Comprehensive Nonsurgical Treatment Versus Self-directed Care to Improve Walking Ability in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Trial

Interventions to improve outdoor mobility among people living with disabilities: A systematic review

Background

Around 15% of the global population live with some form of disabilities and experience worse health outcomes, less participation in the community and are part of fewer activities outside the home. Outdoor mobility interventions aim to improve the ability to move, travel and orient outside the home and could influence the number of activities outside the home, participation and quality of life. However, outdoor mobility interventions may also lead to harm like falls or injuries or have unforeseen effects which could lead to mortality or hospitalization.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy of interventions aiming to improve outdoor mobility for adults living with disabilities and to explore if the efficacy varies between different conditions and different intervention components.

Search Methods

Standard, extensive Campbell search methods were used, including a total of 12 databases searched during January 2023, including trial registries.

Selection Criteria

Only randomized controlled trials were included, focusing on people living with disabilities, comparing interventions to improve outdoor mobility to control interventions as well as comparing different types of interventions to improve outdoor mobility.

Data Collection and Analysis

Standard methodological procedures expected by Campbell were used. The following important outcomes were 1. Activity outside the home; 2. Engagement in everyday life activities; 3. Participation; 4. Health-related Quality of Life; 5. Major harms; 6. Minor harms. The impact of the interventions was evaluated in the shorter (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) after starting the intervention. Results are presented using risk ratios (RR), risk difference (RD), and standardized mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). The risk of bias 2-tool and the GRADE-framework were used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

Main Results

The screening comprised of 12.894 studies and included 22 studies involving 2.675 people living with disabilities and identified 12 ongoing studies. All reported outcomes except one (reported in one study, some concerns of bias) had overall high risk of bias. Thirteen studies were conducted in participants with disabilities due to stroke, five studies with older adults living with disabilities, two studies with wheelchair users, one study in participants with disabilities after a hip fracture, and one study in participants with cognitive impairments. Skill training interventions versus control interventions (16 studies) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of skill training interventions versus control interventions not aimed to improve outdoor mobility among all people living with disabilities both in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for Activity outside the home; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. Skill training interventions may improve engagement in everyday life activities among people with disabilities in the shorter term (RR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.84; I 2 = 7%; RD: 0.15; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.32; I 2 = 71%; 692 participants; three studies; low certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain in the longer term, based on very low certainty evidence. Subgroup analysis of skill training interventions among people living with disabilities due to cognitive impairments suggests that such interventions may improve activity outside the home in the shorter term (SMD: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.81; I 2 = NA; 118 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis of skill training interventions among people living with cognitive impairments suggests that such interventions may improve health-related quality of life in the shorter term (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.88; I 2 = NA; 118 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Physical training interventions versus control interventions (five studies) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of physical training interventions versus control interventions not aimed to improve outdoor mobility in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for: Engagement in everyday life activities; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. Physical training interventions may improve activity outside the home in the shorter (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.61; I 2 = NA; 228 participants; one study; low certainty evidence) and longer term (≥7 months) (SMD: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.54; I 2 = NA; 216 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Comparison of different outdoor mobility interventions (one study) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of outdoor mobility interventions of different lengths in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for Activity outside the home; Engagement in everyday life activities; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. No studies explored the efficacy of other types of interventions.

Authors’ Conclusions

Twenty-two studies of interventions to improve outdoor mobility for people living with disabilities were identified, but the evidence still remains uncertain about most benefits and harms of these interventions, both in the short- and long term. This is primarily related to risk of bias, small underpowered studies and limited reporting of important outcomes for people living with disabilities. For people with disabilities, skill training interventions may improve engagement in everyday life in the short term, and improve activity outside the home and health-related quality of life for people with cognitive impairments in the short term. Still, this is based on low certainty evidence from few studies and should be interpreted with caution. One study with low certainty evidence suggests that physical training interventions may improve activity outside the home in the short term. In addition, the effect sizes across all outcomes were considered small or trivial, and could be of limited relevance to people living with disabilities. The evidence is currently uncertain if there are interventions that can improve outdoor mobility for people with disabilities, and can improve other important outcomes, while avoiding harms. To guide decisions about the use of interventions to improve outdoor mobility, future studies should use more rigorous design and report important outcomes for people with disabilities to reduce the current uncertainty.

Chronic Pain Self-Management Strategies for Older Adults: An Integrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Due to the complex nature of chronic pain, especially in older adults, a biopsychosocial approach is more effective than an isolated approach for its management. Furthermore, when patients are actively engaged in their pain management, they are more likely to be successful than relying totally on others.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the self-management strategies currently used by older adults with chronic pain.

METHOD

An integrative review was conducted through seven online databases, searching for scientific studies on this topic published in the last 10 years.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Fifty-eight studies were included in the final sample. Research on chronic pain self-management for older adults has increased in recent years. Although a diversity of chronic physical painful conditions are being investigated, many conditions are still under-investigated. Online and in-person strategies are currently adopted, demonstrating similar results. Positive results are evidenced by strategies including health promotion, mind control, social participation and take-action fields. Major results come from a combination of strategies focusing on biopsychosocial aspects of pain management. Results include not only the reduction of pain itself, but increased self-efficacy, adoption of health behaviors and improvement of functionality, among others, i.e., improved QoL, despite pain.

ChatGPT and its Role in the Decision-Making for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Comparative Analysis and Narrative Review

STUDY DESIGN

Comparative Analysis and Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare ChatGPT's responses to the clinical questions and recommendations proposed by The 2011 North American Spine Society (NASS) Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS). We explore the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT's responses through an updated literature review on spinal stenosis.

METHODS

We prompted ChatGPT with questions from the NASS Evidence-based Clinical Guidelines for LSS and compared its generated responses with the recommendations provided by the guidelines. A review of the literature was performed via PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis between January 2012 and April 2023.

RESULTS

14 questions proposed by the NASS guidelines for LSS were uploaded into ChatGPT and directly compared to the responses offered by NASS. Three questions were on the definition and history of LSS, one on diagnostic tests, seven on non-surgical interventions and three on surgical interventions. The review process found 40 articles that were selected for inclusion that helped corroborate or contradict the responses that were generated by ChatGPT.

CONCLUSIONS

ChatGPT's responses were similar to findings in the current literature on LSS. These results demonstrate the potential for implementing ChatGPT into the spine surgeon's workplace as a means of supporting the decision-making process for LSS diagnosis and treatment. However, our narrative summary only provides a limited literature review and additional research is needed to standardize our findings as means of validating ChatGPT's use in the clinical space.

Exercise treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and intervention component analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the components used in exercise interventions for people with symptoms of neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis and identify components associated with successful interventions.

DATA SOURCES

Eligible papers published up to April 2023 from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and trial registry websites.

REVIEW METHODS

Literature searches were performed by an Information Specialist. We searched for randomised trials evaluating exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication symptoms (the primary symptom of lumbar spinal stenosis). Two authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool Version 2 and the TIDieR checklist for intervention reporting. Details of intervention components were extracted, tabulated, and synthesised using an intervention component analysis approach.

RESULTS

We found thirteen trials reporting 23 exercise interventions delivered to 1440 participants. These featured 60 different components. Most exercise interventions included supervision and flexion-based exercises. Balance exercises were rarely included. Exercise components featured more frequently in successful interventions included stretches, strength or trunk muscle exercises, fitness exercises, especially cycling, and psychologically informed approaches. Interpretation is limited by low study numbers and heterogeneity. No conclusions could be drawn about exercise supervision or dose.

