Clinical outcomes among low back pain consulters with referred leg pain in primary care

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparing the Scores of The Functional Movement Screen™ in Individuals with Low Back Pain versus Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The Functional Movement Screen™ (FMS™) is widely used to assess functional movement patterns and illuminate movement dysfunctions that may have a role in injury risk. However, the association between FMS™ scores and LBP remains uncertain.

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine functional movement scores among patients with low back pain (LBP) and healthy subjects with no LBP and review the validity of the FMS™ tool for screening functional movement among LBP patients.

Methods

The systematic review and meta-analysis included papers assessing functional movement among adult patients with LBP using the FMS™ through a literature review of five databases. The search strategy focused used relevant keywords: Functional movement screen AND low back pain. The review included all papers assessing functional movement among LBP adult patients (>18 years old) using the FMS™ published between 2003 to 2023. The risk of bias in the involved studies was evaluated using the updated Cochrane ROB 2 tool. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager software, version 5.4. The meta-analysis included the total FMS™ score and the scores of the seven FMS™ movement patterns.

Results

Seven studies were included in this systematic review were considered to have low to unclear risk of bias. The meta-analysis revealed that the LBP group had a significantly lower total FMS™ score than the control group by 1.81 points (95% CI (-3.02, -0.59), p= 0.004). Patients with LBP had a significantly lower score than the control group regarding FMS™ movement patterns, the deep squat (p <0.01), the hurdle step (p <0.01), the inline lunge (P value <0.01), the active straight leg raise (p <0.01), the trunk stability push-up (p=0.02), and the rotational stability screens (p <0.01).

Conclusion

Lower scores on the FMS™ are associated with impaired functional movement. Identifying the specific functional movement impairments linked to LBP can assist in the creation of personalized treatment plans and interventions. Further research is needed to assess the association of cofounders, such as age, gender, and body mass index, with the FMS™ score among LBP patients and controls.

Level of evidence

1.

Does Preoperative Back Pain Impact Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Isthmic Spondylolisthesis?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

To determine postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS).

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined the postoperative clinical trajectory in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF specifically for IS.

METHODS

Patients were separated into two cohorts based on the previously defined Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back pain (BP) for severe pain: VAS-BP <7 and VAS-BP ≥7. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-physical function (PF), 12-item Short Form (SF-12) Physical/Mental Component Score, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, VAS-BP, VAS leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index were collected preoperatively and up to 2-year postoperatively. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated through previously defined thresholds.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients were recorded, with 58 patients in the VAS-BP <7 cohort. The VAS-BP <7 cohort demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs at one or more postoperative time points. The VAS-BP ≥7 demonstrated significant improvement at 3 or more postoperative time points in all PROMs except for SF-12 Mental Component Score. The VAS-BP <7 cohort reported significantly superior preoperative and postoperative PROMs in all domains, except for SF-12 Physical Component Score. The VAS-BP ≥7 cohort had higher MCID achievement rates at one or more time points in multiple PROMs.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing MIS-TLIF for IS demonstrated significant postoperative improvement in PF, mental function, pain, and disability outcomes independent of preoperative severity of BP. Patients with lower preoperative BP demonstrated superior outcomes in PF, mental function, pain, and disability. However, patients with greater preoperative BP achieved higher rates of MCID in mental function, BP, and disability outcomes. Patients with greater severity of preoperative BP undergoing MIS-TLIF for IS may experience greater rates of clinically relevant improvement in mental function, BP, and disability outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

SIGNIFICANCE

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

Management of low back pain and lumbosacral radicular syndrome: the Guideline of the Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF)

BACKGROUND

Significant progress and new insights have been gained since the Dutch Physical Therapy guideline on low back pain (LBP) in 2013 and the Cesar en Mensendieck guideline in 2009, necessitating an update of these guidelines.

AIM

To update and develop an evidence-based guideline for the comprehensive management of LBP and lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LRS) without serious specific conditions (red flags) for Dutch physical therapists and Cesar and Mensendieck Therapists.

DESIGN

Clinical practice guideline.

SETTING

Inpatient and outpatient.

POPULATION

Adults with LBP and/or LRS.

METHODS

Clinically relevant questions were identified based on perceived barriers in current practice of physical therapy. All clinical questions were answered using published guidelines, systematic reviews, narrative reviews or systematic reviews performed by the project group. Recommendations were formulated based on evidence and additional considerations, as described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework. Patients participated in every phase.

RESULTS

The guideline describes a comprehensive assessment based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for LBP and LRS, including the identification of alarm symptoms and red flags. Patients are assigned to three treatment profiles (low, moderate and high risk of persistent symptoms) based on prognostic factors for persistent LBP. The guideline recommends offering simple and less intensive support to people who are likely to recover quickly (low-risk profile) and more complex and intensive support to people with a moderate or high risk of persistent complaints. Criteria for initiating and discontinuing physical therapy, and referral to a general practitioner are specified. Recommendations are formulated for information and advice, measurement instruments, active and passive interventions and behavior-oriented treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence based physical therapy guideline for the management of patients with LBP and LRS without red flags for physical therapists and Cesar and Mensendieck therapists was developed. Cornerstones of physical therapy assessment and treatment are risk stratification, shared decision-making, information and advice, and exercises.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

This guideline provides guidance for clinicians and patients to optimize treatment outcomes in patients with LBP and LRS and offers transparency for other healthcare providers and stakeholders.

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

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

Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain? The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations

The potential to classify low back pain as being characterised by dominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic mechanisms is a clinically relevant issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that these low back pain phenotypes might respond differently to treatments; however, more research must be done before making specific recommendations. Accordingly, the low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium was established as a group of 36 clinicians and researchers from 13 countries (five continents) and 29 institutions, to apply a modified Nominal Group Technique methodology to develop international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations to provide guidance for identifying the dominant pain phenotype in patients with low back pain, and potentially adapt pain management strategies. The BACPAP consortium's recommendations are also intended to provide direction for future clinical research by building on the established clinical criteria for neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The BACPAP consortium's consensus recommendations are a necessary early step in the process to determine if personalised pain medicine based on pain phenotypes is feasible for low back pain management. Therefore, these recommendations are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice until additional evidence is generated that is specific to these low back pain phenotypes.

Prognosis of Patients With Neuropathic Low Back-Related Leg Pain: An Exploratory Study Using Prospective Data From UK Primary Care

This prospective cohort study investigates the prognosis of patients with neuropathic low back-related leg pain consulting in UK primary care. Data from 511 patients were collected using standardised baseline clinical examinations (including magnetic resonance imaging scan findings), self-report questionnaires at baseline, 4 months, 12 months, and 3 years. Cases of possible neuropathic pain (NP) and persistent-NP were identified using either of 2 definitions: 1) clinical diagnosis of sciatica, 2) self-report version of leeds assessment for neurological symptoms and signs (s-LANSS). Mixed-effects models compared pain intensity (highest of mean leg or mean back pain [0-10 Numerical Rating Scale]) over 3-years between persistent-NP versus non-persistent-NP based on 1) clinical diagnosis, 2) s-LANSS. Logistic regression examined associations between potential prognostic factors and persistent-NP at 4 months based on the 2 NP definitions. At 4-months, using both definitions: 1) approximately 4 out of 10 patients had persistent-NP, 2) mean pain intensity was higher for patients with persistent-NP at all follow-up points compared to those without, 3) only pain self-efficacy was significantly associated with persistent-NP (s-LANSS: OR .98, sciatica: .98), but it did not predict cases of persistent-NP in either multivariable model. Based on factors routinely collected from self-report and clinical examination, it was not possible to predict persistent-NP in this population. PERSPECTIVE: This study provides evidence that neuropathic back-related leg pain in patients consulting in primary care is not always persistent. Patients with persistent neuropathic pain had worse outcomes than those without. Neither leg pain intensity, pain self-efficacy nor MRI scan findings predicted cases of persistent neuropathic pain in this patient population.

