considering these characteristics.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if the addition of neurodynamic exercises (EEN) to extension-oriented exercises (EE) promotes additional benefits in individuals with back-related leg pain and a directional preference.

METHODS

Patients will be randomized to either EE or EEN. Patients from both groups will receive 7 sessions over 3 weeks. Low back and leg pain, function, quality of life, disability, and global perceived effect will be evaluated at baseline, 3 weeks after randomization and 1-month follow-up. A linear mixed model will be used for outcomes analysis.

Spinal manipulative therapy reduces peripheral neuropathic pain in the rat

Spinal manipulative therapy, including low-velocity variable-amplitude spinal manipulation (LVVA-SM), relieves chronic low back pain, especially in patients with neuropathic radiating leg pain following peripheral nervous system insult. Understanding the underlying analgesic mechanisms requires animal models. The aim of the current study was to develop an animal model for the analgesic actions of LVVA-SM in the setting of peripheral neuropathic pain. Adult male Sprague-Dawley rat sciatic nerve tibial and common peroneal branches were transected, sparing the sural branch (spared nerve injury, SNI). After 15-18 days, rats were assigned randomly to one of three groups (n=9 each group): LVVA-SM at 0.15-or 0.16-Hz or Control. LVVA-SM (20° flexion at the L5 vertebra with an innovative motorized treatment table) was administered in anesthetized rats for 10 min. Control rats were administered anesthesia and positioned on the treatment table. After 10, 25, and 40 min, the plantar skin of the hindpaw ipsilateral to SNI was tested for mechanical sensitivity (paw withdrawal threshold to a logarithmic series of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments) and cold sensitivity (duration of paw lifting, shaking, and/or licking to topical acetone application). SNI produced behavioral signs of mechanical and cold allodynia. LVVA-SM reduced mechanical, but not cold, hypersensitivity compared with Control (0.15-Hz: P=0.04 at 10 min; 0.16-Hz: P<0.001 at 10 min, P=0.04 at 25 min). The analgesic effect of LVVA-SM in chronic low back pain patients with neuropathic leg pain can be reverse-translated to a rat model Video abstract: http://links.lww.com/WNR/A453.

Spinal Manipulative Therapy and Other Conservative Treatments for Low Back Pain: A Guideline From the Canadian Chiropractic Guideline Initiative

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to develop a clinical practice guideline on the management of acute and chronic low back pain (LBP) in adults. The aim was to develop a guideline to provide best practice recommendations on the initial assessment and monitoring of people with low back pain and address the use of spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) compared with other commonly used conservative treatments.

METHODS

The topic areas were chosen based on an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comparative effectiveness review, specific to spinal manipulation as a nonpharmacological intervention. The panel updated the search strategies in Medline. We assessed admissible systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials for each question using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Back Review Group criteria. Evidence profiles were used to summarize judgments of the evidence quality and link recommendations to the supporting evidence. Using the Evidence to Decision Framework, the guideline panel determined the certainty of evidence and strength of the recommendations. Consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi technique. The guideline was peer reviewed by an 8-member multidisciplinary external committee.

RESULTS

For patients with acute (0-3 months) back pain, we suggest offering advice (posture, staying active), reassurance, education and self-management strategies in addition to SMT, usual medical care when deemed beneficial, or a combination of SMT and usual medical care to improve pain and disability. For patients with chronic (>3 months) back pain, we suggest offering advice and education, SMT or SMT as part of a multimodal therapy (exercise, myofascial therapy or usual medical care when deemed beneficial). For patients with chronic back-related leg pain, we suggest offering advice and education along with SMT and home exercise (positioning and stabilization exercises).

CONCLUSIONS

A multimodal approach including SMT, other commonly used active interventions, self-management advice, and exercise is an effective treatment strategy for acute and chronic back pain, with or without leg pain.

The impact of low back pain on health-related quality of life in old age: results from a survey of a large sample of Swiss elders living in the community

PURPOSE

The present study aims at investigating the effects of low back pain (LBP), i.e., type of symptoms, activity limitations, frequency, duration, and severity on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a sample of 707 community-dwelling men and women aged ≥ 65 years living in Switzerland.

METHODS

The study is part of a larger survey conducted in Switzerland on a sample of older adults selected randomly from population records, stratified by age and sex. The Standardized Back Pain Definition was used to investigate LBP, and HRQoL was assessed by means of the EQ-5D, including Health Utility Index (HUI) measures.

