scholarly journals Evaluation of the EQ-5D-3L and 5L versions in low back pain patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Garratt ◽  
H. Furunes ◽  
C. Hellum ◽  
T. Solberg ◽  
J. I. Brox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Missing Data ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Improve Measurement ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Ceiling Effects

Abstract Background The EuroQol EQ-5D is one of the most widely researched and applied patient-reported outcome measures worldwide. The original EQ-5D-3L and more recent EQ-5D-5L include three and five response categories respectively. Evidence from healthy and sick populations shows that the additional two response categories improve measurement properties but there has not been a concurrent comparison of the two versions in patients with low back pain (LBP). Methods LBP patients taking part in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of lumbar total disc replacement and conservative treatment completed the EQ-5D-3L and 5L in an eight-year follow-up questionnaire. The 3L and 5L were assessed for aspects of data quality including missing data, floor and ceiling effects, response consistency, and based on a priori hypotheses, associations with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain-Visual Analogue Scales and Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25). Results At the eight-year follow-up, 151 (87%) patients were available and 146 completed both the 3L and 5L. Levels of missing data were the same for the two versions. Compared to the EQ-5D-5L, the 3L had significantly higher floor (pain discomfort) and ceiling effects (mobility, self-care, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). For these patients the EQ-5D-5L described 73 health states compared to 28 for the 3L. Shannon’s indices showed the 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of classification efficiency. Correlations with the ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 were largely as hypothesized, the 5L having slightly higher correlations than the 3L. Conclusion The EQ-5D assesses important aspect of health in LBP patients and the 5L improves upon the 3L in this respect. The EQ-5D-5L is recommended in preference to the 3L version, however, further testing in other back pain populations together with additional measurement properties, including responsiveness to change, is recommended. Trial registration: retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01704677.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the EQ-5D-3L and 5L Versions in Low Back Pain Patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
AM Garratt ◽  
Håvard Furunes ◽  
Christian Hellum ◽  
Tore Solberg ◽  
Jens Ivar Brox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Missing Data ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Improve Measurement ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Ceiling Effects

Abstract Background: The EuroQol EQ-5D is the most widely researched and applied patient-reported outcome measure worldwide. The original EQ-5D-3L and more recent EQ-5D-5L include three and five response categories respectively. Evidence from healthy and sick populations shows that the additional two response categories improve measurement properties but there has not been a concurrent comparison of the two versions in patients with low back pain (LBP). Methods: LBP patients taking part in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of lumbar total disc replacement and conservative treatment completed the EQ-5D-3L and 5L in an eight-year follow-up questionnaire. The 3L and 5L were assessed for aspects of data quality including missing data, floor and ceiling effects, response consistency, and based on a priori hypotheses, associations with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain-Visual Analogue Scales and Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25). Results: At the eight-year follow-up, 151 (87%) patients were available and 146 completed both the 3L and 5L. Levels of missing data were the same for the two versions. Compared to the EQ-5D-5L, the 3L had significantly higher floor (pain discomfort) and ceiling effects (mobility, self-care, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). For these patients the EQ-5D-5L described 73 health states compared to 28 for the 3L. Shannon’s indices also showed the 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of classification efficiency. Correlations with the ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 were largely as hypothesized, the 5L having slightly higher correlations than the 3L. In a multivariate regression analysis, ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 scores explained 13% more variation in EQ-5D-5L scores compared to 3L scores. Conclusion: The EQ-5D assesses important aspect of health in LBP patients and the 5L improves upon the 3L in this respect. The EQ-5D-5L is recommended in preference to the 3L version, however, further testing in other back pain populations together with additional measurement properties, including responsiveness to change, is recommended. Trial Registration: retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01704677.

scholarly journals Prognosis and Course of Disability in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A 5- and 12-Month Follow-up Cohort Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 93 (12) ◽  
pp. 1603-1614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Verkerk ◽  
Pim A.J. Luijsterburg ◽  
Martijn W. Heymans ◽  
Inge Ronchetti ◽  
Annelies L. Pool-Goudzwaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Multidisciplinary Therapy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Specific Disability

Background Few data are available on the course of and predictors for disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). Objective The purpose of this study was to describe the course of disability and identify clinically important prognostic factors of low-back-pain–specific disability in patients with CNSLBP receiving multidisciplinary therapy. Design A prospective cohort study was conducted. Methods A total of 1,760 patients with CNSLBP who received multidisciplinary therapy were evaluated for their course of disability and prognostic factors at baseline and at 2-, 5-, and 12-month follow-ups. Recovery was defined as 30% reduction in low back pain–specific disability at follow-up compared with baseline and as absolute recovery if the score on the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) was ≤20 points at follow-up. Potential prognostic factors were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results Mean patient-reported disability scores on the QBPDS ranged from 51.7 (SD=15.6) at baseline to 31.7 (SD=15.2), 31.1 (SD=18.2), and 29.1 (SD=20.0) at 2, 5, and 12 months, respectively. The prognostic factors identified for recovery at 5 and 12 months were younger age and high scores on disability and on the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (Physical and Mental Component Summaries) at baseline. In addition, at 5-month follow-up, a shorter duration of complaints was a positive predictor, and having no comorbidity and less pain at baseline were additional predictors at 12-month follow-up. Limitations Missing values at 5- and 12-month follow-ups were 11.1% and 45.2%, respectively. Conclusion After multidisciplinary treatment, the course of disability in patients with CNSLBP continued to decline over a 12-month period. At 5- and 12-month follow-ups, prognostic factors were identified for a clinically relevant decrease in disability scores on the QBPDS.