DISCUSSION

Exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication typically feature multiple components. Common features such as supervision, lumbar flexion, and aerobic fitness exercises and also less common features such as stretches, strengthening exercises, and psychologically informed approaches warrant consideration for inclusion when designing and optimising exercise interventions for people with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Trends in Chiropractic Care and Physical Rehabilitation Use Among Adults with Low Back Pain in the United States, 2002 to 2018

BACKGROUND

While nonpharmacologic treatments are increasingly endorsed as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP) in clinical practice guidelines, it is unclear if use of these treatments is increasing or equitable.

OBJECTIVE

Examine national trends in chiropractic care and physical rehabilitation (occupational/physical therapy (OT/PT)) use among adults with LBP.

DESIGN/SETTING

Serial cross-sectional analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2002 to 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

146,087 adults reporting LBP in prior 3 months.

METHODS

We evaluated the association of survey year with chiropractic care or OT/PT use in prior 12 months. Logistic regression with multilevel linear splines was used to determine if chiropractic care or OT/PT use increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines. We also examined trends in use by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. When trends were similar over time, we present differences by these demographic characteristics as unadjusted ORs using data from all respondents.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2018, less than one-third of adults with LBP reported use of either chiropractic care or OT/PT. Rates did not change until 2016 when uptake increased with the introduction of clinical guidelines (2016-2018 vs 2002-2015, OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.10-1.19). Trends did not differ significantly by sex, race, or ethnicity (p for interactions > 0.05). Racial and ethnic disparities in chiropractic care or OT/PT use were identified and persisted over time. For example, compared to non-Hispanic adults, either chiropractic care or OT/PT use was lower among Hispanic adults (combined OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.65-0.73). By contrast, compared to White adults, Black adults had similar OT/PT use (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.94-1.03) but lower for chiropractic care use (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.47-0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Although use of chiropractic care or OT/PT for LBP increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines in 2016, only about a third of US adults with LBP reported using these services between 2016 and 2018 and disparities in use have not improved.

Minimal clinically important differences in walking capacity and physical activity after nonsurgical treatment in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Little information is available about the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for objective physical measurements in people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

PURPOSE

To use disorder-specific anchor and, multiple anchor-, and distribution-based approaches to determine the MCIDs for walking capacity and physical activity in patients with LSS receiving nonsurgical treatment.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Sixty-nine patients with neurogenic claudication caused by LSS receiving outpatient physical therapy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Zurich claudication questionnaire (ZCQ), self-paced walking test (SPWT), and number of daily steps measured by pedometry.

METHODS

All patients completed the ZCQ, SPWT, and pedometry at the baseline and after 6 weeks. For the anchor-based approach, ZCQ symptom severity, physical function, and satisfaction subscales were used as the external anchors. Using the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the MCIDs were determined based on the optimal cutoff points for changes in the SPWT or daily steps. For the distribution-based approach, the MCIDs were estimated from the standard deviations (SDs) of the baseline scores of the SPWT and daily steps.

RESULTS

In the anchor-based approach, only the ZCQ satisfaction subscale for the SPWT (0.73), and ZCQ symptom severity subscale for daily steps (0.71) exceeded the area under the ROC curve value of 0.7, which is considered acceptable. When using these subscales as anchors, the ROC curves and optimal cutoff points indicated MCIDs of 151 m for the SPWT and 1,149 steps for daily steps. The distribution-based approach estimated the MCIDs as 280 m for the SPWT and 1,274 steps for daily steps, and had a moderate effect size (0.5 SD).

CONCLUSIONS

The anchor-based approach had limited external responsiveness when the ZCQ was used as the anchor. However, this information may be helpful for interpreting walking capacity and physical activity in patients with LSS receiving nonsurgical treatment and for estimating power and sample size when planning new trials.

Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the inconclusive literature on operative time, pain relief, functional outcomes, and complications, this meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) and Micro-Endoscopic Discectomy (MED) in treating Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (DLSS).

METHODS

A thorough literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and based on the PICO framework. The study interrogated four primary databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library-on August 16, 2023, without time restrictions. The search employed a strategic selection of keywords and was devoid of language barriers. Studies were included based on strict criteria, such as the diagnosis, surgical intervention types, and specific outcome measures. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was executed through Stata version 17.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated 9 articles out of an initial yield of 1,136 potential studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in surgical duration, but no statistically significant difference was identified (MD = - 2.11, P = 0.56). For VAS scores assessing lumbar and leg pain, UBE was statistically superior to MED (MD = - 0.18, P = 0.013; MD = - 0.15, P = 0.006, respectively). ODI scores demonstrated no significant difference between the two surgical methods (MD = - 0.57, P = 0.26). UBE had a lower incidence of complications compared to those receiving MED (OR = 0.54, P = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

UBE and MED exhibited comparable surgical durations and disability outcomes as measured by ODI. However, UBE demonstrated superior efficacy in alleviating lumbar and leg pain based on VAS scores. The findings present an intricate evaluation of the two surgical interventions for DLSS, lending valuable insights for clinical decision-making.

Similar improvements in patient-reported outcomes for non-specific low back pain patients with and without lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms following a structured education and exercise therapy program

BACKGROUND

People with nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) can also experience overlapping symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but the impact on treatment outcomes is unknown. This study investigated differences in treatment outcomes for disability, back pain intensity, and leg pain intensity following an education and exercise therapy program for NSLBP patients with and without comorbid LSS symptoms.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal analysis of 655 Danish participants in the GLA:D® Back program; an education and exercise therapy program for people with persistent NSLBP. Participants were classified as having comorbid LSS symptoms based on self-report. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences in change in disability (Oswestry Disability Index [0-100]) and back and leg pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale [0-10]) at 3-, 6-, and 12-months between those with and without LSS symptoms.

RESULTS

28% of participants reported LSS symptoms. No certain differences in change in disability or back pain intensity improvement were observed at any time-point between those with and without LSS symptoms. Participants with LSS symptoms had slightly greater improvement in leg pain intensity at 6- (-0.7, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.2) and 12-months (-0.6, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1).

CONCLUSION

Compared to those without LSS symptoms, patients with persistent NSLBP and LSS symptoms can expect similar improvements in disability and back pain intensity, and slightly greater improvements in leg pain intensity with treatment. Therefore, education and exercise therapy programs designed for NSLBP are likely helpful for those also experiencing LSS symptoms.

Effectiveness of non-surgical treatment combined with supervised exercise for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefits of combining supervised exercise in the non-surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of non-surgical treatments with and without supervised exercise for pain intensity, symptom severity, functional impairment/disability, walking distance, and quality of life (QOL) in LSS patients.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating combinations of supervised exercises were searched using four electronic databases up to August 13, 2020. Meta-analysis was conducted for immediate and long-term results.

RESULTS

Three studies were identified, including 244 participants. Immediate-term results showed that leg pain intensity (mean distance [MD]: -0.94, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI]: -1.60 to -0.29, p< 0.01) and symptom severity (MD: -0.29, 95% CI: -0.50 to -0.08, p< 0.01) were lower in the study group than in the control group, and walking distance (MD: 415.83, 95% CI: 298.15-533.50, p< 0.001) and QOL were higher in the study group. Long-term results showed that functional disability/impairment (MD: 0.27, 95% CI: -0.49 to -0.04, p< 0.05) was lower in the study group than in the control group, and walking distance and QOL were higher in the study group.

CONCLUSION

The number of studies on this topic was small and limited. Combinations of non-surgical treatment and supervised exercise may not provide significant benefits.

