Refine
Document Type
- Postprint (3)
- Article (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Keywords
- Back pain diagnosis (2)
- Back pain prognosis (2)
- Exercise (2)
- PROGRESS/TRIPOD (2)
- Pain screening (2)
- Prediction of disability/intensity (2)
- Yellow flags (2)
- exercise (1)
- functional capacity (1)
- individualized intervention (1)
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.
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.
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.
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.
