Hip and Lumbar Spine Physical Examination Findings in People Presenting With Low Back Pain, With or Without Lower Extremity Pain

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Prather ◽  
Abby Cheng ◽  
Karen Steger-May ◽  
Vaibhav Maheshwari ◽  
Linda Van Dillen
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain

scholarly journals High prevalence of low back pain among young basketball players with lower extremity pain: a cross-sectional study

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yutaka Yabe ◽  
Yoshihiro Hagiwara ◽  
Takuya Sekiguchi ◽  
Haruki Momma ◽  
Masahiro Tsuchiya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Basketball Players ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain ◽  
High Prevalence

scholarly journals Systematic Review of Effectiveness and Complications of Adhesiolysis in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: An Update

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 129-146
Author(s):  
Andrea M Trescot
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain

Background: Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis are interventional pain management techniques used to treat patients with refractory low back pain due to epidural scarring. Standard epidural steroid injections are often ineffective, especially in patients with prior back surgery. Adhesions in the epidural space can prevent the flow of medicine to the target area; lysis of these adhesions can improve the delivery of medication to the affected areas, potentially improving the therapeutic efficacy of the injected medications. Study Design: A systematic review utilizing the methodologic quality criteria of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials and the criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials. Objective: To evaluate and update the effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain due to radiculopathy, with or without prior lumbar surgery, since the 2005 systematic review. Methods: Basic search identified the relevant literature, in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BioMed databases (November 2004 to September 2006). Manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and abstracts from scientific meetings within the last 2 years were reviewed. Randomized and non-randomized studies are included in the review based on criteria established. Percutaneous adhesiolysis and endoscopic adhesiolysis are analyzed separately. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was significant pain relief (50% or greater). Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. Short-term relief was defined as less than 3 months, and long-term relief was defined as 3 months or longer. Results: Studies regarding the treatment of epidural adhesions for the treatment of low back and lower extremity pain were sought and reviewed. The evidence from the previous systematic review was combined with new studies since November 2004. There is strong evidence for short term and moderate evidence for long term effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopy. Conclusion: Percutaneous adhesiolysis and spinal endoscopy may be effective interventions to treat low back and lower extremity pain caused by epidural adhesions. Key Words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, percutaneous adhesiolysis, spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, spinal stenosis, post lumbar laminectomy syndrome, epidural fibrosis, epidural adhesions, caudal neuroplasty.

Landing Stiffness Between Individuals With and Without a History of Low Back Pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Sutherlin ◽  
L. Colby Mangum ◽  
Shawn Russell ◽  
Susan Saliba ◽  
Jay Hertel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Joint Stiffness ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Vertical Stiffness ◽  
Landing Mechanics ◽  
History Of

Context: Reduced spinal stabilization, delayed onset of muscle activation, and increased knee joint stiffness have been reported in individuals with a history of low back pain (LBP). Biomechanical adaptations resulting from LBP may increase the risk for future injury due to suboptimal loading of the lower-extremity or lumbar spine. Assessing landing mechanics in these individuals could help identify which structures might be susceptible to future injury. Objective: To compare vertical and joint stiffness of the lower-extremity and lumbar spine between individuals with and without a previous history of LBP. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Research laboratory. Participants: There were 45 participants (24 without a previous history of LBP—age 23 [8] y, height 169.0 [8.5] cm, mass 69.8 [13.8] kg; 21 with a previous history of LBP—age 25[9] y, height 170.0 [8.0] cm, mass 70.2 [11.8] kg). Interventions: Single-limb landing trials on the dominant and nondominant limb from a 30-cm box. Main Outcome Measures: Vertical stiffness and joint stiffness of the ankle, knee, hip, and lumbar spine. Results: Individuals with a previous history of LBP had lower vertical stiffness (P = .04), but not joint stiffness measures compared with those without a previous history of LBP (P > .05). Overall females had lower vertical (P = .01), ankle (P = .02), and hip stiffness (P = .04) compared with males among all participants. Males with a previous history of LBP had lower vertical stiffness compared with males without a previous history LBP (P = .01). Among all individuals without a previous history of LBP, females had lower vertical (P < .01) and ankle stiffness measures (P = .04) compared with males. Conclusions: Landing stiffness may differ among males and females and a previous history of LBP. Comparisons between individuals with and without previous LBP should be considered when assessing landing strategies, and future research should focus on how LBP impacts landing mechanics.

