scholarly journals Is adiposity associated with back and lower limb pain? A systematic review

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256720
Author(s):  
Waruna L. Peiris ◽  
Flavia M. Cicuttini ◽  
Sultana Monira Hussain ◽  
Mahnuma M. Estee ◽  
Lorena Romero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Foot Pain ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Lower Limb Pain ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis

Background Back and lower limb pain have a major impact on physical function and quality of life. While obesity is a modifiable risk factor for musculoskeletal pain, the role of adiposity is less clear. This systematic review aimed to examine the relationship between both adiposity and its distribution and back and lower limb pain. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that examined the association between anthropometric and/or direct measures of adiposity and site specific musculoskeletal pain. Risk of bias was assessed and a best evidence synthesis was performed. Results A total of 56 studies were identified which examined 4 pain regions, including the lower back (36 studies), hip (two studies), knee (13 studies) and foot (eight studies). 31(55%) studies were assessed as having low to moderate risk of bias. 17(30%) studies were cohort in design. The best evidence synthesis provided evidence of a relationship between central adiposity and low back and knee pain, but not hip or foot pain. There was also evidence of a longitudinal relationship between adiposity and the presence of back, knee and foot pain, as well as incident and increasing foot pain. Conclusions This systematic review provides evidence of an association between both body fat and its central distribution and low back and knee pain, and a longitudinal relationship between adiposity and back, knee and foot pain. These results highlight the potential for targeting adiposity in the development of novel treatments at these sites.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Pain in Bio-Pharmaceutical Industry Workers

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 48-61
Author(s):  
Dhairav Alkesh Shah ◽  
Nirati Paresh Lakhani
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Body Regions ◽  
Lower Limb Pain ◽  
Musculoskeletal Problems ◽  
Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire

The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of musculoskeletal problems in bio-pharmaceutical industry workers. A cross sectional survey was conducted on 33 bio-pharmaceutical industry workers by administering the Extended Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire to quantify the musculoskeletal pain and activity limitation in 9 body regions. The Rapid Office Strain Assessment was used to assess the work-related postures and ergonomics of the computer operators in this industry. A Self-Designed Questionnaire was administered to obtain data regarding the various musculoskeletal problems faced by Bio-pharmaceutical industrial workers, work-related risk factors and various postures attained throughout the day. Out of the 33 workers investigated, 21 workers (63%) of the workers experienced musculoskeletal pain. Isolated spine pain was the commonest, and was reported in 8 out of 21 individuals (38%). Spine with upper and lower limb pain was the next most common, and was reported in 5 out of 21 individuals (24%). 4 out of 21 individuals had spine and lower limb pain (19%). The Rapid Office Strain Assessment scores of all the workers was above 5 indicating “high risk” which implied that immediate ergonomic change was necessary. This study concluded that there was 63% prevalence of musculoskeletal pain. The most common site of pain were the spine, followed by pain in the spine with both upper and lower extremities. All the workers were exposed to different ergonomic risk factors. The study concluded that implementation of ergonomic interventions may minimize the risks of work related musculoskeletal pain. Key words: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders, Extended Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, Rapid Office Strain Assessment, Ergonomic hazards.

Percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency applied to the L-2 dorsal root ganglion for treatment of chronic low-back pain: 3-year experience

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsi-Kai Tsou ◽  
Shao-Ching Chao ◽  
Chao-Jan Wang ◽  
Hsien-Te Chen ◽  
Chiung-Chyi Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Lower Limb Pain

Object The authors assessed the effectiveness of percutaneous pulsed radiofrequency treatment for providing pain relief in patients with chronic low-back pain with or without lower-limb pain. Methods Data were obtained in 127 patients who had chronic low-back pain with or without lower-limb pain due to a herniated intervertebral disc or previous failed back surgery and who underwent pulsed radiofrequency treatment. Their conditions were proven by clinical features, physical examination, and imaging studies. Low-back pain was treated with pulsed radiofrequency applied to the L-2 dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and lower-limb pain was treated with pulsed radiofrequency applied to the L3–S1 DRG. Patients underwent uni- or bilateral treatment depending on whether their low-back pain was unilateral or bilateral. A visual analog scale was used to assess pain. The patients were followed up for 3 years postoperatively. Results In patients without lower-limb pain (Group A), 27 (55.10%) of 49 patients had initial improvement ≥ 50% at 3-month follow-up. At 1-year follow-up, 20 (44.44%) of 45 patients in Group A had pain relief ≥ 50%. An analysis of patients with pain relief ≥ 50% for at least 1 month showed that the greatest effect was at 3 months after treatment. In patients with low-back pain and lower-limb pain (Group B), 37 (47.44%) of 78 patients had initial improvement ≥ 50% at 3-month follow-up. At 1-year follow-up, 34 (45.95%) of 74 patients had pain relief effect ≥ 50%. An analysis of patients in Group B with pain relief ≥ 50% for at least 1 month showed that the greatest effect was at 1 month after treatment. Conclusions The results of this prospective analysis showed that treatment with pulsed radiofrequency applied at the L-2 DRG is safe and effective for treating for chronic low-back pain. Satisfactory pain relief was obtained in the majority of patients in Group A with the effect persisting for at least 3 months. The results indicate that pulsed radiofrequency provided intermediate-term relief of low-back pain. Further studies with long-term follow-up are necessary.

