@misc{WippertPuschmannSchiltenwolfetal.2016, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Wiebking, Christine and Mayer, Frank}, title = {BACK PAIN: THE STUDY OF MECHANISMS AND THE TRANSLATION IN INTERVENTIONS WITHIN THE MISPEX NETWORK}, series = {Psychosomatic medicine}, volume = {78}, journal = {Psychosomatic medicine}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Philadelphia}, issn = {0033-3174}, pages = {A91 -- A91}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{WippertDeWittHubertsHonoldetal.2014, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and De Witt Huberts, Jessie and Honold, Jasmin and Holzmann, Caroline and Rector, Michael V. and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Chronic stress measurement methods and their comparability}, series = {Psychosomatic medicine}, volume = {76}, booktitle = {Psychosomatic medicine}, number = {3}, publisher = {Lippincott Williams \& Wilkins}, address = {Philadelphia}, issn = {0033-3174}, pages = {A129 -- A129}, year = {2014}, language = {en} } @article{LinMayerWippert2020, author = {Lin, Chiao-I and Mayer, Frank and Wippert, Pia-Maria}, title = {Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validation of the Taiwan-Chinese version of Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool}, series = {Disability and rehabilitation}, volume = {44}, journal = {Disability and rehabilitation}, number = {5}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0963-8288}, doi = {10.1080/09638288.2020.1774928}, pages = {781 -- 787}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Purpose:To cross-cultural translate the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) to Taiwan-Chinese version (CAIT-TW), and to evaluate the validity, reliability and cutoff score of CAIT-TW for Taiwan-Chinese athletic population. Materials and methods:The English version of CAIT was translated to CAIT-TW based on a guideline of cross-cultural adaptation. 77 and 58 Taiwanese collegial athletes with and without chronic ankle instability filled out CAIT-TW, Taiwan-Chinese version of Lower Extremity Functional Score (LEFS-TW) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The construct validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency and cutoff score of CAIT-TW were evaluated. Results:In construct validity, the Spearman's correlation coefficients were moderate (CAIT-TW vs LEFS-TW: Rho = 0.39,p < 0.001) and strong (CAIT-TW vs NRS: Rho= 0.76,p < 0.001). The test retest reliability was excellent (ICC2.1= 0.91, 95\% confidential interval = 0.87-0.94,p < 0.001) with a good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.87). Receiver operating characteristic curve showed a cutoff score of 21.5 (Youden index: 0.73, sensitivity: 0.87, specificity 0.85). Conclusions:The CAIT-TW is a valid and reliable tool to differentiate between stable and instable ankles in athletes and may further apply for research or daily practice in Taiwan.}, language = {en} } @article{WippertDeWittHubertsKlipkeretal.2015, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and De Witt Huberts, Jessie and Klipker, Kathrin and Gantz, Simone and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Development and content of the behavioral therapy module of the MiSpEx intervention. Randomized, controlled trial on chronic nonspecific low back pain}, series = {Der Schmerz : Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft zum Studium des Schmerzes, der {\"O}sterreichischen Schmerzgesellschaft und der Deutschen Interdisziplin{\"a}ren Vereinigung f{\"u}r Schmerztherapie}, volume = {29}, journal = {Der Schmerz : Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft zum Studium des Schmerzes, der {\"O}sterreichischen Schmerzgesellschaft und der Deutschen Interdisziplin{\"a}ren Vereinigung f{\"u}r Schmerztherapie}, number = {6}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {0932-433X}, doi = {10.1007/s00482-015-0044-y}, pages = {658 -- 663}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Back pain is a complex phenomenon that goes beyond a simple medical diagnosis. The aetiology and chronification of back pain can be best described as an interaction between biological, psychological, and social processes. However, to date, multimodal prevention and intervention programs for back pain that target all three aetiological factors have demonstrated limited effectiveness. This lack of supportive evidence for multimodal programmes in the treatment of back pain could be due to the fact that few programs are suitable for long-term and unsupervised use in everyday life. Moreover, in combining the elements from various therapies, little attention has been paid to the mechanisms underlying the synergistic effects of the separate components. In this contribution, we will describe the development of a new multimodal intervention for back pain that set out to address these limitations. To this end, the biological elements of neuromuscular adaptation is supplemented with cognitive behavioral and psychophysiological techniques in an intervention that can be followed at home as well as in clinics, and that is suitable for all grades of pain. The efficacy of this intervention will be tested in a multicentric randomized controlled longitudinal trial (n = 714) at five time points over a period of 6 months. Here we will describe the development and the content of this new intervention.}, language = {de} } @misc{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2017, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schmidt, Hendrik and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network)}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-403424}, pages = {11}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. Objectives: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). Methods: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. Results: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95\% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. Conclusion: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.}, language = {en} } @article{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2017, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schmidt, Hendrik and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network)}, series = {Pain reports}, volume = {9}, journal = {Pain reports}, publisher = {Wolters Kluwer Health}, address = {Riverwoods, IL}, doi = {10.1097/PR9.0000000000000623}, pages = {1 -- 11}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. Objectives: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). Methods: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. Results: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95\% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. Conclusion: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.