scholarly journals P025 Expert Opinions to Develop a Sleep Intervention for Patients with Low Back Pain: A Nominal Group Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A29-A30
Author(s):  
J Comis ◽  
P Hodges ◽  
C Gordon ◽  
K Ho ◽  
P Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
User Experience ◽  
Nominal Group Technique ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Comorbid Insomnia ◽  
Care Assessment ◽  
Pain Outcomes

Abstract Introduction Insomnia is a common comorbidity of low back pain. Research has investigated the use of cognitive behavioural therapy interventions for insomnia (CBT-I) to treat these conditions but show little effect on improving pain outcomes. This study sought the opinion of experts to explore how existing online CBT-I interventions could be optimised to improve sleep and pain outcomes in patients with comorbid insomnia and LBP. Methods This study was conducted using the nominal group technique, a structured meeting to generate ideas and rank priorities amongst a panel of experts. Musculoskeletal researchers (n=7) and clinicians (n=1), sleep researchers (n=2), and a consumer advocate (n=1) were purposively sampled to participate in a 2-hour online nominal group workshop. A quantitative analysis was conducted to rank ideas by their relative importance. A qualitative analysis was used to provide context on the highest ranked ideas. Results A total of 58 ideas were generated and subdivided into 11 primary categories, each of which contained a varying number of sub-ideas. The primary categories, personalisation of care, assessment guided management, understanding the user experience, personalised advice on physical and environmental factors, and continual re-assessment to guide management, were ranked one to five respectively and accounted for 73% of all votes from the panel. Discussion An intervention framework consisting of three interacting domains, personalisation of the intervention, assessment guided management, and user experience was proposed. This framework outlines recommendations that should be considered to improve online CBT-I interventions to treat patients with comorbid insomnia and low back pain.

Association of Psychosocial Work Characteristics With Low Back Pain Outcomes

Spine ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 1270-1275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thelma J. Mielenz ◽  
Joanne M. Garrett ◽  
Timothy S. Carey
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Work Characteristics ◽  
Psychosocial Work ◽  
Pain Outcomes

The Roland–Morris disability scale for the assessment of non-specific low back pain outcomes among disability sector workers

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 1635-1640
Author(s):  
Jin-Ding Lin ◽  
Sheng-Fang Su ◽  
Lan-Ping Lin ◽  
Shang-Wei Hsu ◽  
Jia-Ling Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Disability Scale ◽  
Pain Outcomes

scholarly journals Cognitive behavioural therapy and core stabilization exercise on pain-related disability and psychological status in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 188-194
Author(s):  
Ashiyat Kehinde Akodu ◽  
◽  
Thompson Adewale Ogunbiyi ◽  
Oluwaseun Akinleye Fapojuwo ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Sleep Disturbance ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Psychological Status ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Core Stabilization ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural

Introduction. Exercises have been shown to relieve symptoms in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) patients. Aim. This study compared the effects of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and core stabilization exercises (CSE) on pain-related disability, psychological status and sleep disturbance in patients with NSCLBP. Material and methods. This randomized controlled trial involved a total of thirty-seven (37) participants. They were randomly allotted into three groups [CBT (11), CSE (14) and control (12)]. The intervention was done once per week for duration of 60 minutes for the CBT group, 30 minutes for CSE group and 10 minutes for the control group twice per week for 8 consecutive weeks. Assessment of outcome was done at baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks. Data were analyzed using statistical package for social science version 25 at alpha level of less than 0.05. Results. The results of this study showed that there was significant improvement in the level of pain-related disability (p= 0.001), level of anxiety (p =0.001), depression (p = 0.01, p = 0.001, p =0.001) and sleep disturbance (p = 0.001) in all the groups (CBT, CSE, control) post treatment. Conclusion. CBT and CSE are both effective in the treatment of pain-related disability, sleep disturbance, and psychological status of NSCLBP patients.

scholarly journals Psychosocial subgroups in high-performance athletes with low back pain: eustress-endurance is most frequent, distress-endurance most problematic!

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Titze ◽  
Daniela Fett ◽  
Katharina Trompeter ◽  
Petra Platen ◽  
Hannah Gajsar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
High Performance ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Response Patterns ◽  
Fear Avoidance ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Clinical Pain ◽  
Pain Outcomes ◽  
Pain Responses

AbstractObjectivesIn non-athletes, fear-avoidance and endurance-related pain responses appear to influence the development and maintenance of low back pain (LBP). The avoidance-endurance model (AEM) postulates three dysfunctional pain response patterns that are associated with poorer pain outcomes. Whether comparable relationships are present in athletes is currently unclear. This cross-sectional case-control study explored frequencies and behavioral validity of the AEM-based patterns in athletes with and without LBP, as well as their outcome-based validity in athletes with LBP.MethodsBased on the Avoidance-Endurance Fast-Screen, 438 (57.1% female) young adult high-performance athletes with and 335 (45.4% female) without LBP were categorized as showing a “distress-endurance” (DER), “eustress-endurance” (EER), “fear-avoidance” (FAR) or “adaptive” (AR) pattern.ResultsOf the athletes with LBP, 9.8% were categorized as FAR, 20.1% as DER, 47.0% as EER, and 23.1% as AR; of the athletes without LBP, 10.4% were categorized as FAR, 14.3% as DER, 47.2% as EER, and 28.1% as AR. DER and EER reported more pronounced endurance- and less pronounced avoidance-related pain responses than FAR, and vice versa. DER further reported the highest training frequency. In athletes with LBP, all dysfunctional groups reported higher LBP intensity, with FAR and DER displaying higher disability scores than AR.ConclusionsThe results indicate that also in athletes, patterns of endurance- and fear-avoidance-related pain responses appear dysfunctional with respect to LBP. While EER occurred most often, DER seems most problematic.ImplicationsEndurance-related pain responses that might be necessary during painful exercise should therefore be inspected carefully when shown in response to clinical pain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document