RESULTS

For more than half of the sufferers, pain was chronic, occurred most days or every day and induced activity limitations. One-third of the sufferers reported sciatica symptoms. Individuals reporting every day pain, severe pain and more than 3 years since the last episode without pain lost nearly 10 points of HRQoL. Amongst the dimension of HRQoL, Mobility was the most affected by LBP.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide further insight into the impact of qualitative aspects of LBP and in particular the importance of radiating leg pain and pain frequency and duration. While LBP-related activity limitations had little impact on both self-rated overall health and HUI, radiating leg pain and pain frequency and duration were associated with significantly decreased scores on both dimensions.

Neuropathic Pain in Low Back-Related Leg Pain Patients: What Is the Evidence of Prevalence, Characteristics, and Prognosis in Primary Care? A Systematic Review of the Literature

This systematic review synthesizes literature describing prevalence, characteristics, and prognosis of low back-related leg pain (LBLP) patients with neuropathic pain in primary care and/or similar settings. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed and used by independent reviewers to screen citations for eligibility. The initial search yielded 24,948 citations; after screening 12 studies were included. Neuropathic pain was identified using case ascertainment tools (n = 5), clinical history with examination (n = 4), and using LBLP samples assumed neuropathic (n = 3). Neuropathic pain prevalence varied from 19% to 80%. There was consistent evidence for higher back-related disability (n = 3), poorer health-related quality of life (n = 2), and some evidence for more severe depression (n = 2), anxiety (n = 3), and pain intensity (n = 4) in patients with neuropathic pain. Results were less consistent when cases were identified through clinical history with examination than those identified using case ascertainment tools. Prognosis (n = 1) of LBLP patients with neuropathic pain was worse compared with those without, in all outcomes (leg pain intensity, leg and back-related disability, self-reported general health) except back pain intensity. No studies described prognostic factors. This systematic review highlights the evidence gap in neuropathic pain in LBLP in primary care, especially with respect to prognosis.

PERSPECTIVE

Patients with LBLP may have neuropathic pain. This systematic review emphasizes the paucity of evidence describing the characteristics and prognosis of neuropathic pain in this patient population. Future research investigating prognosis of these patients with neuropathic pain is likely to contribute to better understanding and management.

Efficacy and safety of etanercept in the treatment of sciatica: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Etanercept might be promising to alleviate sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. However, the results remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of etanercept in patients with sciatica. PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Controlled clinical trials (CCT) assessing the efficacy of etanercept on sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome was leg pain scores. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect model. Four RCTs and one CCT involving 184 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with placebo, etanercept could significantly reduce leg pain (Std. mean difference=-0.83; 95% CI=-1.59 to -0.06; P=0.03) and back pain (Std. mean difference=-1.89; 95% CI=-3.34 to -0.43; P=0.01). However, when comparing etanercept to steroids there was no significant difference in the relief of leg pain (Std. mean difference=-1.18; 95% CI=-3.21 to 0.84; P=0.25) and back pain (Std. mean difference=-0.29; 95% CI=-1.26 to 0.67; P=0.55). Etanercept showed no increase in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) compared with placebo (Std. mean difference=-0.83; 95% CI=-2.03 to 0.37; P=0.18) and steroids (Std. mean difference=-0.19; 95% CI=-1.15 to 0.77; P=0.70). Etanercept treatment was associated with a significantly reduced pain in leg and back compared to placebo and may possibly improve leg pain relief compared to steroids, but failed to improve ODI. Etanercept should be recommended for sciatica with caution because of heterogeneity.

The association between pain characteristics, pain catastrophizing and health care use – Baseline results from the SWEPAIN cohort

Background and aim

Pain is common and adds to the global burden of disease. However, individuals suffering from pain are a heterogeneous group in terms of pain spreading, intensity and duration. While pain influences overall health care consultation not everyone with pain consult health care. To be able to provide health care matching the patients’ needs increased knowledge about what factors determines the decision to consult health care is essential. The aim of this study was to explore the combined importance of pain spreading, intensity, duration and pain catastrophizing for consulting health care.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study we used population based survey data from southeast Sweden (SWEPAIN) including 7792 individuals’ aged 16–85 reporting pain. We used Modified Poisson regressions to analyse factors of importance related to the decision to consult health care.