Diagnostic utility of diagnostic investigations to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain: protocol for a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain has gained increasing interest in contemporary research. Identification of neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain is essential to inform precision management. Diagnostic investigations are commonly used to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain; yet the diagnostic utility of these investigations is unknown. This systematic review aims to investigate the diagnostic utility of diagnostic investigations to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol has been designed and reported in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Diagnostic Test Accuracy studies, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols checklist, respectively. The search strategy will involve two independent reviewers searching electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, AMED, Pedro), key journals (Spine, The Clinical Journal of Pain, PAIN, European Journal of Pain, The Journal of Pain, Musculoskeletal Science and Practice) and grey literature (British National Bibliography for report literature, OpenGrey, EThOS) from inception to 31 July 2023 to identify studies. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic investigation to identify neuropathic pain in patients with low back-related leg pain will be eligible, studies not written in English will be excluded. The reviewers will extract the data from included studies, assess risk of bias (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and determine confidence in findings (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines). Methodological heterogeneity will be assessed to determine if a meta-analysis is possible. If pooling of data is not possible then a narrative synthesis will be done.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at relevant conferences and shared with the Patient Partner Advisor Group at Western University, Canada.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023438222.

Role of kinesiophobia in the selective motor control during gait in patients with low back-related leg pain

Fear of movement has been related to changes in motor function in patients with low back pain, but little is known about how kinesiophobia affects selective motor control during gait (ability of muscles performing distinct mechanical functions) in patients with low back-related leg pain (LBLP). The aim of the study was to determine the association between kinesiophobia and selective motor control in patients with LBLP. An observational cross-sectional study was performed on 18 patients. Outcome included: kinesiophobia using the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia; pain mechanism using Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Signs and Symptoms; disability using Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; mechanosensitivity using Straight Leg Raise. Surface electromyography was used to assess selective motor control during gait by examining the correlation and coactivation in muscle pairs involved in the stance phase. Pairs included vastus medialis (VM) and medial gastrocnemius (MG), causing opposite moments around the knee joint, and gluteus medius (GM) and MG, as muscles with distinct mechanical functions (weight acceptance vs. propulsion). A strong association was observed between kinesiophobia and correlation (r = 0.63; p = 0.005) and coactivation (r = 0.69; p = 0.001) between VM versus MG. A moderate association was observed between kinesiophobia and correlation (r = 0.58; p = 0.011) and coactivation (r = 0.55; p = 0.019) between GM versus MG. No significant associations were obtained for other outcomes. A high kinesiophobia is associated with low selective motor control of the muscles involved in the weight acceptance and propulsion phases during gait in patients with LBLP. Fear of movement was better associated with decreased neuromuscular control than other clinical variables such as pain mechanism, disability, and mechanosensitivity.

Low-back related leg pain: is the nerve guilty? How to differentiate the underlying pain mechanism

Low back pain (LBP) that radiates to the leg is not always related to a lesion or a disease of the nervous system (neuropathic pain): it might be nociceptive (referred) pain. Unfortunately, patients with low-back related leg pain are often given a variety of diagnoses (e.g. 'sciatica'; 'radicular pain'; pseudoradicular pain"). This terminology causes confusion and challenges clinical reasoning. It is essential for clinicians to understand and recognize predominant pain mechanisms. This paper describes pain mechanisms related to low back-related leg pain and helps differentiate these mechanisms in practice using clinical based scenarios. We illustrate this by using two clinical scenarios including patients with the same symptoms in terms of pain localization (i.e. low-back related leg pain) but with different underlying pain mechanisms (i.e. nociceptive versus neuropathic pain).

Neural mobilization in low back and radicular pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Low back pain can present with radicular pain caused by lumbosacral nerve root pathology. Neural mobilization (NM) is a treatment technique used to treat low back and radicular pain (LBRP).

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of NM interventions in improving pain, disability, and function in adults with LBRP.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE (Ovid), Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Cochrane databases were searched.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of NM on pain, disability, and/or function in adults with LBRP.

DATA EXTRACTION

Authors reviewed studies and used the PEDro scale and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool to assess methodological quality and risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eight studies were included. Six of the eight studies found the addition of NM to conservative treatment improved all measured outcomes. One study found improvements in some but not all functional measures, and delayed improvements in pain. One study found improvements in measures of neural sensitivity, but not overall pain and disability.

CONCLUSIONS

NM may be an effective tool for short-term improvements in pain, function, and disability associated with LBRP. Additional high quality research is needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

: This systematic review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020192338).

Comparison of the susceptibility to implant failure in the lateral, posterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A finite element analysis

OBJECTIVE

There are several techniques for lumbar interbody fusion, and implant failure following lumbar interbody fusion can be troublesome. This study aimed to compare the stress in posterior implant and peri-screw vertebral bodies among lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and to select the technique that is least likely to cause implant failure.

METHODS

We created an intact L3-L5 model and simulated the LLIF, PLIF, and TLIF techniques at L4-L5 using finite element methods. All models at the lower portion of L5 were fixed and imposed a preload of 400 N and a moment of 7.5 Nm on the upper portion of L3 to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. We investigated the peak stresses and stress concentration in the posterior implant and peri-screw vertebral bodies for the LLIF, PLIF, and TLIF techniques.

RESULTS

The extension, flexion, bending, and rotation peak stresses and stress concentration in the posterior implant, and the peri-screw vertebral bodies, were the lowest in LLIF, followed by PLIF and TLIF, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

It was found that implant failure was least likely to occur in LLIF, followed by PLIF and TLIF, respectively. Hence, surgeons should be aware of these factors when selecting an appropriate surgical technique and be careful for implant failure during postoperative follow-up.

