TY  - JOUR
A1  - Hasenbring, Monika Ilona
A1  - Levenig, Claudia
A1  - Hallner, D.
A1  - Puschmann, Anne-Katrin
A1  - Weiffen, A.
A1  - Kleinert, Jens
A1  - Belz, J.
A1  - Schiltenwolf, Marcus
A1  - Pfeifer, A. -C.
A1  - Heidari, Jahan
A1  - Kellmann, M.
A1  - Wippert, Pia-Maria
T1  - Psychosocial risk factors for chronic back pain in the general population and in competitive sports
BT  - from theory to clinical screening- a review fromthe MiSpEx network
BT  - Von der Modellbildung zum klinischen Screening – ein Review aus dem MiSpEx-Netzwerk
JF  - Der Schmerz : Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft zum Studium des Schmerzes, der Österreichischen Schmerzgesellschaft und der Deutschen Interdisziplinären Vereinigung für Schmerztherapie
N2  - Lumbar back pain and the high risk of chronic complaints is not only an important health concern in the general population but also in high performance athletes. In contrast to non-athletes, there is a lack of research into psychosocial risk factors in athletes. Moreover, the development of psychosocial screening questionnaires that would be qualified to detect athletes with a high risk of chronicity is in the early stages. The purpose of this review is to give an overview of research into psychosocial risk factors in both populations and to evaluate the performance of screening instruments in non-athletes. The databases MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsycINFO were searched from March to June 2016 using the keywords "psychosocial screening", "low back pain", "sciatica" and "prognosis", "athletes". We included prospective studies conducted in patients with low back pain with and without radiation to the legs, aged ae<yen>18 years and a follow-up of at least 3 months. We identified 16 eligible studies, all of them conducted in samples of non-athletes. Among the most frequently published screening questionnaires, the A-rebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (A-MPSQ) demonstrated a sufficient early prediction of return to work and the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) revealed acceptable performance predicting pain-related impairment. The prediction of future pain was sufficient with the Risk Analysis of Back Pain Chronification (RISC-BP) and the Heidelberg Short Questionnaire (HKF). Psychosocial risk factors of chronic back pain, such as chronic stress, depressive mood, and maladaptive pain processing are becoming increasingly more recognized in competitive sports. Screening instruments that have been shown to be predictive in the general population are currently being tested for suitability in the German MiSpEx research consortium.
T2  - Psychosoziale Risikofaktoren für chronischen Rückenschmerz in der Allgemeingesellschaft und im Leistungssport
KW  - Chronic back pain
KW  - Psychosocial risk factors
KW  - Screening
KW  - Prognosis
Y1  - 2018
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-018-0307-5
SN  - 0932-433X
SN  - 1432-2129
VL  - 32
IS  - 4
SP  - 259
EP  - 273
PB  - Springer
CY  - Heidelberg
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Fliesser, Michael
A1  - De Witt Huberts, Jessie
A1  - Wippert, Pia-Maria
T1  - The choice that matters: the relative influence of socioeconomic status indicators on chronic back pain
BT  - a longitudinal study
JF  - BMC health services research
N2  - Background

In health research, indicators of socioeconomic status (SES) are often used interchangeably and often lack theoretical foundation. This makes it difficult to compare results from different studies and to explore the relationship between SES and health outcomes. To aid researchers in choosing appropriate indicators of SES, this article proposes and tests a theory-based selection of SES indicators using chronic back pain as a health outcome.
Methods

Strength of relationship predictions were made using Brunner & Marmot’s model of ‘social determinants of health’. Subsequently, a longitudinal study was conducted with 66 patients receiving in-patient treatment for chronic back pain. Sociodemographic variables, four SES indicators (education, job position, income, multidimensional index) and back pain intensity and disability were obtained at baseline. Both pain dimensions were assessed again 6 months later. Using linear regression, the predictive strength of each SES indicator on pain intensity and disability was estimated and compared to the theory based prediction.
Results

Chronic back pain intensity was best predicted by the multidimensional index (beta = 0.31, p < 0.05), followed by job position (beta = 0.29, p < 0.05) and education (beta = −0.29, p < 0.05); whereas, income exerted no significant influence. Back pain disability was predicted strongest by education (beta = −0.30, p < 0.05) and job position (beta = 0.29, p < 0.05). Here, multidimensional index and income had no significant influence.
Conclusions

The choice of SES indicators influences predictive power on both back pain dimensions, suggesting SES predictors cannot be used interchangeably. Therefore, researchers should carefully consider prior to each study which SES indicator to use. The introduced framework can be valuable in supporting this decision because it allows for a stable prediction of SES indicator influence and their hierarchy on a specific health outcomes.
KW  - Socioeconomic status
KW  - Indicators of socioeconomic status, Health inequality
KW  - Education
KW  - Job position
KW  - Income
KW  - Chronic back pain
Y1  - 2017
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2735-9
SN  - 1472-6963
VL  - 17
PB  - BioMed Central
CY  - London
ER  -