Economic costs, health-related quality of life outcomes and cost-utility of a physical and psychological group intervention targeted at older adults with neurogenic claudication

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence suggests that structured and progressive exercise underpinned by a cognitive behavioural approach can improve functional outcomes in patients with neurogenic claudication (NC). However, evidence surrounding its economic benefits is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the economic costs, health-related quality of life outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST programme) versus best practice advice (BPA) in older adults with NC.

METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted based on data from a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial. The base-case economic evaluation took the form of an intention-to-treat analysis conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS) perspective and separately from a societal perspective. Costs (£ 2018-2019 prices) were collected prospectively over a 12 month follow-up period. A bivariate regression of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained and the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of the BOOST programme in comparison to BPA. Sensitivity and pre-specified subgroup analyses explored uncertainty and heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness estimates.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 435) were randomised to the BOOST programme (n = 292) or BPA (n = 143). Mean (standard error [SE]) NHS and PSS costs over 12 months were £1,974 (£118) in the BOOST arm versus £1,827 (£169) in the BPA arm (p = 0.474). Mean (SE) QALY estimates were 0.620 (0.009) versus 0.599 (0.006), respectively (p = 0.093). The probability that the BOOST programme is cost-effective ranged between 67 and 83% (NHS and PSS perspective) and 79-89% (societal perspective) at cost-effectiveness thresholds between £15,000 and £30,000 per QALY gained. INMBs ranged between £145 and £464 at similar cost-effectiveness thresholds. The cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The BOOST programme resulted in modest QALY gains over the 12 month follow-up period. Future studies with longer intervention and follow-up periods are needed to address uncertainty around the health-related quality of life impacts and cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Trial registration This study has been registered in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, reference number ISRCTN12698674. Registered on 10 November 2015.

Management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of rehabilitation, surgical, injection, and medication interventions

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has a substantial impact on mobility, autonomy, and quality of life. Previous reviews have demonstrated inconsistent results and/or have not delineated between specific nonsurgical interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of interventions in the management of LSS.

METHODS

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective studies, included patients with LSS, assessed the effectiveness of any interventions (rehabilitation, surgical, injection, medication), included at least two intervention groups, and included at least one measure of pain, disability, ambulation assessment, or LSS-specific symptoms. Eighty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were conducted across outcomes. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedge's g and reported descriptively. Formal grading of evidence was conducted.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis comparing rehabilitation to no treatment/placebo demonstrated significant effects on pain favoring rehabilitation (mean difference, MD -1.63; 95% CI: -2.68, -0.57; I² = 71%; p = .002). All other comparisons to no treatment/placebo revealed nonsignificant findings. The level of evidence ranged from very low to high for rehabilitation and medication versus no treatment/placebo for pain, disability, ambulation ability, and LSS symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the findings of this review are inconclusive regarding superiority of interventions, this accentuates the value of multimodal patient-centered care in the management of patients with LSS.

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of lumbar spinal stenosis, 2021 - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) guideline for the management of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was first published in 2011. Since then, the medical care system for LSS has changed and many new articles regarding the epidemiology and diagnostics of LSS, conservative treatments such as new pharmacotherapy and physical therapy, and surgical treatments including minimally invasive surgery have been published. In addition, various issues need to be examined, such as verification of patient-reported outcome measures, and the economic effect of revised medical management of patients with lumbar spinal disorders. Accordingly, in 2019 the JOA clinical guidelines committee decided to update the guideline and consequently established a formulation committee. The purpose of this study was to describe the formulation we implemented for the revision of the guideline, incorporating the recent advances of evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

The JOA LSS guideline formulation committee revised the previous guideline based on the method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan proposed by the Medical Information Network Distribution Service in 2017. Background and clinical questions were determined followed by a literature search related to each question. Appropriate articles based on keywords were selected from all the searched literature. Using prepared structured abstracts, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence and recommendations for each clinical question was decided by the committee members.

RESULTS

Eight background and 15 clinical questions were determined. Answers and explanations were described for the background questions. For each clinical question, the strength of evidence and the recommendation were both decided, and an explanation was provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of LSS was completed according to the latest evidence-based medicine. We expect that this guideline will be useful for all medical providers as an index in daily medical care, as well as for patients with LSS.

A Protocol for a Single-Centered, Pragmatic, Randomized, Controlled, Parallel Trial Comparing Comprehensive Nonsurgical Therapy Options for Individuals with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Aim

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a long-term degenerative disease. Considering the risks and advantages of the patient's age range and the characteristics of the condition, non-surgical treatment is recommended. To determine the best first-line non-surgical therapy for LSS, few studies have examined different non-surgical therapies. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to determine whether the selection of comprehensive Chinese medicine (CM) treatment for LSS is more successful than non-surgical conservative treatment.

Patients and Methods

In this two-armed, parallel, single-centered, pragmatic randomized controlled study, 94 LSS participants will be randomized to receive 24 sessions of comprehensive CM therapy or conservative treatment for 3 months, with follow-up assessments at 6, 9, 12, and 15 months. The primary outcome will be based on the success rate of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) for the most clinical important difference (MCID) at 3 and 15 months. Secondary outcomes include Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain, ZCQ scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores for lumbar dysfunction, and Short-Form 12 scores for health-related quality of life at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months. Adverse events and incidences of surgery will be reported anytime during the trial and follow-up.

Conclusion

This protocol examines the comparative efficacy of comprehensive CM therapy compared with conventional care through a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to present data to facilitate clinical or policy decision-making. The outcomes will make it easier to decide which patient-centered treatments to prioritize for LSS.

Effectiveness of a 6-week specific rehabilitation program combining education and exercises on walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: a randomized controlled clinical trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is a leading cause of disability which is intimately related to a decrease in walking capacity. Walking limitation has negative physical and mental impacts on patients. Recent guidelines recommend the use of conservative treatment options such as exercises before considering surgery. Unfortunately, dedicated healthcare resources for the conservative management of patients with LSS causing NC are uncommon. Thus, it is important to develop accessible and specific rehabilitation programs aimed at improving patients' self-management, especially with regard to walking capacity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a 6-week specific rehabilitation program combining education and exercises on walking capacity in patients with LSS causing NC.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a prospective randomized controlled parallel-group clinical trial. Sixty-six patients with LSS causing NC will be recruited from identified clinics and local advertisements. The intervention group will receive standardized education and specific exercises while the control group will only receive a standardized education. The program in both groups will last for 6 weeks with 5 evaluation time points (baseline, week 2, week 4, week 6, and week 12). The primary outcome will be walking capacity measured with the Self-Paced Walking Test, and the secondary outcomes will be back and leg pain intensity, LSS-related disability, self-efficacy, level of physical activity, anxiety, depression, gait pattern characteristics, balance, and global perceived change.

DISCUSSION

This study will assess the effectiveness of a 6-week specific rehabilitation program combining education and exercises on walking capacity in patients with LSS causing NC. By measuring objective gait pattern characteristics, the study will also provide new information about the impact of NC on gait pattern that could eventually improve the evaluation and the management of LSS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05513326 . Registered on August 22, 2022.

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment: Is Surgery Better than Non-Surgical Treatments in Afro-Descendant Populations?

(1) Background: Limited data are available on lumbar spine stenosis management in sub-Saharan African populations and Afro-descendant patients are underrepresented in European and US clinical trials. We aimed to compare the clinical response between decompressive surgery and conservative treatments in a population of self-reported Afro-Caribbean patients with lumbar spine stenosis over a 2-year follow-up period. (2) Methods: Prospective cohort of 137 self-reported Afro Caribbeans with lumbar spine stenosis based on clinical and radiological criteria. Patients were assigned to decompression surgery or to conservative treatments according to their outcome after a first course of steroid epidural injection and their preferences. The primary outcome was evolution of the Oswestry disability index at 3 months (3 M), 12 M, 18 M and 24 M follow-up. (3) Results: Decrease of ODI was significantly more important in the “decompression surgery” arm compared to “conservative treatment” arm at 3 M, 12 M and 18 M: −17.36 vs. 1.03 p < 10−4; −16.38 vs. −1.53 p = 0.0059 and −19.00 vs. −4.52 p = 0.021, respectively. No difference was reported at 24 M. (4) Conclusions: In this first comparative study between surgery and conservative treatments in an exclusively afro-descendant lumbar spine stenosis cohort, we report long term superiority of decompression surgery versus conservative treatments over an 18-month period.