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

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

Development of a clinical prediction model to inform clinical decision making for classification of patients with sciatica, based on their clinical characteristics, in the Greek health system: protocol for a prospective predictive exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Sciatica is one of the most common reasons for seeking healthcare for musculoskeletal pain. Sciatica is primarily considered as neuropathic in nature when neural tissue in the low back is compromised, but sometimes other non-neural structures may be involved. Appropriate assessment and management are important for patients with sciatica. Therapists use several outcome measures to assess patients to inform selection of the most suitable treatment. There is limited evidence for the best treatment of sciatica, and this is likely contributed to by having no reliable algorithm to categorise patients based on their clinical characteristics to inform physiotherapy treatment. The purpose of this study is to develop a clinical prediction model to categorise patients with sciatica, in terms of early clinical outcome, based on their initial clinical characteristics.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A prospective observational multicentre design will recruit consecutive patients (n=467) with sciatica referred for physiotherapy. Each patient will be evaluated to determine whether or not they will be accepted into the study by answering some questions that will confirm the study's eligibility criteria. Patients' basic characteristics, patient-reported outcome measures and performance-based measures will be collected at baseline from multiple sites in the Greek territory using this same protocol, prior to commencement of treatment. The main researcher of this study will be responsible for data collection in all sites. On completion of the standard referred physiotherapy treatment after 3 weeks' time, participants will be asked by telephone to evaluate their outcome using the Global Perceived Effect Scale. For the descriptive statistical analysis, the continuous variables will be expressed in the form of 'mean' and 'SD'. In order to assess the prognostic value of each predictor, in terms of the level of improvement or worsening of the symptoms, multiple variable regression analysis will be used.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Τhis study is approved from the Ethics and Deontology Committee of the University of West Attica, Athens, Greece, protocol number: 38313-09/06/2020, 10226-10/02/2021. The study's findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at national and international conferences and through social media.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020168467.

Low-Dose Collagenase Chemonucleolysis Combined with Radiofrequency in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A 10-Year Retrospective Study

Objective

This study explored the 10-year efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors of low-dose collagenase chemonucleolysis (CCNL) combined with radiofrequency (RF) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Methods

The data of 167 LDH patients were collected. Modified MacNab criteria, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were, respectively, used to evaluate patients' excellent and good rates, pain degree, and nerve function. The preoperative and 10-year postoperative patients' pain, numbness, and muscle weakness were compared. Patients' complications in perioperative period, recurrent/reappeared LDH, and reoperations were recorded. Finally, the independent risk factors affecting the long-time efficacy were assessed.

Results

A total of 126 patients were included. The patients' excellent and good rates were 86.51%–92.86% with no significant difference (P > 0.05). Postoperative NRS and JOA scores significantly improved (P < 0.01), most obvious within 6 months postoperatively. At 10 years postoperatively, 65.08%, 83.95%, and 93.02% of patients' pain, numbness, and muscle weakness were completely relieved (P < 0.05). Perioperative complications occurred in three patients with the rate of 2.38%. Recurrent/reappeared LDH patients were 11 with the ratio of 8.73%; nine of them underwent reoperations with the rate of 7.14%. And patients' probability of fair and poor efficacy at 10 years postoperatively with the course of disease >12 months and the responsibility disc ≥2 were, respectively, 6.005 and 4.227 times that of patients with the course of disease ≤12 months and the responsibility disc = 1 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The combined treatment is effective and safe in the long term. A course of disease >12 months and responsibility disc ≥2 independently reduce efficacy, and a course of disease >12 months has a more significant impact.

Pain trajectories and possible predictors of a favourable course of low back pain in patients consulting musculoskeletal physicians in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

In The Netherlands, low back pain patients can consult physicians specialized in musculoskeletal (MSK) medicine. Previous studies have reported on the characteristics of patients consulting MSK physicians, and the treatment options used. There are no studies yet reporting on the course of Low Back Pain (LBP) after treatment by musculoskeletal (MSK) physicians in The Netherlands.

METHODS

In an observational cohort study MSK physicians recorded data about all low back pain patients presenting for a first consultation. At baseline they recorded age, gender, type and duration of the main complaint, and concomitant complaints. At the end of treatment they recorded the type of treatment and the number of treatment sessions. Patients were recruited to answer questionnaires at baseline, and at 6-weekly intervals during a follow-up period of six months. Patient questionnaires included information about previous medical consumption, together with PROMs measuring the level of pain and functional status. Latent Class Growth Analysis (LCGA) was used to classify patients into different groups according to their pain trajectories. Baseline variables were evaluated as predictors of a favourable trajectory using logistic regression analyses, and treatment variables were evaluated as possible confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1377 patients were recruited, of whom 1117 patients (81%) answered at least one follow-up measurement. LCGA identified three groups of patients with distinct pain trajectories. A first group (N = 226) with high pain levels showed no improvement, a second group (N = 578) with high pain levels showed strong improvement, and a third group (N = 313) with mild pain levels showed moderate improvement. The two groups of patients presenting with high baseline pain scores were compared, and a multivariable model was constructed with possible predictors of a favourable course. Male gender, previous specialist visit, previous pain clinic visit, having work, a shorter duration of the current episode, and a longer time since the complaints first started were predictors of a favourable course. The multivariable model showed a moderate area under the curve (0.68) and a low explained variance (0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

In low back pain patients treated by musculoskeletal physicians in The Netherlands three different pain trajectories were identified. Baseline variables were of limited value in predicting a favourable course.

Axially Loaded Magnetic Resonance Imaging Identification of the Factors Associated with Low Back-Related Leg Pain

This retrospective observational study was conducted to identify factors associated with low back-related leg pain (LBLP) using axially loaded magnetic resonance imaging (AL-MRI). Ninety patients with low back pain (LBP) underwent AL-MRI of the lumbar spine. A visual analog scale and patient pain drawings were used to evaluate pain intensity and location and determine LBLP cases. The values of AL-MRI findings were analyzed using a logistic regression model with a binary dependent variable equal to one for low back-related leg pain and zero otherwise. Logistic regression results suggested that intervertebral joint effusion (odds ratio (OR) = 4.58; p = 0.035), atypical ligamenta flava (OR = 5.77; p = 0.003), and edema of the lumbar intervertebral joint (OR = 6.41; p = 0.003) were more likely to be present in LBLP patients. Advanced disc degeneration (p = 0.009) and synovial cysts (p = 0.004) were less frequently observed in LBLP cases. According to the AL-MRI examinations, the odds of having LBLP are more likely if facet effusion, abnormal ligamenta flava, and lumbar facet joint edema are present on imaging than if not. The assessment of lumbar spine morphology in axial loaded MRI adds value to the potential understanding of LBLP, but further longitudinal and loaded–unloaded comparative studies are required to determine the role of acute dynamic changes and instability in LBLP development.

Prevalence, Characteristics, and Clinical Course of Neuropathic Pain in Primary Care Patients Consulting With Low Back-related Leg Pain

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the epidemiology of neuropathic pain in primary care patients consulting with low back-related leg pain. We aimed to describe prevalence, characteristics, and clinical course of low back-related leg pain patients with and without neuropathic pain, consulting with their family doctor in the United Kingdom.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study. Data were collected using a standardized baseline clinical examination and self-report questionnaires at baseline, 4, 12, and 36 months. We identified cases of neuropathic pain using 3 definitions: 2 based on clinical diagnosis (sciatica, with and without evidence of nerve root compression on magnetic resonance imaging), one on the self-report version of Leeds Assessment for Neurological Symptoms and Signs. Differences between patients with and without neuropathic pain were analyzed comparing each definition. Clinical course (mean pain intensity measured as the highest of leg or back pain intensity: mean of 3 Numerical Rating Scales, each 0 to 10) was investigated using linear mixed models over 36 months.