Psychometric Properties of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Low-Back Pathology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. e20200042
Author(s):  
Goris Nazari ◽  
Pavlos Bobos ◽  
Steve Lu ◽  
Stephanie Reischl ◽  
Pedro H. Almeida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis identifies, critically appraises, synthesizes, and meta-analyses the reported psychometric properties of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in patients with low back pain or pathology. Method: The MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched from their inception to September 2019. We included prospective measurement studies that reported on the psychometric properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness) of the PSFS in people with low back pain or pathology. We followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments 2018 guideline for systematic reviews. We performed both quantitative and qualitative syntheses in which the results were summarized on the basis of the reported measurement properties and study quality. Results: Ten eligible studies were included. The pooled PSFS reliability measure was excellent (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.95). Validity measures displayed correlations that ranged from −0.47 to 0.69 when compared with other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) or other tests. Eight studies had assessed the responsiveness of the PSFS. Effect sizes reported were large (≥ 0.91). Conclusions: The PSFS is a reliable, valid, and responsive PROM for patients with low back pain or pathology.

scholarly journals Independent prescribing by advanced physiotherapists for patients with low back pain in primary care: protocol for a feasibility trial with an embedded qualitative component

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e027745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy David Noblet ◽  
John F Marriott ◽  
Alison B Rushton
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Prescription Drugs ◽  
Feasibility Trial ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Independent Prescribing ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Qualitative Component

IntroductionLow back pain (LBP) is the most prevalent musculoskeletal condition in the UK. Guidelines advocate a multimodal approach, including prescription of medications. Advanced physiotherapy practitioners (APPs) are well placed to provide this care in primary care. Physiotherapist independent prescribing remains novel, with the first prescribers qualifying in 2014. This feasibility trial aims to evaluate the feasibility, suitability and acceptability of assessing the effectiveness of independent prescribing by APPs for patients with LBP in primary care, to inform the design of a future definitive stepped-wedged cluster trial.Method and analysis(1) Trial component. An APP (registered prescriber) will complete the initial participant consultation. If prescription drugs are required within the multimodal physiotherapeutic context, these will be prescribed. Patient-reported outcome measures will be completed prior to initial assessment and at 6 and 12 weeks to assess feasibility of follow-up and data collection procedures. Accelerometers will be fitted for 7 days to assess physical activity, sedentary behaviour and feasibility of use. (2) Embedded qualitative component. A focus group and semistructured interviews will be used to evaluate the views and experiences of the participants and APPs respectively, about the feasibility, suitability and acceptability of the proposed full trial. A Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials diagram will be used to analyse feasible eligibility, recruitment and follow-up rates. Descriptive analysis of the data will be completed to evaluate procedures. Thematic analysis will be used to analyse and synthesise the qualitative data.Ethics and disseminationThis feasibility trial is approved by the Health Research Authority (HRA). Ethical approval was sought and granted via the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) ID 250734.Data will be disseminated via publication in peer reviewed journal and conference presentation. It is anticipated that the results of this study will be used in conjunction with ethical evaluation, economic and risk analyses, as well as consultation with key stakeholders including the British health consumer when contemplating change, enhancement or redesign of the essential full randomised controlled trial.Trial registration numberISRCTN15516596, Pre-results.

scholarly journals A systematic review of movement and muscular activity biomarkers to discriminate non-specific chronic low back pain patients from an asymptomatic population

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Florent Moissenet ◽  
Kevin Rose-Dulcina ◽  
Stéphane Armand ◽  
Stéphane Genevay
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Muscular Activity ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Pain Patients

AbstractThe identification of relevant and valid biomarkers to distinguish patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) from an asymptomatic population in terms of musculoskeletal factors could contribute to patient follow-up and to evaluate therapeutic strategies. Several parameters related to movement and/or muscular activity impairments have been proposed in the literature in that respect. In this article, we propose a systematic and comprehensive review of these parameters (i.e. potential biomarkers) and related measurement properties. This systematic review (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020144877) was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases until July 2019. In the included studies, all movements or muscular activity parameters having demonstrated at least a moderate level of construct validity were defined as biomarkers, and their measurement properties were assessed. In total, 92 studies were included. This allowed to identify 121 movement and 150 muscular activity biomarkers. An extensive measurement properties assessment was found in 31 movement and 14 muscular activity biomarkers. On the whole, these biomarkers support the primary biomechanical concepts proposed for low back pain. However, a consensus concerning a robust and standardised biomechanical approach to assess low back pain is needed.