Step Count in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Accuracy During Walking and Nonwalking Activities

STUDY DESIGN

This is a method development and validation study.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to develop and test a method for step detection using accelerometer data in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). There are 2 objectives: (1) to describe a method for step detection from accelerations measured at the wrist, hip, lower back, thigh and ankle; (2) to assess the accuracy of the method during walking with and without walking aids and during nonwalking activities.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Loss of walking ability is one of the main symptoms of LSS, and there is no validated measure to assess walking activity in daily living in patients with LSS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with LSS performed a standardized movement protocol that included walking with and without walking aids and performing nonwalking activities while wearing accelerometers on five different wear-sites. After the walking tests, a method was designed for optimal step detection and compared with a gold standard of observed step count.

RESULTS

The method for step detection applied to accelerations from the lower back, hip, thigh, and ankle provided an accurate step counts during continuous walking without walking aids. Accuracy diminished at all wear-sites when walking with walking aids, except the ankle. The wrist provided the most inaccurate step count, and the accelerometers on the thigh and ankle were prone to falsely detecting steps during bicycling.

CONCLUSION

The ankle-worn accelerometer provided the most accurate step count, but wrongly registered steps during nonwalking activities. The developed step detection method shows potential as a measure of walking activity why further development and testing under free-living conditions should be performed.

Treatment-based classification for low back pain: systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effects of treatment-based classification (TBC) in patients with specific and nonspecific acute, subacute and chronic low back pain.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and WHO from inception up to December 2021. We used the PEDro scale, the TIDieR checklist and the GRADE approach to evaluate the risk of bias, quality on reporting and the certainty of the evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials (pooled n = 2,649) met the inclusion criteria. We have identified a total of 22 comparisons and 134 estimates of treatment effects. There was a very large heterogeneity with regards to the comparison groups. Most of individual trials had low risk of bias with a mean score of 6.8 (SD = 1.3) on a 0-10 scale. The certainty of evidence for most comparisons was low, which indicates that more high quality and robust trials are needed. We were able to pool the data using a meta-analysis approach for only two comparisons (TBC versus mobility exercises in patients with acute low back pain and traction for patients with sciatica). In general, the TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis. We strongly suggest readers to carefully read our summary of findings table for further details on each comparison.

CONCLUSION

The TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis.

Outcome Domain and Measurement Instrument Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To describe outcome measurement instruments and outcome domains in randomized controlled trials of any interventions for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

LITERATURE SEARCH

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PubMed were searched from inception to May 2020.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were eligible if patients were diagnosed with LSS, with or without neurogenic claudication. Trials were eligible if they used at least 1 outcome measurement instrument.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Measurement instruments used in trials were extracted and then classified into outcome domains. We described the frequency of measurement instruments and outcome domains.

RESULTS

After study screening, 29 trials were included. In total, 54 different individual outcome measurement instruments were used. The Visual Analogue Scale (59%; n = 17) and the Oswestry Disability Index (52%; n = 15) were the most frequently used outcome measurement instruments in trials; function (90%; n = 26) and pain (62%; n = 18) were the most common outcome domains.

CONCLUSION

In total, 54 different measurement instruments were used in trials of interventions for LSS. This diverse range of observations contributes to outcome instrument heterogeneity between trials and impedes the analysis of data due to lack of comparability. The most common outcome domains assessed were pain and function, which will help inform a core outcome measure set for symptomatic LSS. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(7):446-456. Epub: 18 May 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10879.

Consensus on a standardised treatment pathway algorithm for lumbar spinal stenosis: an international Delphi study

Background

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common degenerative spinal condition in older adults associated with disability, diminished quality of life, and substantial healthcare costs. Individual symptoms and needs vary. With sparse and sometimes inconsistent evidence to guide clinical decision-making, variable clinical care may lead to unsatisfactory patient outcomes and inefficient use of healthcare resources.

Methods

A three-phase modified Delphi study comprising four consensus rounds was conducted on behalf of the International Taskforce for the Diagnosis and Management of LSS to develop a treatment algorithm based on multi-professional international expert consensus. Participants with expertise in the assessment and management of people with LSS were invited using an international distribution process used for two previous Delphi studies led by the Taskforce. Separate treatment pathways for patients with different symptom types and severity were developed and incorporated into a proposed treatment algorithm through consensus rounds 1 to 3. Agreement with the proposed algorithm was evaluated in the final consensus round.

Results

The final algorithm combines stratified and stepped approaches. When indicated, immediate investigation and surgery is advocated. Otherwise, a stepped approach is suggested when self-directed care is unsatisfactory. This starts with tailored rehabilitation, then more complex multidisciplinary care, investigations and surgery options if needed. Treatment options in each step depend on clinical phenotype and symptom severity. Treatment response guides pathway entrance and exit points. Of 397 study participants, 86% rated their agreement ≥ 4 for the proposed algorithm on a 0–6 scale, of which 22% completely agreed. Only 7% disagreed. Over 70% of participants felt that the algorithm would be useful for clinicians in public healthcare (both primary care and specialist settings) and in private healthcare settings, and that a simplified version would help patients in shared decision-making.

Conclusions

International and multi-professional agreement was achieved for a proposed LSS treatment algorithm developed through expert consensus. The algorithm advocates different pathway options depending on clinical indications. It is not intended as a treatment protocol and will require evaluation against current care for clinical and cost-effectiveness. It may, however, serve as a clinical guide until evidence is sufficient to inform a fully stratified care model.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05485-5.

Efficacy and characteristics of physiotherapy interventions in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of physiotherapy approaches used in the treatment of LSS and compare their delivery characteristics.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, PEDro, CINAHL and Web of Science databases, from inception until March 2021. Inclusion criteria were clinical diagnosis of LSS confirmed through imaging techniques, RCTs written in English comparing physiotherapy interventions among them or versus placebo or usual care without restrictions on treatment and follow-up duration, outcomes related to pain, physical function, disability and quality of life. Two independent reviewers assessed records for eligibility and methodological quality (PEDro scale) and extracted participants' characteristics, interventions details and outcome measures at each timepoint. Pooled or un-pooled findings were reported as mean difference with 95% confidence interval, depending on heterogeneity. Evidence quality was rated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (944 patients, mean PEDro score 7.6, range 5-9) were included. Three weeks of weight-supported walking improved pain and disability, while 8 weeks of aquatic exercises improved pain and walking tolerance (very low evidence). Six weeks of cycling reduced disability compared to weight-supported walking (low evidence). Six weeks of manual therapy plus exercise was not superior to supervised exercises (low evidence), but improved pain, walking tolerance, disability and quality of life compared to home/group exercises (moderate to very low evidence). Very low evidence supported 2 weeks of electromagnetic fields, whereas TENS (low evidence) and ultrasounds (very low evidence) revealed no effects.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may assist clinicians in delivering effective physiotherapy interventions in LSS patients.

Diagnosis and Management of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Lumbar spinal stenosis is a prevalent and disabling cause of low back and leg pain in older persons, affecting an estimated 103 million persons worldwide. Most are treated nonoperatively. Approximately 600 000 surgical procedures are performed in the US each year for lumbar spinal stenosis.