RESULTS

Prevalence of neuropathic pain varied from 48% to 74% according to definition used. At baseline, patients with neuropathic pain had more severe leg pain intensity, lower pain self-efficacy, more patients had sensory loss than those without. Distinct profiles were apparent depending on neuropathic pain definition. Mean pain intensity reduced after 4 months (6.1 to 3.9 [sciatica]), most rapidly in cases defined by clinical diagnosis.

DISCUSSION

This research provides new information on the clinical course of neuropathic pain and a better understanding of neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain patients consulting in primary care.

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

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

Concomitant back and leg pain as predictors for trajectories of poor outcome after single level lumbar micro-decompression alone and with micro-discectomy: a study of 3,308 patients

BACKGROUND

Lumbar decompression is the commonest spinal intervention. One in four patients have suboptimal outcome postoperatively, however no large studies identified clear poor outcome predictors. The aim of this study was to study low back pain (LBP) as a predictor of poor outcome following lumbar micro-decompression.

METHODS

Prospectively collected spinal registry data was analysed for patients who underwent primary, single-level, decompression with or without discectomy at single spinal centre (2011-2017). Based on the response to the Likert global outcome question, we had two outcome groups (good & poor). Percentage of achievement of minimum clinically relevant change (MCRC) for Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) score, LBP and leg pain (LP) was examined. A two-step approach was adopted. First, COMI score, LBP and LP visual analogue scales (VAS) trajectories were modelled using a discrete mixture model. Second, multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the association between variables and trajectories.

RESULTS

We included 3,308 patients with mean follow up (1.4 y). MCRC was achieved in COMI score in 63% of cases, 42% in LBP and 62% in LP. A three-group trajectory model was identified: large-improvement (LI) (n=980), moderate-improvement (MI) (n=1,364) and no-improvement (NI) (n=966) with 99.5%, 84.5% and 31.5% of patients presenting good outcome, respectively. Higher pre-operative LBP and COMI score and smoking were strongly associated with MI and NI. In addition, higher LP, post-operative surgical complications, previous surgery at same level, conservative treatment >6 months and anxiety/depression were associated with NI.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first large-scale study reporting preoperative LBP severity, spinal stenosis and smoking as predictors for poor functional outcomes post lumbar decompression with or without discectomy. This is very useful while counselling patients for surgery to meet realistic expectations.

Validation of the Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for Back pain patients (Q-SAP)

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that not only pain intensity but also impairment of quality of life and functionality are important parameters for the evaluation of treatment of chronic low back pain patients. The aim of the study was to validate a specific self-questionnaire for symptom assessment and their influence on quality of life and functionality of chronic low back pain patients (Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for back pain patients, Q-SAP).

METHODS

The self-questionnaire consists of two parts (for back and if applicable leg symptoms) and was tested in 152 chronic low back pain patients with and without radiculopathy. Test-retest reliability, exploratory factor analysis, convergent validity, criterion-related validity and the sensitivity to detect patient reported changes were investigated.

RESULTS

The questionnaire showed a good to excellent test-retest reliability. In the factor analysis nociceptive and neuropathic pain components could be separated and the highest convergent validities were shown for the painDETECT, EQ-5D-3L and the FFbH-R. The criterion-related validity showed concordance of QST and the Q-SAP Back for warmth induced pain and numbness. Regarding the sensitivity to patient-reported changes, a moderate correlation was found for both parts of the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The Q-SAP was tested as a useful, valid and reliable tool. This new questionnaire records classical nociceptive and neuropathic pain symptoms of chronic low back pain patients depending on their local distribution. Furthermore, the questionnaire records the intensity of these symptoms and their influence on quality of life and functionality and can be used for the evaluation of treatment.

SIGNIFICANCE

The Q-SAP Back/Leg is a new self-questionnaire for CLBP patients with or without radiating leg pain that precisely assesses neuropathic and nociceptive symptoms. In contrast to other questionnaires, the Q-SAP Back/Leg evaluates not only symptom intensities but also their impact on the patient's quality of life and functionality. Furthermore, this questionnaire requests the symptoms depending on their anatomical distribution.

The Interexaminer Reproducibility and Prevalence of Lumbar and Gluteal Myofascial Trigger Points in Patients With Radiating Low Back Pain

Objective

To determine the interexaminer reproducibility for judging the presence, number, and location of leg-pain referring myofascial trigger points, and their prevalence in patients with low back pain with and without concomitant leg pain referral.

Design

An interexaminer reproducibility study.

Setting

An outpatient public Hospital Spine Centre in Southern Denmark.

Participants

Examiners: experienced examiners (N=2), a chiropractor and a physiotherapist, respectively. Subjects: a case mix of patients with low back pain (N=32) with and without leg pain referral.

Interventions

A standardized palpation examination protocol of 4 bilateral lumbosacral muscles performed by each examiner.

Main Outcome Measures

Reproducibility on presence (measured in Cohen’s κ), number (difference and limits of agreement), location (distance between matching marks placed by examiners), and prevalence of myofascial trigger points.

Results

Kappa values of the examined muscles were as follows: quadratus lumborum (κ=0.42), gluteus medius (κ=0.83), gluteus minimus (κ=0.74), and piriformis (κ=0.62), with a mean of all examined muscles of kappa=0.66, assessed as substantial agreement. The mean difference in number of trigger points was 0.8, with limits of agreement ranging from −6.4 to 4.9. Mean distance between trigger point locations was 12.9 mm, with 57% only being identified by a single examiner. The prevalence of trigger points was 82.7%, highest in the gluteal region of the painful side.

Conclusions

Inadequate standardization and multiple trigger point sites complicate interexaminer reproducibility on location and number of patients with low back pain and leg pain referral. Nevertheless, substantial interexaminer reproducibility for the trigger point presence appears achievable. Implemented routinely, this relatively simple clinical evaluation procedure could meaningfully enhance diagnostic triage and eventual management.

Steroids and L-Lysine Aescinate for Acute Radiculopathy Due to a Herniated Lumbar Disk

Background and objectives. The efficacy of commonly prescribed analgesic and adjuvant drugs for the management of patients with radiculopathy has not been well established. Oral steroids are commonly used to treat sciatica or radiculopathy due to a herniated disk but the effect remains controversial. L-lysine aescinate showed superiority over placebo or baseline therapy with NSAIDs alone in treating sciatica, but have not been evaluated in an appropriately powered clinical trial. Materials and Methods. Randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted in two health centers in collaboration with Uzhhorod Natioanl University in Ukraine. Adults (N = 90) with acute radicular pain and a herniated disk confirmed by MRI were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups (N = 30 in each) to receive a baseline therapy with lornoxicam (16 mg per day) and adjunctive 5-day course of IV dexamethasone (first group: 8 mg per day/40 mg total) or 0,1% solution of L-lysine aescinate (5 mL and 10 mL for group 2 and 3 respectively). Primary outcomes were Visual Analogue Scale changes and the straight leg raise angle at 15th and 30th day. Results. The level of pain improvement at 15th days after initiation of therapy with dexamethasone or solution of L-lysine aescinate at doses of 5 or 10 mL was not significantly different. The lowest levels of pain were achieved in patients who received the L-lysine aescinate 10 mL, but the range of decrease in pain was slightly greater in the group administered dexamethasone. Conclusions. Among patients with acute radiculopathy due to a herniated lumbar disk a short course of IV dexamethasone or L-lysine aescinate resulted in pain improvement at 15th and 30th day. Dexamethasone may be preferable if a longer-term analgesic effect is needed. Taking into account side effects of dexamethasone, a solution of L-lysine aescinate can be used to relieve pain symptoms.

