Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (27) (remove)
Document Type
- Postprint (27) (remove)
Language
- English (27)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (27)
Keywords
- yellow flags (4)
- allostatic load (3)
- exercise (3)
- low back pain (3)
- Ankle sprain (2)
- Functional ankle instability (2)
- MiSpEx (2)
- neuroplasticity (2)
- osteoporosis (2)
- psychosocial moderators (2)
- stress (2)
- Aftercare (1)
- Ankle injury (1)
- Anti-doping guideline (1)
- Anti-doping program (1)
- Back pain diagnosis (1)
- Back pain prognosis (1)
- Basketball (1)
- Chronic back pain (1)
- Chronic low back pain (1)
- Doping (1)
- Education (1)
- Elite sports schools (1)
- Exercise (1)
- HDL (1)
- Income (1)
- Indicators of socioeconomic status, Health inequality (1)
- Individualized therapy (1)
- Job position (1)
- LDL (1)
- MRI (1)
- Metabolic syndrome (1)
- MiSpEx Network (1)
- MiSpEx-network (1)
- Mobile diagnostics (1)
- Nutrition (1)
- PROGRESS/TRIPOD (1)
- Pain screening (1)
- Perceived ankle instability (1)
- Physical activity (1)
- Prediction of disability/intensity (1)
- Prevention (1)
- RSI (1)
- Randomized controlled trial (1)
- Rehabilitation (1)
- Rural health (1)
- Socioeconomic status (1)
- Sports injury (1)
- Survey (1)
- Yellow flags (1)
- allostatic load index (1)
- antidepressants (1)
- back pain (1)
- back pain diagnosis (1)
- back-pain screening (1)
- biomechanics (1)
- bone mineral density (1)
- bone pathologies (1)
- bone remodeling (1)
- bone–brain–nervous system interactions (1)
- cardiac catheterization (CC) (1)
- childhood (1)
- cholesterol (1)
- chronic back pain (1)
- chronic low back pain (1)
- chronic pain (1)
- classical conditioning (1)
- clinical pain research (1)
- cortisol (1)
- dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (1)
- disability (1)
- distress (1)
- endocrine pathways (1)
- epinephrine (1)
- executive function (1)
- exercise treatment (1)
- functional capacity (1)
- hair cortisol (1)
- high density lipoprotein cholesterol (1)
- hypocortisolemic symptom triad (1)
- individualized intervention (1)
- invalidation (1)
- life events (1)
- lipids (1)
- long-term effects (1)
- low back painExercise (1)
- low density lipoprotein cholesterol (1)
- low-back pain (1)
- low-back-pain (1)
- major depressive disorder (1)
- metabolic syndrome (1)
- microRNA (1)
- mindfulness-based stress reduction (1)
- motor control (1)
- motor-control-exercise (1)
- multidisciplinary intervention (1)
- multidisciplinary pain treatment (1)
- multidisciplinary-therapy (1)
- multimodal intervention (1)
- neuroendocrine (1)
- norepinephrine (1)
- osteoblast (1)
- osteoclast (1)
- pain matrix (1)
- pain screening (1)
- physical activity (1)
- primary marker (1)
- psychoeducation (1)
- psychosocial risk factors (1)
- psychosocial stress (1)
- relaxation (1)
- self-efficacy (1)
- sensorimotor exercise training (1)
- sensorimotor training (1)
- sensorimotor training intervention (1)
- social pain (1)
- social rejection (1)
- standardized patient information (1)
- stress intervention (1)
- stress management (1)
- stress types (1)
- study protocol (1)
- sustainability (1)
- translation-reliability (1)
- triglycerides (1)
Purpose: Psychosocial variables are known risk factors for the development and chronification of low back pain (LBP). Psychosocial stress is one of these risk factors. Therefore, this study aims to identify the most important types of stress predicting LBP. Self-efficacy was included as a potential protective factor related to both, stress and pain.
Participants and Methods: This prospective observational study assessed n = 1071 subjects with low back pain over 2 years. Psychosocial stress was evaluated in a broad manner using instruments assessing perceived stress, stress experiences in work and social contexts, vital exhaustion and life-event stress. Further, self-efficacy and pain (characteristic pain intensity and disability) were assessed. Using least absolute shrinkage selection operator regression, important predictors of characteristic pain intensity and pain-related disability at 1-year and 2-years follow-up were analyzed.