OBSERVATIONS

The prevalence of the clinical syndrome of lumbar spinal stenosis in US adults is approximately 11% and increases with age. The diagnosis can generally be made based on a clinical history of back and lower extremity pain that is provoked by lumbar extension, relieved by lumbar flexion, and confirmed with cross-sectional imaging, such as computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Nonoperative treatment includes activity modification such as reducing periods of standing or walking, oral medications to diminish pain such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and physical therapy. In a series of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis followed up for up to 3 years without operative intervention, approximately one-third of patients reported improvement, approximately 50% reported no change in symptoms, and approximately 10% to 20% of patients reported that their back pain, leg pain, and walking were worse. Long-term benefits of epidural steroid injections for lumbar spinal stenosis have not been demonstrated. Surgery appears effective in carefully selected patients with back, buttock, and lower extremity pain who do not improve with conservative management. For example, in a randomized trial of 94 participants with symptomatic and radiographic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, decompressive laminectomy improved symptoms more than nonoperative therapy (difference, 7.8 points; 95% CI, 0.8-14.9; minimum clinically important difference, 10-12.8) on the Oswestry Disability Index (score range, 0-100). Among persons with lumbar spinal stenosis and concomitant spondylolisthesis, lumbar fusion increased symptom resolution in 1 trial (difference, 5.7 points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 11.3) on the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey physical dimension score (range, 0-100), but 2 other trials showed either no important differences between the 2 therapies or noninferiority of lumbar decompression alone compared with lumbar decompression plus spinal fusion (MCID, 2-4.9 points). In a noninferiority trial, 71.4% treated with lumbar decompression alone vs 72.9% of those receiving decompression plus fusion achieved a 30% or more reduction in Oswestry Disability Index score, consistent with the prespecified noninferiority hypothesis. Fusion is associated with greater risk of complications such as blood loss, infection, longer hospital stays, and higher costs. Thus, the precise indications for concomitant lumbar fusion in persons with lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis remain unclear.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Lumbar spinal stenosis affects approximately 103 million people worldwide and 11% of older adults in the US. First-line therapy is activity modification, analgesia, and physical therapy. Long-term benefits from epidural steroid injections have not been established. Selected patients with continued pain and activity limitation may be candidates for decompressive surgery.

Differentiation of pain-related functional limitations in surgical patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) using the Oswestry Disability Index: a Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is the most commonly used outcome measure of functional outcome in spine surgery. The ability of the ODI to differentiate pain related functional limitation specifically related to degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of the functional subsections of the ODI to differentiate the specific patient limitation(s) from symptomatic LSS and the functional impact of surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis of prospectively collected data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN).

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 1,497 lumbar spinal stenosis patients with a dominant complaint of neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy or back pain were identified in the CSORN registry.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The ODI questionnaire version 2.0 was assessed as an outcome measure.

METHODS

The difference at baseline and the pre-to-post (1-year) surgical change of the ODI individual questions was assessed. Analysis of variance, two-tailed paired sample Student t test were used for statistical analysis. Cohen d was used as an index of effect size, defined as "large" when d ≥0.8.

RESULTS

The mean age at surgery was 65 (±11) years and (50.8%) of the patients were female. Preoperatively, highest functional limitations were noted for standing, lifting, walking, pain intensity and social life (mean 3.2, 2.9, 2.5, 2.9, 2.5 respectively). At 1-year follow-up, overall there was a significant improvement in all individual questions and the overall ODI (all p<.001), with similar patterns seen for each dominant complaint. The greatest effect of surgery was noted in the walking, social life and standing domains (all d≥0.81), while personal care, sitting and lifting showed the least improvement (all d≤0.51). In subgroup analyses, the overall ODI baseline scores and subsection limitations were statistically significantly higher in females, those without degenerative spondylolisthesis and those undergoing fusion, although these differences were not considered clinically significant. Preoperative differentiation of LSS specific functional limitation and postoperative changes in all subgroups was similar to the overall LSS cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the ability of the ODI to differentiate the self-reported pain related functional effects of neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy or back pain from LSS and changes associated with surgical intervention. Disaggregated use of the ODI could be a simple tool to aid in preoperative education regarding specific areas of pain related dysfunction and potential for improvement with LSS surgery.

The clinical effectiveness of a physiotherapy delivered physical and psychological group intervention for older adults with neurogenic claudication: the BOOST randomised controlled trial

Background

Neurogenic claudication (NC) is a debilitating spinal condition affecting older adults’ mobility and quality of life.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial of 438 participants evaluated the effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST program) compared to physiotherapy assessment and tailored advice (best practice advice [BPA]) for older adults with NC. Participants were identified from spinal clinics (community and secondary care) and general practice records and randomized 2:1 to the BOOST program or BPA. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 12 months. Data were also collected at 6 months. Other outcomes included ODI walking item, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and falls. The primary analysis was intention-to-treat.

Results

The average age of participants was 74.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 6.0) and 57% (246/435) were female. There was no significant difference in ODI scores between treatment groups at 12 months (adjusted mean difference [MD]: −1.4 [95% confidence intervals (CI) −4.03, 1.17]), but, at 6 months, ODI scores favored the BOOST program (adjusted MD: −3.7 [95% CI −6.27, −1.06]). At 12 months, the BOOST program resulted in greater improvements in walking capacity (6MWT MD: 21.7m [95% CI 5.96, 37.38]) and ODI walking item (MD: −0.2 [95% CI −0.45, −0.01]) and reduced falls risk (odds ratio: 0.6 [95% CI 0.40, 0.98]) compared to BPA. No serious adverse events were related to either treatment.

Conclusions

The BOOST program substantially improved mobility for older adults with NC. Future iterations of the program will consider ways to improve long-term pain-related disability.

Clinical Trials Registration Number: ISRCTN12698674

Non-operative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication: an updated systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a growing health problem in older adults. We updated our previous Cochrane review (2013) to determine the effectiveness of non-operative treatment of LSS with neurogenic claudication.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases were searched and updated up to 22 July 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We only included randomised controlled trials published in English where at least one arm provided data on non-operative treatment and included participants diagnosed with neurogenic claudication with imaging confirmed LSS.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 1. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used for evidence synthesis.

RESULTS

Of 15 200 citations screened, 156 were assessed and 23 new trials were identified. There is moderate-quality evidence from three trials that: Manual therapy and exercise provides superior and clinically important short-term improvement in symptoms and function compared with medical care or community-based group exercise; manual therapy, education and exercise delivered using a cognitive-behavioural approach demonstrates superior and clinically important improvements in walking distance in the immediate to long term compared with self-directed home exercises and glucocorticoid plus lidocaine injection is more effective than lidocaine alone in improving statistical, but not clinically important improvements in pain and function in the short term. The remaining 20 new trials demonstrated low-quality or very low-quality evidence for all comparisons and outcomes, like the findings of our original review.

CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-quality evidence that a multimodal approach which includes manual therapy and exercise, with or without education, is an effective treatment and that epidural steroids are not effective for the management of LSS with neurogenic claudication. All other non-operative interventions provided insufficient quality evidence to make conclusions on their effectiveness.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020191860.