Systematic review of prognostic factors for work participation in patients with sciatica

Sciatica impacts on the ability to work and may lead to a reduced return to work. This study reviewed and summarised prognostic factors of work participation in patients who received conservative or surgical treatment for clinically diagnosed sciatica. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO until January 2018. Cohort studies, using a measure of work participation as outcome, were included. Two independent reviewers performed study inclusion and used the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool for risk of bias assessment and GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence. Based on seven studies describing six cohorts (n=1408 patients) that assessed 21 potential prognostic factors, favourable factors for return to work (follow-up ranging from 3 months to 10 years) included younger age, better general health, less low back pain or sciatica bothersomeness, better physical function, negative straight leg raise-test, physician expecting surgery to be beneficial, better pain coping, less depression and mental stress, less fear of movement and low physical work load. Study results could not be pooled. Using GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low, with downgrading mainly for a high risk of bias and imprecision. Several prognostic factors like pain, disability and psychological factors were identified and reviewed, and these could be targeted using additional interventions to optimise return to work. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016042497.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

Factors associated with costs and health outcomes in patients with Back and leg pain in primary care: a prospective cohort analysis

Background

There is limited research on the economic burden of low back-related leg pain, including sciatica. The aim of this study was to describe healthcare resource utilisation and factors associated with cost and health outcomes in primary care patients consulting with symptoms of low back-related leg pain including sciatica.

Methods

This study is a prospective cohort of 609 adults visiting their family doctor with low back-related leg pain, with or without sciatica in a United Kingdom (UK) Setting. Participants completed questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments, received an MRI scan, and were followed-up for 12-months. The economic analysis outcome was the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) calculated from the EQ-5D-3 L data obtained at baseline, 4 and 12-months. Costs were measured based on patient self-reported information on resource use due to back-related leg pain and results are presented from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and Societal perspective. Factors associated with costs and outcomes were obtained using a generalised linear model.

Results

Base-case results showed improved health outcomes over 12-months for the whole cohort and slightly higher QALYs for patients in the sciatica group. NHS resource use was highest for physiotherapy and GP visits, and work-related productivity loss highest from a societal perspective. The sciatica group was associated with significantly higher work-related productivity costs. Cost was significantly associated with factors such as self-rated general health and care received as part of the study, while quality of life was significantly predicted by self-rated general health, and pain intensity, depression, and disability scores.

Conclusions

Our results contribute to understanding the economics of low back- related leg pain and sciatica and may provide guidance for future actions on cost reduction and health care improvement strategies.

Trial registration

13/09/2011 Retrospectively registered; ISRCTN62880786.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4257-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The profile of chiropractors managing patients with low back-related leg pain: analyses of 1907 chiropractors from the ACORN practice-based research network

Background

Approximately 60% of people with low back pain also have associated leg pain symptoms. Guidelines for low back pain recommend non-pharmacological approaches, including spinal manipulation - a therapy provided by chiropractors. However, limited empirical data has examined the characteristics of chiropractors managing patients with low back-related leg pain (LBRLP). Our objective is to describe the prevalence, profile and practice characteristics of Australian chiropractors who often treat LBRLP, compared to those who do not often treat LBRLP.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional analysis of a nationally representative sample from the Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN). This study investigated the demographic and practice characteristics as well as clinical management of chiropractors who ‘often’ treated patients with LBRLP compared to those who treated LBRLP ‘never/rarely/sometimes’. Multiple logistic regression models identified independent factors associated with chiropractors who ‘often’ treated patients with LBRLP.

Results

A total of 1907 chiropractors reported treating patients experiencing LBRLP, with 80.9% of them ‘often’ treating LBRLP. Chiropractors who ‘often’ treated LBRLP were more likely to manage patients with multi-site pain including axial low back pain (OR = 21.1), referred/radicular neck pain (OR = 10.8) and referred/radicular thoracic pain (OR = 3.1). While no specific management strategies were identified, chiropractors who ‘often’ treated LBRLP were more likely to discuss medication (OR = 1.8), manage migraine (OR = 1.7) and degenerative spine conditions (OR = 1.5), and treat women during pregnancy (OR = 1.6) and people with work-related injuries (OR = 1.5), compared to those not treating LBRLP frequently.

Conclusions

Australian chiropractors frequently manage LBRLP, although the nature of specific management approaches for this condition remains unclear. Further research on the management of LBRLP can better inform policy makers and educators interested in upskilling chiropractors to deliver safe and effective treatment of LBRLP.

Initial pain and disability characteristics can assist the prediction of the centralization phenomenon on initial assessment of patients with low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Determine whether the achievement of the centralization phenomenon on initial assessment of patients with low back pain (LBP) can be predicted by history and physical examination variables.

METHODS

Ninety patients referred to physical therapy due to LBP completed pain, disability, and fear-avoidance questionnaires, followed by a complete history and a physical examination based on mechanical diagnosis and therapy principles. Patients were subsequently classified as centralizers or noncentralizers. Univariate, followed by multivariate analysis was performed to identify history and physical examination variables that predicted the occurrence of the CP. Factors retained in the multivariate analysis were used to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (31%) were classified as centralizers immediately following assessment. Three predictors were retained in the multivariate analysis: (1) modified Oswestry Disability Index score lower than 33%; (2) intensity of the most distal symptom lower than 6/10; and (3) back pain equal to or greater than leg pain. The resultant CPR indicated the presence of all three variables increased the post-test likelihood of the CP to 57%.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study suggest the CP may be considerably more likely in less severe cases of LBP characterized by lower disability, lower intensity of distal symptoms, and a greater back-versus-leg pain intensity. Pending future validation, the CPR developed in this study may aide decision making regarding the initial management strategy of patients with LBP.

Pragmatic neural tissue management improves short-term pain and disability in patients with sciatica: a single-arm clinical trial

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effect of sciatic neural mobilization in combination with the treatment of surrounding structures for sciatica patients. Secondly, we were also interested in identifying possible baseline characteristics that may be associated with improvements in pain and disability for sciatica patients. Methods: Twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of sciatica were treated with neural mobilization, joint mobilization and soft tissue techniques. Pain intensity and lumbar disability were assessed at baseline and after treatment using a Numerical Rating Scale (0-10) and the Oswestry Disability Index (0-100), respectively. The pre- and post-intervention data were compared. The research protocol was registered under the number NCT03663842. Results: Participants attended an average of 16 (SD±5.6) treatment
sessions over an average of 12 weeks. Decrease in pain scores (before median = 8, after median = 2; p < 0.001) and improvement in lumbar disability scores (before median = 33.3%, after median = 15.6%; p < 0.001) were observed. A multiple linear regression analysis showed that duration of pain and age of the patient predicted the disability improvement: F (2, 24) = 4.084, p < 0.030, R² = 0.254. Discussion: Patients with sciatica may benefit from neural mobilization in combination with manual therapy for pain and lumbar disability. Longer pain duration and younger age had a negative influence on lumbar disability improvement.