Results

High and moderate pain intensity, as compared to low, increases the probability of consulting health care (High PR = 1.7 [95% CI 1.51–1.88], moderate PR = 1.2 [1.15–1.41]). Having widespread pain, as compared to localised pain, increased the probability of consulting health (PR = 1.2 [1.03–1.36). Pain duration was not associated with increased probability of consulting health care (PR = 1.0 CI0.88–1.07). However an interaction (p = 0.05) between pain duration and pain catastrophizing beliefs was seen indicating a combined importance of the two when consulting health care.

Conclusion

Our result suggests that pain intensity, pain spreading and pain catastrophizing independently influence the decision to consult health care while there is an interaction effect between pain duration and pain catastrophizing beliefs where the importance of pain catastrophizing believes differ with pain duration; the importance of pain catastrophizing believes differ with pain duration.

Implications

Treatment and rehabilitation strategies should incorporate this finding in order to meet the individual’s needs focusing on the biopsychosocial model within health care focusing not only on actual pain reliefs but also on for example acceptance and behavioural changes.

Association of low back pain on physical, sociodemographic and lifestyle factors across a general population sample within Greece

BACKGROUND

Although low back pain (LBP) is a debilitating problem internationally, there is not a lot of research on its impact on physical, psychosocial and lifestyle factors. Especially in mediterranean countries, such as Greece, it is not sufficiently explored whether physical (pain location, activity limitation etc.), sociodemographic (education, smoking etc.) or lifestyle factors (i.e. quality of life or anxiety) are influenced by LBP.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate LBP prevalence in the Greek general population and explore its association with particular sociodemographic, physical and lifestyle factors.

METHOD

A sample of 3125 people of the Greek adult population was randomly selected by stratified sampling encompassing rural and urban representation within the Greek mainland. An extended survey form was developed entailing three sections; personal (sociodemographic) information, questions on symptomatology and physical factors (i.e. pain characteristics, recurrence, physical disability etc.) and 3 self-administered questionnaires (including mostly lifestyle factors); Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale for anxiety and depression, SF-12 for quality of life (QoL) and Roland-Morris for disability.

RESULTS

A total of 471 (15%) people reported LBP (210 males, mean age: 47.04 ± 15.03). Amongst them 60% reported sciatica, 76% suffered recurrent LBP and 70% received specialist care. Low disability levels, moderate to high pain intensity, gender differences and good self-reported QoL and psychosocial status were reported. Sociodemographic characteristics (income, smoking, marital status etc.) were not associated with LBP physical factors, apart from age which correlated with physical disability and wellness (r being 0.446 and 0.405, respectively, p< 0.001). Physical factors (particularly pain intensity and location) correlated with lifestyle factors (QoL) and disability (r ranging between 0.396 and 0.543, p< 0.001). Mental wellness, anxiety and depression (as lifestyle factors) were not associated with sociodemographic or physical factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical parameters were amongst the most prevalent characteristics of the Greek sample, thus offering a direction towards a more targeted treatment and rehabilitation planning. Unlike previous literature, most sociodemographic characteristics were not correlated with any LBP physical or lifestyle factors, thus possibly indicating a different socioeconomic background and aetiology domain to that of the usual non-specific LBP spectrum.

Leg pain location and neurological signs relate to outcomes in primary care patients with low back pain

Background

Low back pain (LBP) patients with related leg pain and signs of nerve root involvement are considered to have a worse prognosis than patients with LBP alone. However, it is unclear whether leg pain location above or below the knee and the presence of neurological signs are important in primary care patients. The objectives of this study were to explore whether the four Quebec Task Force categories (QTFC) based on the location of pain and on neurological signs have different characteristics at the time of care seeking, whether these QTFC are associated with outcome, and if so whether there is an obvious ranking of the four QTFC on the severity of outcomes.

Method

Adult patients seeking care for LBP in chiropractic or general practice were classified into the four QTFC based on self-reported information and clinical findings. Analyses were performed to test the associations between the QTFC and baseline characteristics as well as the outcomes global perceived effect and activity limitation after 2 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year and also 1-year trajectories of LBP intensity.