}, language = {en} } @misc{WippertPuschmannArampatzisetal.2018, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Diagnosis of psychosocial risk factors in prevention of low back pain in athletes (MiSpEx)}, issn = {1866-8364}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-407391}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Background Low back pain (LBP) is a common pain syndrome in athletes, responsible for 28\% of missed training days/year. Psychosocial factors contribute to chronic pain development. This study aims to investigate the transferability of psychosocial screening tools developed in the general population to athletes and to define athlete-specific thresholds. Methods Data from a prospective multicentre study on LBP were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up (n=52 athletes, n=289 recreational athletes and n=246 non-athletes). Pain was assessed using the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire. The psychosocial Risk Stratification Index (RSI) was used to obtain prognostic information regarding the risk of chronic LBP (CLBP). Individual psychosocial risk profile was gained with the Risk Prevention Index - Social (RPI-S). Differences between groups were calculated using general linear models and planned contrasts. Discrimination thresholds for athletes were defined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. Results Athletes and recreational athletes showed significantly lower psychosocial risk profiles and prognostic risk for CLBP than non-athletes. ROC curves suggested discrimination thresholds for athletes were different compared with non-athletes. Both screenings demonstrated very good sensitivity (RSI=100\%; RPI-S: 75\%-100\%) and specificity (RSI: 76\%-93\%; RPI-S: 71\%-93\%). RSI revealed two risk classes for pain intensity (area under the curve (AUC) 0.92(95\% CI 0.85 to 1.0)) and pain disability (AUC 0.88(95\% CI 0.71 to 1.0)). Conclusions Both screening tools can be used for athletes. Athlete-specific thresholds will improve physicians' decision making and allow stratified treatment and prevention.}, language = {en} } @article{WippertPuschmannArampatzisetal.2017, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Diagnosis of psychosocial risk factors in prevention of low back pain in athletes (MiSpEx)}, series = {BMJ Open Sport \& Exercise Medicine}, volume = {3}, journal = {BMJ Open Sport \& Exercise Medicine}, number = {1}, issn = {2055-7647}, doi = {10.1136/bmjsem-2017-000295}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Background Low back pain (LBP) is a common pain syndrome in athletes, responsible for 28\% of missed training days/year. Psychosocial factors contribute to chronic pain development. This study aims to investigate the transferability of psychosocial screening tools developed in the general population to athletes and to define athlete-specific thresholds. Methods Data from a prospective multicentre study on LBP were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up (n=52 athletes, n=289 recreational athletes and n=246 non-athletes). Pain was assessed using the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire. The psychosocial Risk Stratification Index (RSI) was used to obtain prognostic information regarding the risk of chronic LBP (CLBP). Individual psychosocial risk profile was gained with the Risk Prevention Index - Social (RPI-S). Differences between groups were calculated using general linear models and planned contrasts. Discrimination thresholds for athletes were defined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. Results Athletes and recreational athletes showed significantly lower psychosocial risk profiles and prognostic risk for CLBP than non-athletes. ROC curves suggested discrimination thresholds for athletes were different compared with non-athletes. Both screenings demonstrated very good sensitivity (RSI=100\%; RPI-S: 75\%-100\%) and specificity (RSI: 76\%-93\%; RPI-S: 71\%-93\%). RSI revealed two risk classes for pain intensity (area under the curve (AUC) 0.92(95\% CI 0.85 to 1.0)) and pain disability (AUC 0.88(95\% CI 0.71 to 1.0)). Conclusions Both screening tools can be used for athletes. Athlete-specific thresholds will improve physicians' decision making and allow stratified treatment and prevention.}, language = {en} } @misc{PuschmannBeckSchiltenwolfetal.2017, author = {Puschmann, Anne-Kathrin and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Wippert, Pia-Maria and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Distress in a longitudinal study of a population with nonspecific low back pain}, series = {Psychosomatic medicine}, volume = {79}, journal = {Psychosomatic medicine}, publisher = {Lippincott Williams \& Wilkins}, address = {Philadelphia}, issn = {0033-3174}, pages = {A20 -- A21}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @misc{NiedererVogtWippertetal.2016, author = {Niederer, Daniel and Vogt, Lutz and Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Pfeifer, Ann-Christin and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Banzer, Winfried and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Medicine in spine exercise (MiSpEx) for nonspecific low back pain patients}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {444}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-407308}, pages = {9}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background: Arising from the relevance of sensorimotor training in the therapy of nonspecific low back pain patients and from the value of individualized therapy, the present trial aims to test the feasibility and efficacy of individualized sensorimotor training interventions in patients suffering from nonspecific low back pain. Methods and study design: A multicentre, single-blind two-armed randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of a 12-week (3 weeks supervised centre-based and 9 weeks home-based) individualized sensorimotor exercise program is performed. The control group stays inactive during this period. Outcomes are pain, and pain-associated function as well as motor function in adults with nonspecific low back pain. Each participant is scheduled to five measurement dates: baseline (M1), following centre-based training (M2), following home-based training (M3) and at two follow-up time points 6 months (M4) and 12 months (M5) after M1. All investigations and the assessment of the primary and secondary outcomes are performed in a standardized order: questionnaires - clinical examination - biomechanics (motor function). Subsequent statistical procedures are executed after the examination of underlying assumptions for parametric or rather non-parametric testing. Discussion: The results and practical relevance of the study will be of clinical and practical relevance not only for researchers and policy makers but also for the general population suffering from nonspecific low back pain. Trial registration: Identification number DRKS00010129. German Clinical Trial registered on 3 March 2016.}, language = {en} }