Ultrasound Elastographic Measurement of Sciatic Nerve Displacement and Shear Strain During Active and Passive Knee Extension

There is current need for objective measures of sciatic nerve mobility in patients with sciatic-type pain. The objective of the study was to assess the feasibility and reliability of ultrasound elastography to quantify sciatic nerve displacement and shear strain at the sciatic nerve-hamstring muscle interface during active and passive knee extension-flexion exercises performed while sitting in healthy people. Ultrasound elastography showed excellent intrarater within-session reliability for assessing sciatic nerve displacement and sciatic nerve-hamstring muscle interface shear strain during active knee extension-flexion exercises. These findings will inform similar future work conducted in patients with sciatic-type pain.

Prognosis of sciatica and back-related leg pain in primary care: the ATLAS cohort

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Evidence is lacking on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in patients seeing their primary care physicians. This evidence could guide timely appropriate treatment and referral decisions.

PURPOSE

The present study aims to describe the prognosis and prognostic factors in primary care patients with low back-related leg pain and sciatica.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a prospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The present study included adults visiting their family doctor with back-related leg pain in the United Kingdom.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Information about pain, function, psychological, and clinical variables, was collected. Good outcome was defined as 30% or more reduction in disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire).

METHODS

Participants completed the questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments, received a magnetic resonance imaging scan, and were followed-up 12 months later. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the prognostic value of six a priori defined variable sets (leg pain duration, pain intensity, neuropathic pain, psychological factors, clinical examination, and imaging variables). A combined model, including variables from all models, examined independent effects. The National Institute for Health Research funded the study. There are no conflicts of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 609 patients were included. At 12 months, 55% of patients improved in both the total sample and the sciatica group. For the whole cohort, longer leg pain duration (odds ratio [OR] 0.41; confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.90), higher identity score (OR 0.70; CI 0.53-0.93), and patient's belief that the problem will last a long time (OR 0.27; CI 0.13-0.57) were the strongest independent prognostic factors negatively associated with improvement. These last two factors were similarly negatively associated with improvement in the sciatica subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study provides new evidence on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in primary care. Just over half of patients improved at 12 months. Patient's belief of recovery timescale and number of other symptoms attributed to the pain are independent prognostic factors. These factors can be used to inform and direct decisions about timing and intensity of available therapeutic options.

Clinical diagnostic model for sciatica developed in primary care patients with low back-related leg pain

BACKGROUND

Identification of sciatica may assist timely management but can be challenging in clinical practice. Diagnostic models to identify sciatica have mainly been developed in secondary care settings with conflicting reference standard selection. This study explores the challenges of reference standard selection and aims to ascertain which combination of clinical assessment items best identify sciatica in people seeking primary healthcare.

METHODS

Data on 394 low back-related leg pain consulters were analysed. Potential sciatica indicators were seven clinical assessment items. Two reference standards were used: (i) high confidence sciatica clinical diagnosis; (ii) high confidence sciatica clinical diagnosis with confirmatory magnetic resonance imaging findings. Multivariable logistic regression models were produced for both reference standards. A tool predicting sciatica diagnosis in low back-related leg pain was derived. Latent class modelling explored the validity of the reference standard.

RESULTS

Model (i) retained five items; model (ii) retained six items. Four items remained in both models: below knee pain, leg pain worse than back pain, positive neural tension tests and neurological deficit. Model (i) was well calibrated (p = 0.18), discrimination was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.95 (95% CI 0.93, 0.98). Model (ii) showed good discrimination (AUC 0.82; 0.78, 0.86) but poor calibration (p = 0.004). Bootstrapping revealed minimal overfitting in both models. Agreement between the two latent classes and clinical diagnosis groups defined by model (i) was substantial, and fair for model (ii).

CONCLUSION

Four clinical assessment items were common in both reference standard definitions of sciatica. A simple scoring tool for identifying sciatica was developed. These criteria could be used clinically and in research to improve accuracy of identification of this subgroup of back pain patients.

Novel approach to characterising individuals with low back-related leg pain: cluster identification with latent class analysis and 12-month follow-up

Traditionally, low back-related leg pain (LBLP) is diagnosed clinically as referred leg pain or sciatica (nerve root involvement). However, within the spectrum of LBLP, we hypothesised that there may be other unrecognised patient subgroups. This study aimed to identify clusters of patients with LBLP using latent class analysis and describe their clinical course. The study population was 609 LBLP primary care consulters. Variables from clinical assessment were included in the latent class analysis. Characteristics of the statistically identified clusters were compared, and their clinical course over 1 year was described. A 5 cluster solution was optimal. Cluster 1 (n = 104) had mild leg pain severity and was considered to represent a referred leg pain group with no clinical signs, suggesting nerve root involvement (sciatica). Cluster 2 (n = 122), cluster 3 (n = 188), and cluster 4 (n = 69) had mild, moderate, and severe pain and disability, respectively, and response to clinical assessment items suggested categories of mild, moderate, and severe sciatica. Cluster 5 (n = 126) had high pain and disability, longer pain duration, and more comorbidities and was difficult to map to a clinical diagnosis. Most improvement for pain and disability was seen in the first 4 months for all clusters. At 12 months, the proportion of patients reporting recovery ranged from 27% for cluster 5 to 45% for cluster 2 (mild sciatica). This is the first study that empirically shows the variability in profile and clinical course of patients with LBLP including sciatica. More homogenous groups were identified, which could be considered in future clinical and research settings.

Determining One-Year Trajectories of Low-Back-Related Leg Pain in Primary Care Patients: Growth Mixture Modeling of a Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The clinical presentation and outcome of patients with back and leg pain in primary care are heterogeneous and may be better understood by identification of homogeneous and clinically meaningful subgroups. Subgroups of patients with different back pain trajectories have been identified, but little is known about the trajectories for patients with back-related leg pain. This study sought to identify distinct leg pain trajectories, and baseline characteristics associated with membership of each group, in primary care patients.

METHODS

Monthly data on leg pain intensity were collected over 12 months for 609 patients participating in a prospective cohort study of adult patients seeking health care for low-back and leg pain, including sciatica, of any duration and severity, from their general practitioner. Growth mixture modeling was used to identify clusters of patients with distinct leg pain trajectories. Trajectories were characterized using baseline demographic and clinical examination data. Multinomial logistic regression was used to predict latent class membership, with a range of covariates.

