scholarly journals Global Consensus From Clinicians Regarding Low Back Pain Outcome Indicators for Older Adults: Pairwise Wiki Survey Using Crowdsourcing (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold YL Wong ◽  
Henrik H Lauridsen ◽  
Dino Samartzis ◽  
Luciana Macedo ◽  
Paulo H Ferreira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Pain Outcome ◽  
Specific Outcome

BACKGROUND Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most debilitating conditions among older adults. Unfortunately, existing LBP outcome questionnaires are not adapted for specific circumstances related to old age, which may make these measures less than ideal for evaluating LBP in older adults. OBJECTIVE To explore the necessity of developing age-specific outcome measures, crowdsourcing was conducted to solicit opinions from clinicians globally. METHODS Clinicians around the world voted and/or prioritized various LBP outcome indicators for older adults on a pairwise wiki survey website. Seven seed outcome indicators were posted for voting while respondents were encouraged to suggest new indicators for others to vote/prioritize. The website was promoted on the social media of various health care professional organizations. An established algorithm calculated the mean scores of all ideas. A score >50 points means that the idea has >50% probability of beating another randomly presented indicator. RESULTS Within 42 days, 128 respondents from 6 continents cast 2466 votes and proposed 14 ideas. Indicators pertinent to improvements of physical functioning and age-related social functioning scored >50 while self-perceived reduction of LBP scored 32. CONCLUSIONS This is the first crowdsourcing study to address LBP outcome indicators for older adults. The study noted that age-specific outcome indicators should be integrated into future LBP outcome measures for older adults. Future research should solicit opinions from older patients with LBP to develop age-specific back pain outcome measures that suit clinicians and patients alike.

scholarly journals Global Consensus From Clinicians Regarding Low Back Pain Outcome Indicators for Older Adults: Pairwise Wiki Survey Using Crowdsourcing

10.2196/11127 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e11127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold YL Wong ◽  
Henrik H Lauridsen ◽  
Dino Samartzis ◽  
Luciana Macedo ◽  
Paulo H Ferreira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Outcome Indicators ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Pain Outcome

Predicting recovery using continuous low back pain outcome measures

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue A Ferguson ◽  
Purnendu Gupta ◽  
William S Marras ◽  
Catherine Heaney
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Outcome

scholarly journals Construct Validity and Validity to Change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Shoulder and Low Back Pain: A Clinimetric Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kromer TO ◽  
◽  
Saner J ◽  
Sieben JM ◽  
Bastiaenen CHG ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Shoulder Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Specific Outcome

Background: Patient-specific and condition-specific measures are widely used in clinical practice and research to measure disability or change over time. While condition-specific outcome measures comprise a range of restrictions generally relevant for all patients, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale measures restrictions chosen by the individual patient. Objectives: Based on the hypothesis that patient-specific and conditionspecific scales deliver comparable results when used on group level. The aim of this study was to test for floor and ceiling effects, to evaluate construct validity and validity to change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale when compared to condition-specific outcome measures. For this purpose, two datasets from patients with shoulder pain and low back pain were analyzed. Methods: Patient-Specific Functional Scale scores were compared to the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at 4 time-points using stem-and-leaf-plots and correlations using Pearson’s r. Hypothesis-driven correlation levels for data interpretation were predefined, with r ≥0.75=high, r ≥0.5=moderate, r ≥0.25=low. Results: Patient-Specific Functional Scale floor effects were comparable to condition-specific outcome measures in both samples. At none of the timepoints did the Patient-Specific Functional Scale correlate with the conditionspecific outcome measures in the expected manner. Conclusion: Hypotheses regarding expected ranges of correlation between the Patient-Specific Functional Scale and the condition-specific outcome measures for construct validity and validity to change were not met. While the use of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in a clinical context has its advantages, the measure is not recommended for group-level evaluations.

scholarly journals Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain

2004 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 314-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Müller ◽  
C. Roeder ◽  
L. Dubs ◽  
M. S. Duetz ◽  
C. G. Greenough
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Specific Outcome

scholarly journals Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain

2004 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Müller ◽  
M. S. Duetz ◽  
C. Roeder ◽  
C. G. Greenough
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Specific Outcome

scholarly journals Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. e1-e18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Deyo ◽  
Samuel F. Dworkin ◽  
Dagmar Amtmann ◽  
Gunnar Andersson ◽  
David Borenstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Research Standards ◽  
Minimum Dataset

Note fr'5ym PTJ's Editor in Chief: Both investigators and readers get frustrated reading research on low back pain because of different definitions of “chronic” and different outcome measures. Lack of consensus on study methods makes it difficult to determine if contradictory findings are based on different methods or different interventions; lack of consensus also prevents synthesis across studies. Dr. Partap Khalsa, Deputy Director, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, announced the release of Research Standards for Chronic Low Pain, and the hope is that future investigations will adopt them and reduce variability in research reporting. The task force on research standards was an international, multidisciplinary team including Anthony Delitto, PT, PhD, FAPTA. Its findings have been published in leading pain journals. PTJ is among the first professional journals to share the report with its readers. Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting “responder analyses” in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement. Perspective: A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

scholarly journals Opioid Exposure Negatively Affects Antidepressant Response to Venlafaxine in Older Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain and Depression

Pain Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1538-1545
Author(s):  
Sarah T Stahl ◽  
Changgi Jung ◽  
Debra K Weiner ◽  
Marta Peciña ◽  
Jordan F Karp
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Stepped Care ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Pain Response ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Duration Of Treatment

Abstract Objective Serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are commonly co-prescribed with opioids for chronic pain. The purpose of this study was to describe pain and mood response to venlafaxine among older adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and depression relative to opioid exposure. Design Secondary analyses were collected from a randomized clinical trial testing a stepped-care approach to comorbid pain and depression in older patients: the Addressing Depression and Pain Together study (ADAPT: 2010–2016). Setting University-based late-life mental health research clinic. Subjects Two hundred twenty-seven adults aged 65+ years with CLBP and depression. Methods Participants received six weeks of lower-dose venlafaxine (≤150 mg/d). Pain and depression were measured each week. Response for both pain and depression at the end of six weeks was defined by a ≥30% improvement on a 0–20 numeric rating scale for low back pain and a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score ≤5. Opioid exposure was analyzed as prescribed (yes or no) and by morphine equivalent dosing (MED). Results Patients co-prescribed an opioid were less likely to report a pain response to venlafaxine. MED was negatively correlated with pain response. Depression response was not impacted. Conclusions Opioids are negatively associated with older adults’ early analgesic response to lower-dose venlafaxine. These findings suggest that clinicians may wish to consider either nonopioid or alternative antidepressant approaches to pain management in these complex patients. It is reassuring that opioids do not prevent depression response. Future research should examine both longer duration of treatment and a wider range of doses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document