Results: The final sample for the statistic procedure consisted of 588 subjects (age: 39.2 (± 13.4) years; baseline pain intensity: 27.8 (± 18.4); disability: 14.3 (± 17.9)). In the 1-year follow-up, the stress types “tendency to worry”, “social isolation”, “work discontent” as well as vital exhaustion and negative life events were identified as risk factors for both pain intensity and pain-related disability. Within the 2-years follow-up, Lasso models identified the stress types “tendency to worry”, “social isolation”, “social conflicts”, and “perceived long-term stress” as potential risk factors for both pain intensity and disability. Furthermore, “self-efficacy” (“internality”, “self-concept”) and “social externality” play a role in reducing pain-related disability.
Conclusion: Stress experiences in social and work-related contexts were identified as important risk factors for LBP 1 or 2 years in the future, even in subjects with low initial pain levels. Self-efficacy turned out to be a protective factor for pain development, especially in the long-term follow-up. Results suggest a differentiation of stress types in addressing psychosocial factors in research, prevention and therapy approaches.
Background: The back pain screening tool Risk-Prevention-Index Social (RPI-S) identifies the individual psychosocial risk for low back pain chronification and supports the allocation of patients at risk in additional multidisciplinary treatments. The study objectives were to evaluate (1) the prognostic validity of the RPI-S for a 6-month time frame and (2) the clinical benefit of the RPI-S.
Methods: In a multicenter single-blind 3-armed randomized controlled trial, n = 660 persons (age 18–65 years) were randomly assigned to a twelve-week uni- or multidisciplinary exercise intervention or control group. Psychosocial risk was assessed by the RPI-S domain social environment (RPI-SSE) and the outcome pain by the Chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire (baseline M1, 12-weeks M4, 24-weeks M5). Prognostic validity was quantified by the root mean squared error (RMSE) within the control group. The clinical benefit of RPI-SSE was calculated by repeated measures ANOVA in intervention groups.
Results: A subsample of n = 274 participants (mean = 38.0 years, SD 13.1) was analyzed, of which 30% were classified at risk in their psychosocial profile. The half-year prognostic validity was good (RMSE for disability of 9.04 at M4 and of 9.73 at M5; RMSE for pain intensity of 12.45 at M4 and of 14.49 at M5). People at risk showed significantly stronger reduction in pain disability and intensity at M4/M5, if participating in a multidisciplinary exercise treatment. Subjects at no risk showed a smaller reduction in pain disability in both interventions and no group differences for pain intensity. Regarding disability due to pain, around 41% of the sample would gain an unfitted treatment without the back pain screening.
Conclusion: The RPI-SSE prognostic validity demonstrated good applicability and a clinical benefit confirmed by a clear advantage of an individualized treatment possibility.
Training intervention effects on cognitive performance and neuronal plasticity — A pilot study
(2022)
Studies suggest that people suffering from chronic pain may have altered brain plasticity, along with altered functional connectivity between pain-processing brain regions. These may be related to decreased mood and cognitive performance. There is some debate as to whether physical activity combined with behavioral therapy (e.g. cognitive distraction, body scan) may counteract these changes. However, underlying neuronal mechanisms are unclear. The aim of the current pilot study with a 3-armed randomized controlled trial design was to examine the effects of sensorimotor training for nonspecific chronic low back pain on (1) cognitive performance; (2) fMRI activity co-fluctuations (functional connectivity) between pain-related brain regions; and (3) the relationship between functional connectivity and subjective variables (pain and depression). Six hundred and sixty two volunteers with non-specific chronic low back pain were randomly allocated to a unimodal (sensorimotor training), multidisciplinary (sensorimotor training and behavioral therapy) intervention, or to a control group within a multicenter study. A subsample of patients (n = 21) from one study center participated in the pilot study presented here. Measurements were at baseline, during (3 weeks, M2) and after intervention (12 weeks, M4 and 24 weeks, M5). Cognitive performance was measured by the Trail Making Test and functional connectivity by MRI. Pain perception and depression were assessed by the Von Korff questionnaire and the Hospital and Anxiety. Group differences were calculated by univariate and repeated ANOVA measures and Bayesian statistics; correlations by Pearson's r. Change and correlation of functional connection were analyzed within a pooled intervention group (uni-, multidisciplinary group). Results revealed that participants with increased pain intensity at baseline showed higher functional connectivity between pain-related brain areas used as ROIs in this study. Though small sample sizes limit generalization, cognitive performance increased in the multimodal group. Increased functional connectivity was observed in participants with increased pain ratings. Pain ratings and connectivity in pain-related brain regions decreased after the intervention. The results provide preliminary indication that intervention effects can potentially be achieved on the cognitive and neuronal level. The intervention may be suitable for therapy and prevention of non-specific chronic low back pain.
