Prognostic Factors for Work Ability in Women With Chronic Low Back Pain Consulting Primary Health Care

2013 ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Nordeman ◽  
Ronny Gunnarsson ◽  
Kaisa Mannerkorpi
2022 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ester García-Martínez ◽  
Jorge Soler-González ◽  
Joan Blanco-Blanco ◽  
Francesc Rubí-Carnacea ◽  
María Masbernat-Almenara ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim To identify misbeliefs about the origin and meaning of non-specific chronic low back pain and to examine attitudes towards treatment by primary health care providers. Design Generic qualitative study. Methods Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted between October and November 2016 with physicians and nurses from primary health care centres in Lleida. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis via Atlas.ti-8 software. Results Five themes were identified: i. beliefs about the origin and meaning of chronic low back pain, ii. psychosocial aspects of pain modulators, iii. Therapeutic exercise as a treatment for chronic low back pain, iv. biomedical attitudes of primary health care providers, and v. difficulties in the clinical approach to chronic low back pain. Conclusion Primary health care providers have a unifactorial view of chronic low back pain and base their approach on the biomedical model. Professionals attribute chronic low back pain to structural alterations in the lumbar spine while psychosocial factors are only recognized as pain modulators. For professionals, therapeutic exercise represents a possible solution to chronic low back pain; however, they still do not prescribe it and continue to educate on postural hygiene and recommend limiting physical and/or occupational activities, as opposed to clinical practice guidelines. These findings suggest that to improve the adherence of primary health care providers to the biopsychosocial model, it may be necessary first to modify their misbeliefs about non-specific chronic low back pain by increasing their knowledge on pain neurophysiology. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02962817. Date of registration: 11/11/2016.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Hill ◽  
Freya Try ◽  
Georgia Agnew ◽  
Nicola Saywell

Abstract Background: Chronic low back pain is associated with disability and work absence. Stratified primary care management of acute low back pain using a prognostic screening tool (STarT Back) allows triage of those at risk of chronicity. Primary health practitioners can use this method of stratification to assess patients with low back pain then allocate them to matched treatment groups. STarT Back was designed for use in the health service in the United Kingdom (UK) where stratification using STarT Back has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and reduce treatment costs and time off work. Implementation of STarT Back in health care systems outside of the UK is in an early stage and its success is dependent on the health practitioners using it and the healthcare system in which they work. Gaining health practitioners’ perspectives on STarT Back is an important step in effective implementation. This will help contextualise the tool to each healthcare environment, making it easier and more meaningful for intended users. Methods: A computerised search of qualitative literature was conducted across seven databases in August 2020 using keywords to identify studies that investigate the perspectives of physiotherapists and general practitionners on the use of STarT Back in primary health care. Study quality was assessed using the CASP tool. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Eight articles met the inclusion criteria where qualitative data was retrievable and included the views of general practitioners and physiotherapists from primary health care settings from four countries. Participants’ perspectives varied across the data, and three key themes were created from these findings: ‘making it work’, ‘will I do it?’, and ‘it’s all about the patient’. Conclusions: Physiotherapists and general practitioners found using STarT Back frequently enhanced their practice. General practitioners did express concerns about time constraints and the potential for STarT Back to undermine their clinical experience. Findings from this study will inform adaptations of STarT Back to ensure successful implementation into different health contexts.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (B) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
William Sukmajaya ◽  
Firas Farisi Alkaff ◽  
Alina Oen ◽  
Alverina Cynthia Sukmajaya

AIM: Low back pain (LBP) is a widespread complaint of all age groups. The economic burden of LBP is high, and physiotherapy has proven to reduce this. Unfortunately, physiotherapy or exercise regimen is rarely prescribed to LBP patients by doctors. Until now, there was no study regarding the application of physiotherapy exercise in Indonesia. This study aims to evaluate the effect of Williams flexion exercise (WFE) toward people with LBP. METHODS: This was a pretest-posttest experimental study design of PROLANIS participants with LBP complaints in one of the primary health-care centers in Jombang, East Java, Indonesia, on June 2018–July 2018. The total sampling method was used in this study. Participants’ basic clinical data and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire. WFE was taught to the participants through a presentation, video, and live demonstration. After 1 month, ODI of the participants was reassessed. RESULTS: There were 42 participants included in this study. There was a significant ODI difference between pre- and post-WFE implementation (31.05 ± 17.40 vs. 14.10 ± 11.78, p = 0.019). Higher exercise frequency (>1 times/day) was associated with further reduction in ODI compared to lower exercise frequency group (1 time/day) (22.09 ± 19.09 vs. 7.38 ± 12.58, p = 0.017). There was no significant difference in ODI reduction between geriatric and non-geriatric participants (p = 0.24). CONCLUSION: WFE improves functional symptoms of LBP regardless of age. This exercise could be implemented in a primary health-care setting in future to reduce the cost for LBP treatment.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Hill ◽  
Freya Try ◽  
Georgia Agnew ◽  
Nicola Saywell

