T'ai Chi for Chronic Low Back Pain in Older Adults: A Feasibility Trial

Physical Activity Supported by Low-Cost Mobile Technology for Back Pain (PAT-Back) to Reduce Disability in Older Adults: Results of a Feasibility Study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of a multimodal program (PAT-Back) compared to best practice advice on pain and disability in older adults with chronic low back pain (LBP) in primary care.

METHODS

This feasibility study took place in Fortaleza, Northeast Brazil. The PAT-Back intervention consisted of a program including exercises, pain education, and motivational text messages for the in-home component. The control group received an evidence-based educational booklet. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment, adherence and retention rates, level of difficulty of the education and intervention content, perception of utility of mobile technology, and adverse events. The feasibility criteria were previously defined.

RESULTS

A total of 248 people were screened, of which 46 older adults were eligible. The retention rate was high (100% in the PAT-Back group and 95% in the control group). The adherence rate to intervention was partially met (60%), whereas the adherence rate to unsupervised exercises was adequate (75%), and perception about safety to perform home exercise was partially acceptable (70%) in the PAT-Back group. In addition, 100% of older adults reported which text messages motivated them to perform the exercises in the PAT-Back group. Difficulty reported by participants in understanding and performing the intervention was small in both groups. Six participants reported transient adverse events in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Older adults accepted both interventions. Results demonstrated that the program is feasible, although minor changes targeting adherence and safety in home exercise are needed.

IMPACT

This feasibility study supports progression to a full trial investigating the effectiveness of a multimodal program (PAT-Back) on pain and disability in older adults with chronic LBP within a primary health care setting in low to middle income countries where such data from the older population are scarce and the burden of LBP is increasing.

Association Between Pain and Sarcopenia Among Adults Aged ≥65 Years from Low- and Middle-Income Countries

BACKGROUND

Pain may increase the risk for sarcopenia, but existing literature is only from high-income countries, while the mediators of this association are largely unknown. Thus, we aimed to investigate the association between pain and sarcopenia using nationally representative samples of older adults from 6 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and to identify potential mediators.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from the WHO Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) were analyzed. Sarcopenia was defined as having low skeletal muscle mass and weak handgrip strength, while the presence and severity of pain in the last 30 days were self-reported. Multivariable logistic regression and mediation analyses were performed. The control variables included age, sex, education, wealth, and chronic conditions, while affect, sleep/energy, disability, social participation, sedentary behavior, and mobility were considered potential mediators.

RESULTS

Data on 14,585 adults aged ≥65 years were analyzed (mean [SD] age 72.6 [11.5] years; 55.0% females). Compared to no pain, mild, moderate, severe, and extreme pain were associated with 1.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05-1.94), 1.43 (95%CI = 1.02-2.00), 1.92 (95%CI = 1.09-3.37), and 2.88 (95%CI = 1.10-7.54) times higher odds for sarcopenia, respectively. Disability (mediated percentage 18.0%), sedentary behavior (12.9%), and low mobility (56.1%) were significant mediators in the association between increasing levels of pain and sarcopenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher levels of pain were associated with higher odds for sarcopenia among adults aged ≥65 years in 6 LMICs. Disability, sedentary behavior, and mobility problems were identified as potential mediators. Targeting these factors in people with pain may decrease the future risk of sarcopenia onset, pending future longitudinal research.

Conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention in adults with chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomized controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a major source of human suffering, and chronic low back pain (cLBP) is among the most prevalent, costly, and disabling of pain conditions. Due to the significant personal and societal burden and the complex and recurring nature of cLBP, self-management approaches that can be practiced at home are highly relevant to develop and test. The respiratory system is one of the most integrated systems of the body, and breathing is bidirectionally related with stress, emotion, and pain. Thus, the widespread physiological and psychological impact of breathing practices and breathwork interventions hold substantial promise as possible self-management strategies for chronic pain. The primary aim of the current randomized pilot study is to test the feasibility and acceptability of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention compared to a sham control condition.