Results

The study comprised 1271 patients; 947 from chiropractic practice and 324 from general practice. The QTFC at presentation were statistically significantly associated with most of the baseline characteristics, with activity limitation at all follow-up time points, with global perceived effect at 2 weeks but not 3 months and 1 year, and with trajectories of LBP. Severity of outcomes in the QTFC increased from LBP alone, across LBP with leg pain above the knee and below the knee to LBP with nerve root involvement. However, the variation within the categories was considerable.

Conclusion

The QTFC identify different LBP subgroups at baseline and there is a consistent ranking of the four categories with respect to outcomes. The differences between outcomes appear to be large enough for the QTFC to be useful for clinicians in the communication with patients. However, due to variation of outcomes within each category individuals’ outcome cannot be precisely predicted from the QTFC alone. It warrants further investigation to find out if the QTFC can improve existing prediction tools and guide treatment decisions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1495-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial

QUESTION

In people with nerve-related leg pain, does adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active improve leg pain, disability, low back pain, function, global perceived effect and location of symptoms?

DESIGN

Randomised trial with concealed allocation and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty participants with nerve-related leg pain recruited from the community.

INTERVENTIONS

The experimental group received four sessions of neurodynamic treatment. Both groups received advice to remain active.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Leg pain and low back pain (0, none, to 10, worst), Oswestry Disability Index (0, none, to 100, worst), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (0, unable to perform, to 30, able to perform), global perceived effect (-5 to 5) and location of symptoms were measured at 2 and 4 weeks after randomisation. Continuous outcomes were analysed by linear mixed models. Location of symptoms was assessed by relative risk (95% CI).

RESULTS

At 2 weeks, the experimental group did not have significantly greater improvement than the control group in leg pain (MD -1.1, 95% CI -2.3 to 0.1) or disability (MD -3.3, 95% CI -9.6 to 2.9). At 4 weeks, the experimental group experienced a significantly greater reduction in leg pain (MD -2.4, 95% CI -3.6 to -1.2) and low back pain (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.8 to -0.2). The experimental group also improved significantly more in function at 2 weeks (MD 5.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 8.2) and 4 weeks (MD 4.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.8), as well as global perceived effect at 2 weeks (MD 2.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.5) and 4 weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.9). No significant between-group differences occurred in disability at 4 weeks and location of symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active did not improve leg pain and disability at 2 weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01954199. [Ferreira G, Stieven F, Araujo F, Wiebusch M, Rosa C, Plentz R, et al. (2016) Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 197-202].

Determinants of Quality of Life in Ageing Populations: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study in Finland, Poland and Spain

Purpose

To comprehensively identify the determinants of quality of life (QoL) in a population study sample of persons aged 18–50 and 50+.

Methods

In this observational, cross-sectional study, QoL was measured with the WHOQOL-AGE, a brief instrument designed to measure QoL in older adults. Eight hierarchical regression models were performed to identify determinants of QoL. Variables were entered in the following order: Sociodemographic; Health Habits; Chronic Conditions; Health State description; Vision and Hearing; Social Networks; Built Environment. In the final model, significant variables were retained. The final model was re-run using data from the three countries separately.

Results

Complete data were available for 5639 participants, mean age 46.3 (SD 18.4). The final model accounted for 45% of QoL variation and the most relevant contribution was given by sociodemographic data (particularly age, education level and living in Finland: 17.9% explained QoL variation), chronic conditions (particularly depression: 4.6%) and a wide and rich social network (4.6%). Other determinants were presence of disabling pain, learning difficulties and visual problems, and living in usable house that is perceived as non-risky. Some variables were specifically associated to QoL in single countries: age in Poland, alcohol consumption in Spain, angina in Finland, depression in Spain, and self-reported sadness both in Finland and Poland, but not in Spain. Other were commonly associated to QoL: smoking status, bodily aches, being emotionally affected by health problems, good social network and home characteristics.

Conclusions

Our results highlight the importance of modifiable determinants of QoL, and provide public health indications that could support concrete actions at country level. In particular, smoking cessation, increasing the level of physical activity, improving social network ties and applying universal design approach to houses and environmental infrastructures could potentially increase QoL of ageing population.