Artificial Intelligence Algorithm-Based Lumbar and Spinal MRI for Evaluation of Efficacy of Chinkuei Shin Chewan Decoction on Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

The study aimed to explore the application value of lumbar Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) images processed by artificial intelligence algorithms in evaluating the efficacy of chinkuei shin chewan decoction (a traditional Chinese medicine to nourish the kidney) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Specifically, 110 LSS patients admitted to the hospital were selected as the research subjects. They were randomly divided into the control group (n = 55) and experimental group (n = 55) according to different treatment methods. The control group was treated with traditional medicine, and the experimental group additionally took chinkuei shin chewan decoction on its basis. Based on the traditional U-net algorithm, a U-net registration algorithm based on artificial intelligence was designed by introducing the information entropy theory, and the algorithm was applied to the lumbar MRI image evaluation of LSS patients. Compared with the traditional U-net algorithm, the artificial intelligence-based U-net registration algorithm had a decreased noise level (P < 0.05), the Jaccard (J) value (0.84) and the Dice value (0.93) increased significantly versus the traditional algorithm (J = 0.63, Dice = 0.81), and the characteristics of the image were more accurate. Before treatment, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores of the experimental group and the control group were 44.32 ± 6.45 and 43.32 ± 5.45, respectively. After treatment, the ODI scores of the two groups were 10.21 ± 5.05 and 17.09 ± 5.23, respectively. Both showed significant improvement, while the improvement of the experimental group was more obvious than that of the control group (P < 0.05). The overall effective rates of the two groups of patients were 96.44% and 82.47%, respectively, and the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group (P < 0.05). Under the U-net registration algorithm based on artificial intelligence, the diagnostic accuracy of lumbar MRI in the experimental group was 94.45%, significantly higher than 67.5% before the introduction of the algorithm (P < 0.05). In conclusion, chinkuei shin chewan decoction are effective for the treatment of LSS, and lumbar MRI based on the artificial intelligence U-net registration algorithm can evaluate the efficacy of LSS well and is worthy of promotion.

Interventions for the Management of Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: Revision 2021

Low back pain (LBP) remains a musculoskeletal condition with an adverse societal impact. Globally, LBP is highly prevalent and a leading cause of disability. This is an update to the 2012 Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), clinical practice guideline (CPG) for LBP. The overall objective of this update was to provide recommendations on interventions delivered by physical therapists or studied in care settings that included physical therapy providers. It also focused on synthesizing new evidence, with the purpose of making recommendations for specific nonpharmacologic treatments. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(11):CPG1-CPG60. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.0304.

The association between pain, balance, fall, and disability in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with vascular claudication

Background

The effect of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and peripheral vascular disease (PVD), which occurs with similar degenerative conditions, when seen together, has not been studied. The aim of this study is to examine and compare the relationship between pain, balance, disability, fear of falling, and kinesiophobia in LSS patients with intermittent vascular claudication (IVC).

Methods

Seventy-two patients diagnosed with LSS using magnetic resonance imaging participated in this study. Thirty-five patients with IVC symptoms and showing vascular lesions by lower extremity venous and arterial Doppler ultrasonography imaging were included in the IVC-LSS group. The pain, static balance, dynamic balance, disability, fear of falling, and kinesiophobia were evaluated using the numeric rating scale, single leg stance test, Time Up and Go (TUG), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), respectively.

Results

Age and female sex were found to be higher in the IVC-LSS group (P = 0.024; P = 0.012). The IVC-LSS group had a shorter single leg stance time and TUG test duration, pain intensity, ODI, FES-I, and TSK scores were higher than patients with LSS (P = 0.001). Pain, fear of falling, and kinesiophobia were moderately correlated with disability in the IVC-LSS group. No relationship was found between pain and dynamic balance. Also, the pain was not related to kinesiophobia.

Conclusions

The findings indicated that IVC causes loss of balance and an increase in pain, disability, fear of falling, and kinesophobia in patients with LSS.

Physical and Psychological Factors Associated With Walking Capacity in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Neurogenic Claudication: A Systematic Scoping Review

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current state of scientific knowledge regarding physical and psychological factors associated with walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with neurogenic claudication.

Design: Systematic scoping review.

Literature Search: We searched CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus databases.

Study Selection Criteria: Cohorts and cross-sectional studies reporting on associations between physical or psychological factors and impaired walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were included.

Data Synthesis: Data were synthetized to identify associations between physical or psychological factors and either walking capacity, gait pattern characteristics, or functional tasks.

Results: Twenty-four studies were included. Walking capacity was significantly correlated with several pain outcomes, disability, estimated walking distance, and cross-sectional area of the lumbar spine. Gait pattern characteristics such as speed and stride were strongly and positively correlated with disability outcomes. Functional tasks were significantly correlated with lower back and upper limb disability, lower limb endurance strength, ranges of motion, and speed. Associations with psychological factors were mostly conflicting except for the Rasch-based Depression Screener and the Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale (PASS-20) questionnaire that were associated with a decreased performance in functional tasks.

Conclusion: Physical and psychological factors that are associated with walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were identified. However, many associations reported between physical or psychological factors and walking capacity were conflicting, even more so when correlated with walking capacity specifically.

Non-Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Leading To Neurogenic Claudication: A Clinical Practice Guideline

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is increasingly common with an aging population and can be associated with significant symptoms and functional limitations. We developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on nonsurgical management of patients with LSS causing NC. Using the GRADE approach, a multidisciplinary guidelines panel based recommendations on evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published through June 2019, or expert consensus. The literature monitored up to October 2020. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, disability, quality of life, and walking capacity. The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with LSS (congenital and/or acquired, lateral recess or central canal, with or without low back pain, with or without spondylolisthesis) causing NC. The guidelines panel developed 6 recommendations based on randomized controlled trials and 5 others based on professional consensus, summarized in 3 overarching recommendations: (Grade: statements are all conditional/weak recommendations) Recommendation 1. For patients with LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may initially select multimodal care nonpharmacological therapies with education, advice and lifestyle changes, behavioral change techniques in conjunction with home exercise, manual therapy, and/or rehabilitation (moderate-quality evidence), traditional acupuncture on a trial basis (very low-quality evidence), and postoperative rehabilitation (supervised program of exercises and/or educational materials encouraging activity) with cognitive-behavioral therapy 12 weeks postsurgery (low-quality evidence). Recommendation 2. In patients LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may consider a trial of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. (very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 3. For patients LSS causing NC, we recommend against the use of the following pharmacological therapies: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, methylcobalamin, calcitonin, paracetamol, opioids, muscle relaxants, pregabalin (consensus-based), gabapentin (very low-quality), and epidural steroidal injections (high-quality evidence). PERSPECTIVE: This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on the nonsurgical management of lumbar spine stenosis, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective non-surgical management of lumbar spine stenosis should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the type of treatment involved, and multimodal care is recommended in most situations.

Comparison of walking variations during treadmill walking test between neurogenic and vascular claudication: a crossover study

Background

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) are two distinct conditions characterized by similar symptoms including leg pain and walking limitations due to claudication. Differentiation between both origins can be difficult and characteristics such as symptom manifestations, time to relief in rest position and pain localization should be considered when determining diagnosis and the treatment plan. The objectives of this study were to compare changes in walking time to symptom change during treadmill tests and self-reported outcomes measures related to claudication, kinesophobia and global health between individuals with LSS, PAD and non-specific low back pain (nLBP).

Method

Fifty-five patients (23 with LSS, 14 with PAD and 18 with nLBP) were recruited from May 2018 to March 2020 to complete a treadmill walking test involving two 5-min walking tasks (Upright and Forward Leaning Trunk (FLT) Walking tasks). The speed was set at 1.9 km/h (1.2 mph), and each task was followed by a 5-min rest period. Walking time to symptom change and Total walking time were recorded during each walking task. Patients were asked to complete four questionnaires related to the impact of claudication, walking impairment, kinesiophobia and global health. One-way ANOVAs were performed to compare walking time difference from the Upright to the FLT walking tasks and to compare questionnaires results between groups.