METHODS

The rationale and procedures for testing a 5-day conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention, compared to a deep breathing sham control intervention, in 24 adults (18-65 years) with cLBP is described. Both interventions will be delivered using standardized audio recordings and practiced over 5 days (two times in-person and three times at-home), and both are described as Breathing and Attention Training to reduce possible expectancy and placebo effects common in pain research. The primary outcomes for this study are feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility will be evaluated by determining rates of participant recruitment, adherence, retention, and study assessment completion, and acceptability will be evaluated by assessing participants' satisfaction and helpfulness of the intervention. We will also measure other clinical pain, psychological, behavioral, and physiological variables that are planned to be included in a follow-up randomized controlled trial.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first study to examine the effects of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention for individuals with chronic pain. The successful completion of this smaller-scale pilot study will provide data regarding the feasibility and acceptability to conduct a subsequent trial testing the efficacy of this breathing self-management practice for adults with cLBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT04740710 . Registered on 5 February 2021.

Effect of different weekly frequencies of Chen-style Tai Chi in elders with chronic non-specific low back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tai Chi (TC), as one of mild to moderate exercise therapies specifically recommended by clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physician, is a viable option for chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP) treatment. Nevertheless, limited studies focused on the effect of different weekly frequencies of TC in elders with CNLBP. This superiority study aims to compare the differences of TC with different weekly frequencies in elders with CNLBP on the premise of proving its effectiveness, and identifying whether mindfulness mediates the effect of TC on treatment outcomes.

METHODS

In total, 284 senior citizens with CNLBP will be recruited in this single-centre, randomised, single-blinded (outcome assessors, data managers and the statistician), parallel controlled trial. Participants will be randomly divided into either one of three TC groups (1, 3, or 5 sessions/week, on the basis of weekly health educational lectures) or weekly health educational lectures, sustaining for 12 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of follow-up after the end of intervention. The primary outcome (the changes of LBP intensity at rest) will be measured at baseline before randomisation and immediately after the completion of weeks 4, 8 and 12 of the intervention, and the end of follow-up (week 24) using the visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-10 cm) to put a mark on the VAS scale to show how severities of their average low back pain have been over the past 24 h. Secondary outcomes, including Beck Depression Inventory-II, Pain Catastrophising Scale and Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index and Short Form-36, will be measured at baseline and immediately after the completion of week 12 of the intervention and end of follow-up. The intention-to-treat and per-protocol principles will be used to analyse outcomes with a setting at α = 0.05 as statistical significance.

DISCUSSION

This comprehensive and detailed protocol will be the first trial to compare the effectiveness of different weekly frequencies of TC in elders with CNLBP. The outcomes may provide valuable data about the choice of the ideal number of sessions to further normalise the application of exercise for clinicians.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese clinical trial registry ChiCTR2200058190 . Registered on 1 April 2022.

The effect and mechanism of traditional Chinese exercise for chronic low back pain in middle-aged and elderly patients: A systematic review

Background

Increasing lines of evidence indicate that traditional Chinese exercise (TCE) has potential benefits in improving chronic low back pain (CLBP) symptoms. To assess the clinical efficacy of TCE in the treatment of CLBP, we performed a systematic review of existing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CLBP and summarized the neural mechanisms underlying TCE in the treatment of CLBP.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and EBSCO from January 1991 to March 2022. The quality of all included RCTs was evaluated by the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale (PEDro). The primary outcomes included pain severity and pain-related disability.

Results

A total of 11 RCTs with 1,256 middle-aged and elderly patients with CLBP were included. The quality of all 11 included RCTs ranged from moderate to high according to PEDro. Results suggested that TCE could considerably reduce pain intensity in patients with CLBP. Overall, most studies did not find any difference in secondary outcomes (quality of life, depression, and sleep quality).

Conclusion

The neurophysiological mechanism of TCE for treating CLBP could be linked to meditation and breathing, posture control, strength and flexibility training, and regulation of pain-related brain networks. Our systematic review showed that TCE appears to be effective in alleviating pain in patients with CLBP.