scholarly journals Compression of Dorsal Root Ganglion as a Cause of Low Back and/or Lower Limb Pain

1987 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 498-503
Author(s):  
Takashi Shimauchi ◽  
Masanobu Oyama ◽  
Shinnosuke Kurose ◽  
Hiroshi Nakamura
Keyword(s):  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Lower Limb Pain

scholarly journals Community-based online survey on seeking care and information for lower limb pain and injury in Australia: an observational study

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e035030
Author(s):  
Jocelyn L Bowden ◽  
Rod Lamberts ◽  
David J Hunter ◽  
Luciano Ricardo Melo ◽  
Kathryn Mills
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Healthcare Information ◽  
Lower Limb Pain

ObjectivesMusculoskeletal pain is a leading cause of disability globally. In geographically and socioeconomically diverse countries, such as Australia, care seeking when someone experiences musculoskeletal pain is varied and potentially influenced by their individual characteristics, access to practitioners or perceived trustworthiness of information. This study explored how consumers currently access healthcare, how well it is trusted and if sociodemographic factors influenced healthcare utilisation.DesignAnonymous online observational survey.SettingAustralia.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 831 community-based individuals (18+ years).Outcome measuresDescriptive analyses and generalised estimating equations were used to quantify healthcare-seeking behaviours, sources and trust of health information for (A) first-contact practitioners, (B) medical practitioners, and (C) other sources of information.ResultsOf the 761 respondents, 73% were females, 54% resided in capital cities. 68% of respondents had experienced pain or injury in more than one lower limb joint. Despite this, more than 30% of respondents only sought help when there had not been natural resolution of their pain. Physiotherapists had the highest odds of being seen, asked and trusted for healthcare information. The odds of seeking care from general practitioners were no higher than seeking information from an expert website. Older individuals and women exhibited higher odds of seeking, asking and trusting health information.ConclusionIntelligible and trustworthy information must be available for consumers experiencing lower limb pain. Individuals, particularly younger people, are seeking information from multiple, unregulated sources. This suggests that healthcare professionals may need to invest time and resources into improving the trustworthiness and availability of healthcare information to improve healthcare quality.

scholarly journals Distribution and prevalence of musculoskeletal pain co-occurring with persistent low back pain: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilie K. Øverås ◽  
Melker S. Johansson ◽  
Tarcisio F. de Campos ◽  
Manuela L. Ferreira ◽  
Bård Natvig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Body Regions

Abstract Background Co-occurring musculoskeletal pain is common among people with persistent low back pain (LBP) and associated with more negative consequences than LBP alone. The distribution and prevalence of musculoskeletal pain co-occurring with persistent LBP has not been systematically described, which hence was the aim of this review. Methods Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus. We considered observational studies from clinical settings or based on cohorts of the general or working populations involving adults 18 years or older with persistent LBP (≥4 wks) and co-occurring musculoskeletal pain for eligibility. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were carried out by independent reviewers. Results are presented according to study population, distribution and location(s) of co-occurring pain. Results Nineteen studies out of 5744 unique records met the inclusion criteria. Studies were from high-income countries in Europe, USA and Japan. A total of 34,492 people with persistent LBP were included in our evidence synthesis. Methods for assessing and categorizing co-occurring pain varied considerably between studies, but based on the available data from observational studies, we identified three main categories of co-occurring pain – these were axial pain (18 to 58%), extremity pain (6 to 50%), and multi-site musculoskeletal pain (10 to 89%). Persistent LBP with co-occurring pain was reported more often by females than males, and co-occurring pain was reported more often in patients with more disability. Conclusions People with persistent LBP often report co-occurring neck pain, extremity pain or multi-site pain. Assessment of co-occurring pain alongside persistent LBP vary considerable between studies and there is a need for harmonisation of measurement methods to advance our understanding of how pain in different body regions occur alongside persistent LBP. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017068807.

scholarly journals Is acupuncture effective for knee osteoarthritis? A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e052270
Author(s):  
Chuan-Yang Liu ◽  
Jian-Feng Tu ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee ◽  
Ling-Yu Qi ◽  
Fang-Ting Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis

IntroductionKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is one of the leading causes of disability. The effectiveness of acupuncture for treating KOA remains controversial. This protocol describes the method of a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for treating KOA.Methods and analysisFour English databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases and Web of Science) and four Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, and Wanfang) will be searched from the database inception to 1 September 2021. All randomised controlled trials related to acupuncture for KOA will be included. Extracted data will include publication details, basic information, demographic data, intervention details and patient outcomes. The primary outcome will be pain intensity. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias. Article selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. If the meta-analysis is precluded, we will conduct a descriptive synthesis using a best-evidence synthesis approach. The strength of recommendations and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation working group methodology.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required because individual patient data are not included. This protocol was registered in the international Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 25 February 2021. The systematic review and meta-analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings will also be disseminated through conference presentations.Trial registration numberCRD42021232177.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document