Background and Objectives: Low back pain is a worldwide health problem. An early diagnosis is required to develop personalized treatment strategies. The Risk Stratification Index (RSI) was developed to serve the purpose. The aim of this pilot study is to cross-culturally translate the RSI to a French version (RSI-F) and evaluate the test-retest reliability of RSI-F using a French active population. Materials and Methods: The RSI was translated from German to French (RSI-F) based on the guidelines of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. A total of 42 French recreational athletes (age 18–63 years) with non-specific low back pain were recruited and filled in the RSI-F twice. The test-retest reliability was examined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1,2) and Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: Finally, 33 questionnaires were analyzed (14 males and 19 females, age 31 ± 10 years, 9.5 ± 3.2 h/week of training). The test-retest of RSI-F CPI and DISS were excellent (CPI: ICC1,2 = 0.989, p < 0.001; r = 0.989, p < 0.001; DISS: ICC1,2 = 0.991, p < 0.001; r = 0.991, p < 0.001), as well as Korff pain intensity (ICC1,2 = 0.995, p < 0.001; r = 0.995, p < 0.001) and disability (ICC1,2 = 0.998, p < 0.001; r = 0.998, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The RSI-F is linguistically accurate and reliable for use by a French-speaking active population with non-specific low back pain. The RSI-F is considered a tool to examine the evolution of psychosocial factors and therefore the risk of chronicity and the prognostic of pain. Further evaluations, such as internal, external validity, and responsiveness should be evaluated in a larger population.
Background: Chronic ankle instability, developing from ankle sprain, is one of the most common sports injuries. Besides it being an ankle issue, chronic ankle instability can also cause additional injuries. Investigating the epidemiology of chronic ankle instability is an essential step to develop an adequate injury prevention strategy. However, the epidemiology of chronic ankle instability remains unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the epidemiology of chronic ankle instability through valid and reliable self-reported tools in active populations.
Methods: An electronic search was performed on PubMed and Web of Science in July 2020. The inclusion criteria for articles were peer-reviewed, published between 2006 and 2020, using one of the valid and reliable tools to evaluate ankle instability, determining chronic ankle instability based on the criteria of the International Ankle
Consortium, and including the outcome of epidemiology of chronic ankle instability. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated with an adapted tool for the sports injury review method.
Results: After removing duplicated studies, 593 articles were screened for eligibility. Twenty full-texts were screened and finally nine studies were included, assessing 3804 participants in total. The participants were between 15 and 32 years old and represented soldiers, students, athletes and active individuals with a history of ankle sprain. The prevalence of chronic ankle instability was 25%, ranging between 7 and 53%. The prevalence of chronic ankle instability within participants with a history of ankle sprains was 46%, ranging between 9 and 76%. Five included studies identified chronic ankle instability based on the standard criteria, and four studies applied adapted exclusion criteria to conduct the study. Five out of nine included studies showed a low risk of bias.
Conclusions: The prevalence of chronic ankle instability shows a wide range. This could be due to the different exclusion criteria, age, sports discipline, or other factors among the included studies. For future studies, standardized criteria to investigate the epidemiology of chronic ankle instability are required. The epidemiology of
CAI should be prospective. Factors affecting the prevalence of chronic ankle instability should be investigated and clearly described.
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.
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.