Results

One-way ANOVAs showed a significant difference between groups regarding difference in Walking time to symptom change between both tasks (F = 4.12, p = 0.022). The LSS group improved its Walking time to symptom change from the Upright to the FLT walking tasks more than the PAD (p = 0.34) and the nLBP group (p = 0.12). The nLBP group was less impacted by claudication and less impaired during walking compared to the LSS and PAD groups (ps < 0.001). The nLBP group also had less kinesiophobia than the LSS one (p < 0.001), but was similar to the PAD group. The global health rating was not statistically different between groups (p = 0.118).

Conclusion

The test was able to distinguish neurogenic from vascular or nLBP related claudication. However, further studies are needed to validate this new treadmill walking test.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04058171), Registered August 15, 2019 –Registered during recruitment

The Effect of Patient Position on Psoas Morphology and in Lumbar Lordosis

INTRODUCTION

Among the interbody fusions, lateral lumbar interbody fusion allows access to the lumbar spine through the major psoas muscle, which offers several advantages to the spine surgeon. However, some of its drawbacks cause surgeons to avoid using it as a daily practice. Therefore, to address some of these challenges, we propose the prone transpsoas technique, differing mainly from the traditional technique on patient position-moving from lateral to prone decubitus, theoretically enhancing the lordosis and impacting the psoas morphology.

METHODS

Twenty-four consecutive patients were invited to have magnetic resonance imaging examinations in 3 different positions (prone, dorsal, lateral). Two observers measured the following parameters: vertebral body size, psoas diameter, psoas anterior border distance, plexus distance, total lumbar lordosis, distal lumbar lordosis, and proximal lumbar lordosis. Values of P < 0.05 were deemed significant.

RESULTS

The prone position yielded a significant increase in the lumbar lordosis, both in L1-S1 (57° vs. 46.5°) and proximal lordosis (40.4° vs. 36.9°) compared with the lateral position. Regarding the morphologic aspects, patients in the prone position presented lesser psoas muscles forward shift, but no difference was noted in the plexus position neither for L3-L4 nor L4-L5.

CONCLUSIONS

The prone position resulted in a significantly increased lumbar lordosis, both distal and proximal, which may enable the spine surgeon to achieve significant sagittal restoration just by positioning. The prone position also produced a posterior retraction of the psoas muscle. However, it did not significantly affect the position of the plexus concerning the vertebral body.

Effectiveness of Conservative Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Pain, Disability, Physical Capacity, and Physical Activity Behavior in Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of conservative nonpharmacologic therapies on pain, disability, physical capacity, and physical activity outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

DATA SOURCES

Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO from inception to November 4, 2019, without language restrictions.

STUDY SELECTION

Pairs of review authors independently identified randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed scientific journals reporting on the effects of rehabilitation interventions on pain intensity (back or leg), disability, symptom severity, physical capacity, physical activity behavior, or adverse events (secondary outcome) in adults with LSS. The search identified 1718 records; data from 21 reports of 19 trials (1432 patients) were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Review author pairs independently extracted data and assessed included studies. We assessed risk of bias with the Cochrane tool, and overall study quality with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation classification.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses; treatment effects were reported as mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Directed exercise and manual therapy was superior to self-directed or group exercise for improving short-term walking capacity (MD, 293.3 m; 95% CI, 61.7-524.9 m; low-quality evidence), back pain (MD, -1.1; 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.4; moderate quality evidence), leg pain (MD, -.9; 95% CI, -0.2 to -1.5; moderate-quality evidence), and symptom severity (MD, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.4 to -0.2; low quality evidence). There is very low quality evidence that rehabilitation is no better than surgery at improving intermediate- or long-term disability. Single trials provided conflicting evidence of effectiveness for a variety of therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with LSS, there is low- to moderate-quality evidence that manual therapy with supervised exercises improves short-term walking capacity and results in small improvements in pain and symptom severity compared with self-directed or group exercise. The choice between rehabilitation and surgery for LSS is very uncertain owing to the very low quality of available evidence.

The profile of older adults seeking chiropractic care: a secondary analysis

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal conditions are the primary reason older adults seek general medical care, resulting in older adults as the highest consumers of health care services. While there is high use of chiropractic care by older adults, there is no recent, specific data on why older adults seek chiropractic care and how chiropractors manage conditions. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to describe the demographic characteristics of older adults seeking chiropractic care, and to report problems diagnosed by chiropractors and the treatment provided to older adults who seek chiropractic care.

METHODS

A secondary data analysis from two, large cross-sectional observational studies conducted in Australia (COAST) and Canada (O-COAST). Patient encounter and diagnoses were classified using the International Classification of Primary Care, 2nd edition (ICPC-2), using the Australian ICPC-2 PLUS general practice terminology and the ICPC-2 PLUS Chiro terminology. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize chiropractor, patient and encounter characteristics. Encounter and patient characteristics were compared between younger (< 65 years old) and older (≥65 years old) adults using χ² tests or t-tests, accounting for the clustering of patients and encounters within chiropractors.

RESULTS

A total of 6781 chiropractor-adult patient encounters were recorded. Of these, 1067 encounters were for persons aged > 65 years (16%), from 897 unique older patients. The most common diagnosis within older adult encounters was a back problem (56%), followed by neck problems (10%). Soft tissue techniques were most frequently used for older patients (85 in every 100 encounters) and in 29 of every 100 encounters, chiropractors recommended exercise to older patients as a part of their treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

From 6781 chiropractor-adult patient encounters across two countries, one in seven adult chiropractic patients were > 65 years. Of these, nearly 60% presented with a back problem, with neck pain and lower limb problems the next most common presentation to chiropractors. Musculoskeletal conditions have a significant burden in terms of disability in older adults and are the most commonly treated conditions in chiropractic practice. Future research should explore the clinical course of back pain in older patients seeking chiropractic care and compare the provision of care to older adults across healthcare professions.

Supervised physical therapy versus unsupervised exercise for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: 1-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the 1-year outcomes of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with supervised physical therapy or unsupervised exercise.

DESIGN

A single-center randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessor and intention-to-treat analysis.

SETTING

Spine care center.

SUBJECTS

A total of 86 patients presenting with symptoms of neurogenic claudication caused by lumbar spinal stenosis.

INTERVENTIONS

The physical therapy group received supervised physical therapy sessions twice a week for 6 weeks and home exercise program. The home exercise group received 6-week home exercise program only.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was symptom severity on the Zurich claudication questionnaire at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included physical function, pain, health-related quality of life and the surgery rate after 1 year.

RESULTS

At 1 year, more patients in the physical therapy group than in the home exercise group achieved minimum clinically important differences in Zurich claudication questionnaire symptom severity (60.5% vs 32.6%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 4.3, [95% CI [1.5-12.3], P = 0.01); Zurich claudication questionnaire physical function (55.8% vs 32.6%; AOR 3.0 [1.1-8.1], P = 0.03); SF-36 bodily pain (48.8% vs 25.6%; AOR 2.8 [1.1-7.3], P = 0.03), and SF-36 general health (20.9% vs 7.0%; AOR 6.1 [1.1-33.0], P = 0.04). The surgery rate at 1 year was lower in the physical therapy than in the home exercise group (7.0% vs 23.3%; AOR 0.2 [0.04-0.9] P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Supervised physical therapy produced greater improvements in symptom severity and physical function than unsupervised exercise and was associated with lower likelihood of receiving surgery within 1 year.