Prolonged Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation to Demonstrate a Larger Analgesia as Well as Cortical Excitability Changes Dependent on the Context of a Pain Episode

A series of neuropathic pain conditions have a prevalence in older adults potentially associated with declined functioning of the peripheral and/or central nervous system. Neuropathic pain conditions demonstrate defective cortical excitability and intermissions, which raises questions of the impact of pain on cortical excitability changes and when to deliver repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to maximize the analgesic effects. Using prolonged continuous theta-burst stimulation (pcTBS), a relatively new rTMS protocol to increase excitability, this study was designed to investigate pcTBS analgesia and cortical excitability in the context of pain. With capsaicin application, twenty-nine healthy participants received pcTBS or Sham stimulation either in the phase of pain initialization (capsaicin applied) or pain ascending (20 min after capsaicin application). Pain intensity was measured with a visual-analogic scale (VAS). Cortical excitability was assessed by motor-evoked potential (MEP) and cortical silent period (CSP) which evaluates corticospinal excitability and GABAergic intracortical inhibition, respectively. Our data on pain dynamics demonstrated that pcTBS produced a consistent analgesic effect regardless of the time frame of pcTBS. More importantly, pcTBS delivered at pain initialization induced a larger pain reduction and a higher response rate compared to the stimulation during pain ascending. We further provide novel findings indicating distinct mechanisms of pcTBS analgesia dependent on the context of pain, in which pcTBS delivered at pain initialization was able to reverse depressed MEP, whereby pcTBS during pain ascending was associated with increased CSP. Overall, our data indicate pcTBS to be a potential protocol in pain management that could be delivered before the initialization of a pain episode to improve rTMS analgesia, potentially through inducing early corticospinal excitability changes that would be suppressed by nociceptive transmission.

Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

The Benefits of T'ai Chi for Older Adults with Chronic Back Pain: A Qualitative Study

Objective: To determine the perceived benefits of t'ai chi in older adults with chronic low-back pain (cLBP). Design: A qualitative analysis from a randomized controlled feasibility trial. Subjects: Eighteen participants (65+ years old) with cLBP of at least moderate intensity. Intervention: A 36-week intervention beginning with twice weekly classes for 12 weeks, weekly classes for 6 weeks, biweekly classes for 6 weeks, and monthly classes for 12 weeks. Participants were asked to practice at home on nonclass days and videos were provided to assist in that process. Outcome Measures: Participants in the focus groups were asked to provide feedback on their experiences with the study as well as the benefits of their t'ai chi practice. We used demographic and class attendance data to describe the sample. Results: Regarding the benefits of t'ai chi practice, five major themes were identified: functional benefits, pain reduction/pain relief, psychospiritual benefits, the importance of social support in learning t'ai chi, and the integration of t'ai chi into daily activities. The most common functional benefits were improvements in balance, flexibility, leg strength, and posture. Some reported pain reduction or pain relief, but others did not. Increased relaxation, mindfulness, and a sense of connectedness were subthemes that emerged from psychospiritual benefits. Social support benefits included motivation to attend class and group support while learning a new skill. Finally, improved body awareness allowed participants to integrate t'ai chi skills into their daily activities. Conclusions: This qualitative analysis demonstrates the multifaceted benefits of t'ai chi for older adults living with cLBP.

The Trials and Tribulations of Selecting Comparison Groups in Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacological Complementary and Integrative Health Interventions

Editor's Note: For over two decades, JACM Editorial Board member Karen Sherman, PhD has been among the most respected clinical trialists in complementary and integrative health research. The epidemiologist and Senior Researcher at Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute has focused on pain conditions and has led or been part of teams exploring the roles of such therapies as yoga, acupuncture, mind-body and manual therapies. In this Invited Commentary, Sherman shares wisdom gleaned from the process: trial designs, principles for selecting controls, benefits and liabilities of placebo and sham controls, attention controls, usual care controls, and more. She also discusses the effects of comparison groups on sample sizes, comparison groups for mechanistic studies, and other comparison groups' considerations. This commentary should prove a useful primer wherever research methods in complementary and integrative health are taught. We are pleased to offer it here through JACM. -John Weeks, Editor-in-Chief, JACM (johnweeks-integrator.com).