RESULTS

Four patient clusters were identified: improving mild pain (58%), persistent moderate pain (26%), persistent severe pain (13%), and improving severe pain (3%). Clusters showed statistically significant differences in a number of baseline characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Four trajectories of leg pain were identified. Clusters 1, 2, and 3 were generally comparable to back pain trajectories, while cluster 4, with major improvement in pain, is infrequently identified. Awareness of such distinct patient groups improves understanding of the course of leg pain and may provide a basis of classification for intervention.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

PERSPECTIVE

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

The Long-Term Course of Outcomes for Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation following Integrated Complementary and Alternative Medicine Inpatient Treatment: A Prospective Observational Study

A prospective observational study was conducted in 524 lumbar intervertebral disc herniation (LDH) inpatients to report the long-term effects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatment. Participants received integrative CAM treatment during hospitalization, from June 2012 to May 2013, and long-term outcomes were assessed from July to August 2016. Numerical rating scales (NRSs) of back and leg pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), satisfaction, surgery, recurrence, and current care status were investigated. Baseline characteristics were analyzed to determine factors that predicted long-term satisfaction. A total of 367 patients were available for follow-up. The long-term change in NRS of back and leg pain and ODI was 3.53 (95% CI, 3.22, 3.83), 2.72 (2.34, 3.11), and 32.89 (30.21, 35.57), respectively, showing that improvements were well sustained. Regarding satisfaction, 86.11% responded that they were “slightly improved” or better. Range of lumbar flexion ≤ 60° and both legs' pain at admission were significant predictors of “much improved” or better satisfaction in the long term. Overall, LDH patients who received CAM treatment maintained favorable states in the long term. However, as an uncontrolled observational study, further studies with placebo and/or active controls are warranted. Trial Registration. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov  NCT02257723 (date of registration: October 2, 2014).

Latent class analysis derived subgroups of low back pain patients - do they have prognostic capacity?

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity in patients with low back pain is well recognised and different approaches to subgrouping have been proposed. One statistical technique that is increasingly being used is Latent Class Analysis as it performs subgrouping based on pattern recognition with high accuracy. Previously, we developed two novel suggestions for subgrouping patients with low back pain based on Latent Class Analysis of patient baseline characteristics (patient history and physical examination), which resulted in 7 subgroups when using a single-stage analysis, and 9 subgroups when using a two-stage approach. However, their prognostic capacity was unexplored. This study (i) determined whether the subgrouping approaches were associated with the future outcomes of pain intensity, pain frequency and disability, (ii) assessed whether one of these two approaches was more strongly or more consistently associated with these outcomes, and (iii) assessed the performance of the novel subgroupings as compared to the following variables: two existing subgrouping tools (STarT Back Tool and Quebec Task Force classification), four baseline characteristics and a group of previously identified domain-specific patient categorisations (collectively, the 'comparator variables').

METHODS

This was a longitudinal cohort study of 928 patients consulting for low back pain in primary care. The associations between each subgroup approach and outcomes at 2 weeks, 3 and 12 months, and with weekly SMS responses were tested in linear regression models, and their prognostic capacity (variance explained) was compared to that of the comparator variables listed above.

RESULTS

The two previously identified subgroupings were similarly associated with all outcomes. The prognostic capacity of both subgroupings was better than that of the comparator variables, except for participants' recovery beliefs and the domain-specific categorisations, but was still limited. The explained variance ranged from 4.3%-6.9% for pain intensity and from 6.8%-20.3% for disability, and highest at the 2 weeks follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Latent Class-derived subgroups provided additional prognostic information when compared to a range of variables, but the improvements were not substantial enough to warrant further development into a new prognostic tool. Further research could investigate if these novel subgrouping approaches may help to improve existing tools that subgroup low back pain patients.

The clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care for patients with sciatica: the SCOPiC randomised controlled trial protocol (ISRCTN75449581)

Background

Sciatica has a substantial impact on patients, and is associated with high healthcare and societal costs. Although there is variation in the clinical management of sciatica, the current model of care usually involves an initial period of ‘wait and see’ for most patients, with simple measures of advice and analgesia, followed by conservative and/or more invasive interventions if symptoms fail to resolve. A model of care is needed that does not over-treat those with a good prognosis yet identifies patients who do need more intensive treatment to help with symptoms, and return to everyday function including work. The aim of the SCOPiC trial (SCiatica Outcomes in Primary Care) is to establish whether stratified care based on subgrouping using a combination of prognostic and clinical information, with matched care pathways, is more effective than non-stratified care, for improving time to symptom resolution in patients consulting with sciatica in primary care. We will also assess the impact of stratified care on service delivery and evaluate its cost-effectiveness compared to non-stratified care.

Methods/Design

Multicentre, pragmatic, parallel arm randomised trial, with internal pilot, cost-effectiveness analysis and embedded qualitative study. We will recruit 470 adult patients with sciatica from general practices in England and Wales, over 24 months. Patients will be randomised to stratified care or non-stratified care, and treated in physiotherapy and spinal specialist services, in participating NHS services. The primary outcome is time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, measured on a 6-point ordered categorical scale, collected using text messaging. Secondary outcomes include physical function, pain intensity, quality of life, work loss, healthcare use and satisfaction with treatment, and will be collected using postal questionnaires at 4 and 12-month follow-up. Semi-structured qualitative interviews with a subsample of participants and clinicians will explore the acceptability of stratified care.

Discussion

This paper presents the details of the rationale, design and processes of the SCOPiC trial. Results from this trial will contribute to the evidence base for management of patients with sciatica consulting in primary care.

Trial registration

ISRCTN75449581, date: 20.11.2014.

Diagnostic triage for low back pain: a practical approach for primary care

Diagnostic triage is an essential guideline recommendation for low back pain (LBP), which is the most frequent musculoskeletal condition that general practitioners encounter in Australia. Clinical diagnosis of LBP - informed by a focused history and clinical examination - is the key initial step for GPs, and determines subsequent diagnostic workup and allied health and medical specialist referral. The goal of diagnostic triage of LBP is to exclude non-spinal causes and to allocate patients to one of three broad categories: specific spinal pathology (< 1% of cases), radicular syndrome (∼ 5-10% of cases) or non-specific LBP (NSLBP), which represents 90-95% of cases and is diagnosed by exclusion of the first two categories. For specific spinal pathologies (eg, vertebral fracture, malignancy, infection, axial spondyloarthritis or cauda equina syndrome), a clinical assessment may reveal the key alerting features. For radicular syndrome, clinical features distinguish three subsets of nerve root involvement: radicular pain, radiculopathy and spinal stenosis. Differential diagnosis of back-related leg pain is complex and clinical manifestations are highly variable. However, distinctive clusters of characteristic history cues and positive clinical examination signs, particularly from neurological examination, guide differential diagnosis within this triage category. A diagnosis of NSLBP presumes exclusion of specific pathologies and nerve root involvement. A biopsychosocial model of care underpins NSLBP; this includes managing pain intensity and considering risk for disability, which directs matched pathways of care. Back pain is a symptom and not a diagnosis. Careful diagnostic differentiation is required and, in primary care, diagnostic triage of LBP is the anchor for a diagnosis.

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

Background

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

Method

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Electronic supplementary material

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

Identifying subgroups of patients using latent class analysis: should we use a single-stage or a two-stage approach? A methodological study using a cohort of patients with low back pain

Background

Heterogeneity in patients with low back pain (LBP) is well recognised and different approaches to subgrouping have been proposed. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) is a statistical technique that is increasingly being used to identify subgroups based on patient characteristics. However, as LBP is a complex multi-domain condition, the optimal approach when using LCA is unknown. Therefore, this paper describes the exploration of two approaches to LCA that may help improve the identification of clinically relevant and interpretable LBP subgroups.