Degenerative Lumbar Spine Stenosis Consensus Conference: the Italian job. Recommendations of the Spinal Section of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery

In the modern era evidence-based medicine, guidelines and recommendations represent a key-point of daily activity. The Spinal Section of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery introduced some recommendations regarding Degenerative Lumbar Spine Stenosis based on those of the Spine Committee of World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies, revising them on the basis of Italian common practice. In June 2019, a Committee of 21 spine surgeons met in Rome to validate the recommendations of the WFNS. Furthermore, they decided to review the ones that did not reach a consensus to create Italian Recommendations on Degenerative Lumbar Spine Stenosis. A literature review of the last ten years was performed and the statements were voted using the Delphi method. Forty-one statements were discussed, and 7 statements were voted again to reach a consensus with respect to those of the WFNS. A total of 40 statements reached a consensus, of which 36 reached a positive consensus and 4 a negative consensus, while no consensus was reached in 1 case. Conservative multimodal therapy, tailored on the patient, is a reasonable and effective first option choice for the treatment of LSS patients with tolerable moderate symptoms. Surgical treatment is reserved for symptomatic patients non-responding to conservative treatment or with neurological deficits. The best surgical technique to use depends on personal experience; modern MISS techniques are equivalent to open decompressive surgery with some advantages and higher cost-effectiveness. Fusion surgery and mobility preserving surgery only have a marginal role in the treatment of DLSS without instability.

Conservative Treatment and Percutaneous Pain Relief Techniques in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a progressive disease with potentially dangerous consequences that affect quality of life. Despite the detailed literature, natural history is unpredictable. This uncertainty presents a challenge making the correct management decisions, especially in patients with mild to moderate symptoms, regarding conservative or surgical treatment. This article focused on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS.

METHODS

To standardize clinical practice worldwide as much as possible, the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Spine Committee held a consensus conference on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS. A team of experts in spinal disorders reviewed the literature on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS from 2008 to 2018 and drafted and voted on a number of statements.

RESULTS

During 2 consensus meetings, 14 statements were voted on. The Committee agreed on the use of physical therapy for up to 3 months in cases with no neurologic symptoms. Initial conservative treatment could be applied without major complications in these cases. In patients with moderate to severe symptoms or with acute radicular deficits, surgical treatment is indicated. The efficacy of epidural injections is still debated, as it shows only limited benefit in patients with degenerative LSS.

CONCLUSIONS

A conservative approach based on therapeutic exercise may be the first choice in patients with LSS except in the presence of significant neurologic deficits. Treatment with instrumental modalities or epidural injections is still debated. Further studies with standardization of outcome measures are needed to reach high-level evidence conclusions.

Development of a Clinical Decision Aid for Chiropractic Management of Common Conditions Causing Low Back Pain in Veterans: Results of a Consensus Process

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to develop a clinical decision aid for chiropractic management of common conditions causing low back pain (LBP) in veterans receiving treatment in US Veterans Affairs (VA) health care facilities.

METHODS

A consensus study using an online, modified Delphi technique and Research Electronic Data Capture web application was conducted among VA doctors of chiropractic. Investigators reviewed the scientific literature pertaining to diagnosis and treatment of nonsurgical, neuromusculoskeletal LBP. Thirty seed statements summarizing evidence for chiropractic management, a graphical stepped management tool outlining diagnosis-informed treatment approaches, and support materials were then reviewed by an expert advisory committee. Email notifications invited 113 VA chiropractic clinicians to participate as Delphi panelists. Panelists rated the appropriateness of the seed statements and the stepped process on a 1-to-9 scale using the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles methodology. Statements were accepted when both the median rating and 80% of all ratings occurred within the highly appropriate range.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine panelists (74% male) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 46 (11) years and clinical experience of 17 (11) years participated in the study. Accepted statements addressed included (1) essential components of chiropractic care, (2) treatments for conditions causing or contributing to LBP, (3) spinal manipulation mechanisms, (4) descriptions and mechanisms of commonly used chiropractic interventions, and (5) a graphical stepped clinical management tool.

CONCLUSION

This study group produced a chiropractic clinical decision aid for LBP management, which can be used to support evidence-based care decisions for veterans with LBP.

Development of an Evidence-Based Practical Diagnostic Checklist and Corresponding Clinical Exam for Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to use scientific evidence to develop a practical diagnostic checklist and corresponding clinical exam for patients presenting with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

An iterative process was conducted to develop a diagnostic checklist and clinical exam for LBP using evidence-based diagnostic criteria. The checklist and exam were informed by a systematic review focused on summarizing current research evidence for office-based clinical evaluation of common conditions causing LBP.

RESULTS

Diagnostic categories contained within the checklist and exam include nociceptive pain, neuropathic pain, and sensitization. Nociceptive pain subcategories include discogenic, myofascial, sacroiliac, and zygapophyseal (facet) joint pain. Neuropathic pain categories include neurogenic claudication, radicular pain, radiculopathy, and peripheral entrapment (piriformis and thoracolumbar syndrome). Sensitization contains 2 subtypes, central and peripheral sensitization. The diagnostic checklist contains individual diagnostic categories containing evidence-based criteria, applicable examination procedures, and checkboxes to record clinical findings. The checklist organizes and displays evidence for or against a working diagnosis. The checklist may help to ensure needed information is obtained from a patient interview and exam in a variety of primary spine care settings (eg, medical, chiropractic).

CONCLUSION

The available evidence informs reasonable working diagnoses for many conditions causing or contributing to LBP. A practical diagnostic process including an exam and checklist is offered to guide clinical evaluation and demonstrate evidence for working diagnoses in clinical settings.

Effect of active TENS versus de-tuned TENS on walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial

Background context

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) leads to diminished blood flow to the spinal nerves causing neurogenic claudication and impaired walking ability. Animal studies have demonstrated increased blood flow to the spinal nerves and spinal cord with superficial para-spinal electrical stimulation of the skin.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of active para-spinal transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) compared to de-tuned TENS applied while walking, on improving walking ability in LSS.

Study design

This was a two-arm double-blinded (participant and assessor) randomized controlled trial.

Patient sample

We recruited 104 participants 50 years of age or older with neurogenic claudication, imaging confirmed LSS and limited walking ability.

Outcome measures

The primary measure was walking distance measured by the self-paced walking test (SPWT) and the primary outcome was the difference in proportions among participants in both groups who achieved at least a 30% improvement in walking distance from baseline using relative risk with 95% confidence intervals.

Methods

The active TENS group (n = 49) received para-spinal TENS from L3-S1 at a frequency of 65-100 Hz modulated over 3-s intervals with a pulse width of 100-200 usec, and turned on 2 min before the start and maintained during the SPWT. The de-tuned TENS group (n = 51) received similarly applied TENS for 30 s followed by ramping down to zero stimulus and turned off before the start and during the SPWT.Study funded by The Arthritis Society ($365,000 CAN) and salary support for Carlo Ammendolia funded by the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation ($500,000 CAN over 5 years).

Results

From August 2014 to January 2016 a total of 640 potential participants were screened for eligibility; 106 were eligible and 104 were randomly allocated to active TENS or de-tuned TENS. Both groups showed significant improvement in walking distance but there was no significant difference between groups. The mean difference between active and de-tuned TENS groups was 46.9 m; 95% CI (- 118.4 to 212.1); P = 0.57. A total of 71% (35/49) of active TENS and 74% (38/51) of de-tuned TENS participants achieved at least 30% improvement in walking distance; relative risk (RR), 0.96; 95% CI, (0.7 to 1.2) P = 0.77.

Conclusions

Active TENS applied while walking is no better than de-tuned TENS for improving walking ability in patients with degenerative LSS and therefore should not be a recommended treatment in clinical practice.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02592642. Registration October 30, 2015.