PERCUTANEOUS EPIDURAL NEUROPLASTY (PEN) USING COMBINATION OF HYALURONIDASE AND HYPERTONIC SALINE (NaCl 3%) IN TREATING FAILED BACK SURGERY SYNDROME

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Wawan Mulyawan ◽  
Yudi Yuwono Wiwoho ◽  
Syaiful Ichwan
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Hypertonic Saline ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Favourable Outcome ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Scale Scores

Background: Following surgical treatments for low back pain, lower extremity pain or neurologic symptoms would last or recur, this is defined as failed sack surgery syndrome (FBSS). FBSS usually occurs in 5-40% of these surgical patients. The most common cause is an epidural scar adhesion. Percutaneous epidural neuroplasty is the non-mechanical treatment for this condition. Previously, the use of hyaluronidase and hypertonic saline separately is commonly used for epidurolysis but the combination of hyaluronidase and hypertonic saline 3% has not been explored.Objective: To investigate the two-year outcomes of percutaneous epidural neuroplasty using a combination of hyaluronidase and hypertonic saline 3% in patients with FBSS.Methods: Twelve patients who experience low back pain, with or without radiculopathy, who have underwent lumbar spine surgery previously were assigned to the study. Parameters, such as the visual analogue scale scores for the back (VAS-B) and legs (VAS-L), and the Oswestry disability index (ODI), were recorded and compared between pretreatment, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 1 year and 2 years follow-up.Results: For all 12 patients, the postoperative VAS-B, VAS-L, and ODI were significantly different from the preoperative values in all follow-up periods: 1 month, 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years.Conclusion: Based off this study group, percutaneous epidural neuroplasty using a combination of hyaluronidase and hypertonic saline 3% has a favourable outcome in the 2 years follow-up

scholarly journals A Novel Placement Technique of S2 Screw (from S2 to Promontorium) and Double Screwing from S2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sedat Dalbayrak ◽  
Ahmet Öğrenci ◽  
Ezgi Akar ◽  
Orkun Koban ◽  
Mesut Yılmaz
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Screw Loosening ◽  
Dynamic Instrumentation ◽  
Placement Technique

AbstractSince pseudoarthrosis or screw loosening is frequently seen in lumbosacral stabilizations ending in S1, S2 screws are used more frequently to support S1 screws. This study aims to describe a new screw placement technique and location from S2. Revision surgery was applied to the patient who had previously undergone surgery with the rigid instrumentation system and encountered pseudoarthrosis during the follow-up period. Instrumentation was performed from S2 to the promontorium. The patient’s chronic low back pain arising due to pseudoarthrosis was reduced and a strong lumbosacral dynamic instrumentation was performed to the patient. Dual screw placement from S2 and/or screw placement in the S2-promontorium direction is a new alternative to provide a powerful instrumentation.

Thoracolumbar Fascia Enthesopathy as a Cause of Low Back Pain: A Retrospective and Follow-up Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ouidade A. Tabesh ◽  
Roba Ghossan ◽  
Soha H Zebouni ◽  
Rafic Faddoul ◽  
Michel Revel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Iliac Crest ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Complete Relief ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Thoracolumbar Fascia ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Aim. To evaluate ultrasonography findings of Thoracolumbar Fascia (TLF) enthesis in patients with low back pain (LBP) due to iliac crest pain syndrome (ICPS). Method. The ultrasonographic and clinical findings of 60 patients with LBP due to ICPS were compared to those of 30 healthy volunteers with no LBP. Thickness of the TLF was measured with ultrasound (US) at its insertion on the iliac crest. Results. Forty-eight women and 12 men with a mean age of 42.1±11.3 years were diagnosed with ICPS. In patients, the mean thickness of the TLF was 2.51±0.70mm in affected sides compared to 1.81±0.44mm in the contralateral unaffected sides. The mean thickness difference of 0.82mm between the affected and non-affected sides was statistically significant (95%CI, 0.64-0.99, P<0.0001). In volunteers, the mean thickness of the TLF was 1.6±0.2mm. The mean thickness difference of 0.89mm between the affected sides of patients and volunteers was statistically significant (95%CI, 0.73-1.06, P<0.0001). Forty-two patients who didn’t improve with conservative therapy, received injections of methylprednisolone acetate and 1% lidocaine around the TLF enthesis. All patients reported complete relief of their LBP within 20 minutes of the injections thanks to the lidocaine anesthetic effect. Fifty-six (93.3%) patients were reached by phone for a long-term follow-up. Among them, 33 (58.9%) patients experienced a sustained complete pain relief after a mean follow-up of 45±19.3 months (range, 3-74 months). Conclusion. our findings suggest that TLF enthesopathy is a potential cause of nonspecific LBP that can be diagnosed using US.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document