Methods

From 928 LBP patients consulting a chiropractor, baseline data were used as input to the statistical subgrouping. In a single-stage LCA, all variables were modelled simultaneously to identify patient subgroups. In a two-stage LCA, we used the latent class membership from our previously published LCA within each of six domains of health (activity, contextual factors, pain, participation, physical impairment and psychology) (first stage) as the variables entered into the second stage of the two-stage LCA to identify patient subgroups. The description of the results of the single-stage and two-stage LCA was based on a combination of statistical performance measures, qualitative evaluation of clinical interpretability (face validity) and a subgroup membership comparison.

Results

For the single-stage LCA, a model solution with seven patient subgroups was preferred, and for the two-stage LCA, a nine patient subgroup model. Both approaches identified similar, but not identical, patient subgroups characterised by (i) mild intermittent LBP, (ii) recent severe LBP and activity limitations, (iii) very recent severe LBP with both activity and participation limitations, (iv) work-related LBP, (v) LBP and several negative consequences and (vi) LBP with nerve root involvement.

Conclusions

Both approaches identified clinically interpretable patient subgroups. The potential importance of these subgroups needs to be investigated by exploring whether they can be identified in other cohorts and by examining their possible association with patient outcomes. This may inform the selection of a preferred LCA approach.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1411-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pain-related fear and functional recovery in sciatica: results from a 2-year observational study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to explore the associations between pain-related fear, pain disability, and self-perceived recovery among patients with sciatica and disk herniation followed up for 2 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pain-related fear was measured by the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-Physical Activity (FABQ-PA) subscale. Disability was measured by the Maine-Seattle Back Questionnaire. At 2 years, patients reported their sciatica/back problem on a global change scale ranging from completely gone to much worse. No specific interventions regarding pain-related fear were provided.

RESULTS

Complete data were obtained for 372 patients. During follow-up, most patients improved. In those who at 2 years were fully recovered (n=66), pain-related fear decreased substantially. In those who did not improve (n=50), pain-related fear remained high. Baseline levels of pain-related fear did not differ significantly between those who were fully recovered and the rest of the cohort. In the total cohort, the correlation coefficients between the 0-2-year change in disability and the changes in the TSK and the FABQ-PA were 0.33 and 0.38, respectively. In the adjusted regression models, the 0-2-year change in pain-related disability explained 15% of the variance in the change in both questionnaires.

CONCLUSION

Pain-related fear decreased substantially in patients who recovered from sciatica and remained high in those who did not improve. Generally, the TSK and the FABQ-PA yielded similar results. To our knowledge, this is the first study that has assessed pain-related fear in patients who recover from sciatica.

What do patients value about spinal manipulation and home exercise for back-related leg pain? A qualitative study within a controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Patient perceptions may influence the effectiveness and utilization of healthcare interventions, particularly for complex health conditions such as sciatica or back-related leg pain (BRLP).

OBJECTIVES

To explore BRLP patients' perceptions of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and home exercise with advice (HEA).

DESIGN

Qualitative study in a controlled clinical trial.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews conducted after 12 weeks of treatment asked participants about satisfaction with care and whether treatment was worthwhile. An interdisciplinary research team conducted content analysis using qualitative data analysis software to identify and summarize themes.

RESULTS

Of 192 trial participants, 174 (91%) completed interviews (66% female, age 57.0 ± 11.5 years). Participants identified interactions with providers and staff, perceived treatment effects, and information as key contributors to both their satisfaction and the worthwhile nature of treatment. HEA was liked for its convenience and ability to foster an exercise habit. SMT was liked for specific aspects of the modality (e.g. manipulation, stretching) and provider competency. Most participants reported no dislikes for SMT or HEA, but some noted the dose/time commitment for SMT and discipline of HEA as least liked aspects of the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of patient-provider interactions, perceived treatment effects, and information sharing influenced BRLP patients' satisfaction with care. Qualitative research describing patients' preferences can facilitate translation of study findings into practice and allow clinicians to tailor treatments to facilitate compliance and satisfaction with care.

Classification of patients with low back-related leg pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The identification of clinically relevant subgroups of low back pain (LBP) is considered the number one LBP research priority in primary care. One subgroup of LBP patients are those with back related leg pain. Leg pain frequently accompanies LBP and is associated with increased levels of disability and higher health costs than simple low back pain. Distinguishing between different types of low back-related leg pain (LBLP) is important for clinical management and research applications, but there is currently no clear agreement on how to define and identify LBLP due to nerve root involvement. The aim of this systematic review was to identify, describe and appraise papers that classify or subgroup populations with LBLP, and summarise how leg pain due to nerve root involvement is described and diagnosed in the various systems.

METHODS

The search strategy involved nine electronic databases including Medline and Embase, reference lists of eligible studies and relevant reviews. Selected papers were appraised independently by two reviewers using a standardised scoring tool.

RESULTS

Of 13,358 initial potential eligible citations, 50 relevant papers were identified that reported on 22 classification systems. Papers were grouped according to purpose and criteria of the classification systems. Five themes emerged: (i) clinical features (ii) pathoanatomy (iii) treatment-based approach (iv) screening tools and prediction rules and (v) pain mechanisms. Three of the twenty two systems focused specifically on LBLP populations. Systems that scored highest following quality appraisal were ones where authors generally included statistical methods to develop their classifications, and supporting work had been published on the systems' validity, reliability and generalisability. There was lack of consistency in how LBLP due to nerve root involvement was described and diagnosed within the systems.

CONCLUSION

Numerous classification systems exist that include patients with leg pain, a minority of them focus specifically on distinguishing between different presentations of leg pain. Further work is needed to identify clinically meaningful subgroups of LBLP patients, ideally based on large primary care cohort populations and using recommended methods for classification system development.

The short term effects of straight leg raise neurodynamic treatment on pressure pain and vibration thresholds in individuals with spinally referred leg pain

BACKGROUND

Limited research exists for the effects of neurodynamic treatment techniques. Understanding short term physiological outcomes could help to better understand immediate benefits or harm of treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the short-term effects of a straight leg raise (SLR) tensioner 'intervention' on pressure pain thresholds (PPT) and vibration thresholds (VT), and establish if additional factors influence outcome in individuals with spinally referred leg pain.

DESIGN

Experimental, repeated measures.

METHODS

Sixty seven participants (mean age (SD) 52.9 (13.3), 33 female) with spinally referred leg pain were divided into 3 sub-groups: somatic referred pain, radicular pain and radiculopathy. Individuals were assessed for central sensitisation (CS) and completed 5 disability and psychosocial questionnaires. PPT and VT were measured pre and post a 3 × 1 min SLR tensioner intervention.

RESULTS

No significant differences (p > 0.05) were found between the 3 groups for either outcome measure, or after treatment. Slight improvements in VT were seen in the radiculopathy group after treatment, but were not significant. Only 2 participants were identified with CS. Disability and psychological factors were not significantly different at baseline between the 3 sub-groups, and did not correlate with the outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

No beneficial effects of treatment were found, but the trend for a decrease in VT indicated that even in individuals with radiculopathy, no detrimental changes to nerve function occurred. Psychosocial factors and levels of disability did not influence short term outcome of SLR treatment.