Abstract Background: Chronic low back pain is associated with disability and work absence. Stratified primary care management of acute low back pain using a prognostic screening tool (STarT Back Tool, SBT) triages people with LBP into targeted treatment groups, matched to their level of risk of chronicity. The SBT was designed for use in the health service in the United Kingdom (UK) where it has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and reduce treatment costs and time off work. Successful implementation of the SBT in health care outside the UK is dependent on the health practitioners who will use it and the healthcare system in which they work. Gaining health practitioners’ perspectives on the SBT is an important step in effective implementation. Methods: A computerised search of qualitative literature was conducted across seven databases in March 2021 using keywords to identify studies that investigate the perspectives of physiotherapists and general practitionners on the use of the SBT in primary health care. Study quality was assessed using the CASP tool. Data were coded and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Eight articles met the inclusion criteria and included the views of general practitioners and physiotherapists from primary health care settings from four countries. Three overarching themes were created from the data, the first ‘making it work’, identifies factors that may influence implementation and continued use of the SBT in clinical practice. The second ‘will I do it?’, captured potential consequences of adopting the SBT and the third ‘it’s all about the patient’ emphasised how the SBT may affect patients and their potential reactions to risk stratification and matched treatments.Conclusions: Physiotherapists and general practitioners found using the SBT frequently enhanced their practice. General practitioners did express concerns about time constraints and the potential for the SBT to undermine their clinical experience. Findings from this study will inform modifications to contextualise the tool to each healthcare environment.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Khanyisile P. Khumalo

Background: Low back pain (LBP) can affect any population and is experienced by any race, gender or age group. The lifetime prevalence of LBP is reported to vary from 44.4% to 90% in different populations in Western countries and 36% to 70.9% in African countries. Studies have been conducted in developed countries, or urban areas of developing countries regarding LBP and they report the LBP prevalence to vary from 48% to 90%. However, very limited literature about LBP and its risk factors in rural areas exist. There are few studies that have been conducted in rural areas; however, none of these investigated a South African rural area and since the demographics and type of work of this population differs, it may affect the prevalence of LBP. Aim of study: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of and associated risk factors for low back pain in medical out patients of a selected Umdoni Municipality Primary Health Care Clinic. Methodology: This study design was a cross-sectional survey, set in a quantitative paradigm, in which data was collected by means of a questionnaire. This study was conducted in a primary health care clinic of the Umdoni Municipality. The convenience sequential sampling method was used to select the qualifying participants (as per inclusion/ exclusion criteria) from the patients in the waiting room of the clinic. Participants (n=400) were recruited by the researcher in the clinic waiting room / reception. All collected data was captured on an Excel spreadsheet and subsequently transferred to the statistical program for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Pearson’s chi square tests and Fisher’s exact test were utilized in order to determine the association between low back pain and various factors. Odds ratios were calculated to determine risk factors for LBP. LBP was correlated with demographics as well as daily activities or chores. Results: A total of 400 questionnaires were completed by the participants in the form of an interview with the researcher. The lifetime and point prevalence of LBP was 79.3% (n = 317) and 32.5% (n = 130) respectively. LBP increased with an increasing age (p = 0.028). Similarly, LBP increased in people with higher BMI (p < 0.001). More females (83.4%, n = 231) suffered from LBP than did males (69.9%, n = 86, p = 0.002). The prevalence of LBP was not correlated with other demographic factors. More females (98%, n = 272) performed household chores than did males (78.8%, n = 97, p < 0.001). These chores included fetching firewood (p < 0.001), washing clothes (p < 0.001) and cooking (p < 0.001). Although there was no relationship between performing household chores and the lifetime prevalence LBP (p = 0.842), there was a relationship between performing these chores and the point prevalence of LBP (p = 0.004). More females (96%, n = 266) than males (65.9%, n = 81) fetched water (p = 0.001). Bivariate analysis indicated that LBP was increased with an increasing number of pregnancies (p < 0.001). The risk of LBP was increased in those who underwent a C-section (OR = 2,748, 95% CI: 1,108-6,819, p = 0.024). Similarly the risk of LBP was increased in those women who had an epidural (OR = 3.115, 95% CI: 1,355 -7,157, p = 0.005). Almost a fifth of the participants lifted heavy objects for a prolonged period of time (19.5%, n = 78, p < 0.001). Lifting heavy objects was strongly associated with an increased lifetime prevalence of LBP (OR = 6.014, 95% CI: 2.131 - 16.976, P < 0.001). There was no correlation between physical activity and the prevalence of LBP (p = 0.084). However Pearson’s chi square test showed that those that walked experienced more LBP compared to those involved in other physical activities (p = 0.024). In addition, those who walked, were often walking to fetch water and this may have caused the LBP. Low back pain affected daily activities such as bending (30.5%, n = 122, p < 0.001) and lifting of objects (18%, n = 72, p < 0.001). It also resulted in absenteeism from work and loss of jobs. Knowledge of chiropractic was poor (1%, n = 4, p < 0.001) and 99% (n = 396, p < 0.001) of the participants had never been treated by a chiropractor. Conclusion: Low back pain prevalence was high in the Umdoni Municipality population. Activities related to life in poor socio-economic backgrounds, such as fetching water from the river, were highly associated with LBP. Participants were unaware of the field of chiropractic treatment and since chiropractors are involved in manually treating low back, it is recommended that chiropractic treatment be incorporated into the services provided at primary health care clinics in the area.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document