scholarly journals Low back pain among nurses working in a clinical settings of Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a 19 years of studies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayele Semachew ◽  
Yinager Workineh ◽  
Emiru Ayalew ◽  
Worku Animaw ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Prevalence Rate ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Healthcare Facilities

Introduction: Because of the nature of the work, healthcare providers are prone to develop different musculoskeletal problems including low back pain and hospital healthcare workers are groups of healthcare workers who suffered a lot from it. The incidence varies between countries and professions. The situation is somewhat worsen among the frontline healthcare provider in many healthcare facilities. Nurses in Africa are arguably the most important frontline health care workers available in most African healthcare facilities, performing a broad range of tasks and working in settings where no other health workers, including physicians, are available. This situation is considerably important in the causation of work load. Nursing is listed among the highly risky profession for the development of low back pain and has been ranked with in the top tenth professions which have a great risk of having susceptible to low back pain. Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to ascertain whether LBP is of a significant concern among nurses in African healthcare facilities. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of different data bases with no date limit was conducted from September to November 2018 using the PRISMA guideline. The quality of the included studies were assessed using a 12-item rating system. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were performed. Cochran's Q and the I2 test were used to assess heterogeneity. The presence of publication bias was evaluated by using Egger's test and visual inspection of the symmetry in funnel plots. Result: During the period 2000–2018, nineteen studies with a sample size of 6110 have been carried out. Among them, the lowest and the highest prevalence were found to be 44.1% and 82.7%. Both the highest and the lowest prevalence of low back pain were reported from a studies done in Nigeria. The estimation of the prevalence rate of low back pain among nurses using the random effects model was found to be 64.07% (95% CI: 58.68–69.46; P-value < 0.0001). Heterogeneity of the reviewed studies was I2 = 94.2% and heterogeneity Chi-squared = 310.06 (d.f = 18), P-value < 0.0001. The subgroup analyses showed that the highest prevalence of LBP among nurses was from west African region with prevalence rates of 68.46% (95% CI: 54.94– 81.97; P-value <0.0001) and followed by north Africa region with prevalence rate of 67.95% (95% CI: 55.96–79.94; P value <0.0001) had the higher prevalence of LBP as compared to their south African counterparts, 59% (95% CI: 51–66.9; P-value <0.0001). Conclusion: Even though the overall prevalence of the present study is lower when compared to the western and Asian studies, it indicated that the prevalence of low back pain among nurses is on the move.

Efficacy of conservative therapy in older people with nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and GRADE recommendations

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 104177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena K.B. Amaral ◽  
Mateus B. Souza ◽  
Mariana G.M. Campos ◽  
Vanessa A. Mendonça ◽  
Alessandra Bastone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Older People ◽  
Conservative Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back

scholarly journals Tibetan herbal pain-relieving plaster for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 140 ◽  
pp. 111727
Author(s):  
Mingxiao Yang ◽  
Susan Q. Li ◽  
Colleen M. Smith ◽  
Yi Lily Zhang ◽  
Ting Bao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back

scholarly journals Effects of low back pain on balance performance in elderly people: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Le Ge ◽  
Chuhuai Wang ◽  
Haohan Zhou ◽  
Qiuhua Yu ◽  
Xin Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Elderly People ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Centre Of Pressure ◽  
Balance Performance

Abstract Background Research suggests that individuals with low back pain (LBP) may have poorer motor control compared to their healthy counterparts. However, the sample population of almost 90% of related articles are young and middle-aged people. There is still a lack of a systematic review about the balance performance of elderly people with low back pain. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to understand the effects of LBP on balance performance in elderly people. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis included a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for full-text articles published before January 2020. We included the articles that 1) investigated the elderly people with LBP; 2) assessed balance performance with any quantifiable clinical assessment or measurement tool and during static or dynamic activity; 3) were original research. Two independent reviewers screened the relevant articles, and disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. Results Thirteen case-control studies comparing balance performance parameters between LBP and healthy subjects were included. The experimental group (LBP group) was associated with significantly larger area of centre of pressure movement (P < 0.001), higher velocity of centre of pressure sway in the anteroposterior and mediolateral directions (P = 0.01 and P = 0.02, respectively), longer path length in the anteroposterior direction (P < 0.001), slower walking speed (P = 0.05), and longer timed up and go test time (P = 0.004) than the control group. Conclusion The results showed that balance performance was impaired in elderly people with LBP. We should pay more attention to the balance control of elderly people with LBP.

The relationships between low back pain and lumbar lordosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1180-1191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Se-Woong Chun ◽  
Chai-Young Lim ◽  
Keewon Kim ◽  
Jinseub Hwang ◽  
Sun G. Chung
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back

scholarly journals Intervertebral disc therapies for non-specific chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2110280
Author(s):  
Camille Daste ◽  
Stéphanie Laclau ◽  
Margaux Boisson ◽  
François Segretin ◽  
Antoine Feydy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Intervertebral Disc ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Activity Limitations ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term

Objectives: We aim to evaluate the benefits and harms of intervertebral disc therapies (IDTs) in people with non-specific chronic low back pain (NScLBP). Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of IDTs versus placebo interventions, active comparators or usual care. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and CINHAL databases and conference abstracts were searched from inception to June 2020. Two independent investigators extracted data. The primary outcome was LBP intensity at short term (1 week–3 months), intermediate term (3–6 months) and long term (after 6 months). Results: Of 18 eligible trials (among 1396 citations), five assessed glucocorticoids (GCs) IDTs and were included in a quantitative synthesis; 13 assessed other products including etanercept ( n = 2), tocilizumab ( n = 1), methylene blue ( n = 2), ozone ( n = 2), chymopapaine ( n = 1), glycerol ( n = 1), stem cells ( n = 1), platelet-rich plasma ( n = 1) and recombinant human growth and differentiation factor-5 ( n = 2), and were included in a narrative synthesis. Standardized mean differences (95% CI) for GC IDTs for LBP intensity and activity limitations were −1.33 (−2.34; −0.32) and −0.76 (−1.85; 0.34) at short term, −2.22 (−5.34; 0.90) and −1.60 (−3.51; 0.32) at intermediate term and −1.11 (−2.91; 0.70) and −0.63 (−1.68; 0.42) at long term, respectively. Odds ratios (95% CI) for serious and minor adverse events with GC IDTs were 1.09 (0.25; 4.65) and 0.97 (0.49; 1.91). Conclusion: GC IDTs are associated with a reduction in LBP intensity at short term in people with NScLBP. Positive effects are not sustained. IDTs have no effect on activity limitations. Our conclusions are limited by high heterogeneity and a limited methodological quality across studies. Registration PROSPERO: CRD42019106336.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document