Association Between Widespread Pain Scores and Functional Impairment and Health-Related Quality of Life in Clinical Samples of Children

Pain involving several body regions generally represents nervous system pathophysiology shifting from predominantly peripheral to more central. In adults, higher widespread pain scores are clinically meaningful and confer risk for poor response to treatment. It is unknown whether widespread pain is similarly important in children. To address this gap, we conducted an observational study examining 1) associations between widespread pain and functional impairment and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in clinical pediatric samples, and 2) associations among sociodemographic factors and pain catastrophizing with widespread pain scores. Participants were 166 children aged 10 to 18 years from 3 samples (acute pain, presurgery, chronic pain). Children self-reported pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, functional impairment, and HRQOL. Children indicated pain locations on a body diagram, which was coded using the American College of Rheumatology definition of widespread pain. Results revealed higher widespread pain scores were associated with greater functional impairment with routine activities (F = 3.15, P = .02) and poorer HRQOL (F = 3.29, P = .02), adjusting for pain intensity, study group, and demographic characteristics. Older age (B = .11, P = .02), and Hispanic ethnicity (B = .67, P = .04) were associated with higher widespread pain scores. Findings support incorporating evaluation of widespread pain into pediatric pain assessment. Future research is needed to examine the longitudinal effect of widespread pain on children's treatment outcomes.

PERSPECTIVE

This article examines the association between widespread pain scores and functional impairment and HRQOL in community and clinical samples of children. Assessment of the spatial distribution of the pain experience provides unique information that may identify children at risk for poorer health.

Characteristics of patients with low back and leg pain seeking treatment in primary care: baseline results from the ATLAS cohort study

Background

Patients with back pain radiating to the leg(s) report worse symptoms and poorer recovery than those with back pain alone. Robust evidence regarding their epidemiological profile is lacking from primary care, the setting where most of these patients will present and be managed. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of patients with back and leg pain, including sciatica, seeking treatment in primary care.

Methods

Adults visiting their general practitioner with back and leg pain, of any duration and severity, were invited to participate. Participants completed questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments and received MRI scans. Characteristics of the sample are described, and differences between patients diagnosed with referred leg pain and those with sciatica are analysed.

Results

Six hundred nine patients participated; 62.6 % were female, mean (SD) age 50.2 (13.9). 67.5 % reported pain below the knee, 60.7 % were in paid employment with 39.7 % reporting time off work. Mean disability (RMDQ) was 12.7 (5.7) and mean pain intensity was 5.6 (2.2) and 5.2 (2.4) for back and leg respectively. Mean sciatica bothersomeness index (SBI) was 14.9 (5.1). Three quarters (74.2 %) were clinically diagnosed as having sciatica. In the sciatica group, leg pain intensity, neuropathic pain, pain below the knee, leg pain worse than back pain, SBI and positive MRI findings were significantly higher as compared to patients with referred leg pain.

Conclusions

This primary care cohort reported high levels of disability and pain. This is the first epidemiological study of unselected primary care patients seeking healthcare for back and leg pain. Follow-up of this cohort will investigate the prognostic value of their baseline characteristics. This new information will contribute to our understanding of the characteristics and clinical features of this population, and will underpin future research aimed at defining prognostic subgroups to enable better targeting of health care provision.

Radiating low back pain in general practice: incidence, prevalence, diagnosis, and long-term clinical course of illness

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to calculate the incidence and prevalence of radiating low back pain, to explore the long-term clinical course of radiating low back pain including the influence of radiculopathy (in a subsample of the study population) and non-radiating low back pain thereon, and to describe general practitioners' (GPs') treatment strategies for radiating low back pain.

DESIGN

A historic prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Dutch general practice.

SUBJECTS

Patients over 18 years of age with a first episode of radiating low back pain, registered by the ICPC code L86.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence and prevalence, clinical course of illness, initial diagnoses established by the GPs, and treatment strategies.

RESULTS

Mean incidence was 9.4 and mean prevalence was 17.2 per 1000 person years. In total, 390 patients had 1193 contacts with their GPs; 50% had only one contact with their GP. Consultation rates were higher in patients with a history of non-radiating low back pain and in patients with a diagnosis of radiculopathy in the first five years. In this study's subsample of 103 patients, L86 episodes represented radiculopathy in 50% of cases. Medication was prescribed to 64% of patients, mostly NSAIDs. Some 53% of patients were referred, mainly to physiotherapists and neurologists; 9% of patients underwent surgery.

CONCLUSION

Watchful waiting seems to be sufficient general practice care in most cases of radiating low back pain. Further research should be focused on clarifying the relationship between radicular radiating low back pain, non-radicular radiating low back pain, and non-radiating low back pain.