Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2020 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- low back pain (2) (remove)
Coordination of the trunk and hips is crucial for successful dynamic balance in many activities of daily living. Persons with recurrent low back pain (rLBP), both while symptomatic and during periods of symptom remission, exhibit dysfunctional muscle activation patterns and coordination of these joints. In a novel dynamic balance task where persons in remission from rLBP exhibit dissociated trunk motion, it is unknown how trunk and hip musculature are coordinated. Activation of hip and trunk muscles were acquired from nineteen persons with and without rLBP during the Balance-Dexterity Task, which involves balancing on one limb while compressing an unstable spring with the other. There were no between-group differences in activation amplitude for any muscle groups tested. In back-healthy control participants, hip and trunk muscle activation amplitudes increased proportionally in response to the added instability of the spring (R = 0.837, p < 0.001). Increases in muscle activation amplitudes in the group in remission from rLBP were not proportional (R = 0.113, p = 0.655). Instead, hip muscle activation in this group was associated with task performance, i.e. dexterous control of the spring (R = 0.676, p = 0.002). These findings highlight atypical coordination of hip and trunk musculature potentially related to task demands in persons with rLBP even during remission from pain.
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.