scholarly journals Differences in lumbar spine and lower extremity kinematics in people with and without low back pain during a step-up task: a cross-sectional study

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Mitchell ◽  
Madeline Porter ◽  
Lauren Anderson ◽  
Carter Phillips ◽  
Grayson Arceo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

scholarly journals POS1289 CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN: THERAPEUTIC STRATEGIES AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN A MILITARY POPULATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 926.2-926
Author(s):  
R. Dhahri ◽  
A. Dghaies ◽  
M. Slouma ◽  
L. Metoui ◽  
I. Gharsallah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Abdominal Muscles ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
The Impact

Background:Low back pain is an extremely common patient complaint. Most cases resolve quickly after the acute episode. However, a significant number of patients develop chronic low back pain; a persistent disabling condition. Patients suffer from unremitting pain and often become functionally impaired.Objectives:The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics of chronic LBP, physical examination abnormalities, treatment strategies and the impact of LBP on the professional life of the patients.Methods:It was a an analytical cross-sectional study including 50 patients with at least three months of LBP, in the department of rheumatology and orthopedics at the Military Hospital of Tunis between January 1st and March 31, 2020. All patients had a standardized investigation and clinical assessment.Results:The study included 80% of active military serving members and 20% of administrative officers. The mean age of the patients was 41.9 ± 8.4 years and the sex ratio was 4.5. Four patients were suffering from diabetes; two patients were suffering from high blood pressure. All the patients were suffering from chronic LBP lasting for an average of 66.4 months. LBP was associated with radicular pain in 78% of the cases. It was a unilateral radicular pain in 72% of the cases and bilateral in 28% of the cases. The main triggering factors were: carrying heavy loads in 98% of the cases, standing or sitting for long periods in 90% and 76% of the cases, tremors in 74% of the cases. Neuropathic pain was found in 26% of patients. Physical examination showed paravertebral muscle tenderness in 66% of the cases and slack abdominal muscles in 56% of the cases. Assessement of range of flexion of the lumbar spine showed: fingertip to floor test was 18 ±12.2 cm [054cm], schober test was +3.8±1.2cm [16cm]. The extension of lumbar spine was painful in 80% of the cases. A trigger point was found in 28% of the cases. Lasegue sign was positive in 18% of the cases. Leri’s test was positive in 8% of the cases. Required treatments during the last episode of LBP were: Paracetamol (62%), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (26%), tramadol (4%), myorelaxant (4%) and pregabalin (2%). Half of the patients needed functional rehabilitation. Forty percent of the patients reported improvement; 46% of them reported improvement then recurrence of the pain, 8% of them reported no improvement and 4% reported worsening of the symptoms. Thirty six percent of the patients needed an average of 21 days of leave and 35% of them needed exemption from work for LBP problems. One patient needed an outplacement from his original work and one patient needed an early retirement.Conclusion:Chronic low back pain can cause significant functional disability, and commonly becomes frustrating for both patients and physicians to cope with and treat. There is still no consensus on the best way to manage chronic low back pain, and clinical guidelines are scarce. A combination of pharmacological agents and non-pharmacological methods is the most appropriate therapeutic regimen.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Application of X STOP Device in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

2010 ◽  
Vol 5;13 (5;9) ◽  
pp. E27-E336
Author(s):  
Xiaobin Yi
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Intermittent Claudication ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Neurogenic Intermittent Claudication ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Low back pain is exceptionally ubiquitous, complex, and costly. Nevertheless, lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with neurogenic intermittent claudication (NIC) is a frequent cause of low back and lower extremity pain. Although the phenomena and pathophisiology of lumbar spinal stenosis has been described for decades, therapeutic treatment options remain considerably limited. Current care consists of conservative measures including physical therapy, rest, medications, and epidural steroid injection therapy or invasive surgical treatment including laminectomy with or without fusion. Despite standard of care intervention, many patients are often left inadequately treated and suffer from debilitating low back and lower extremity pain as a result of lumbar spinal stenosis. Interspinous process distraction (IPD) devices were originally described in the 1950s, but technological advances, which have contributed to improved safety and efficacy, have rekindled an interest in IPD implantation. By mimicking lumbar flexion at affected levels of stenosis, it is thought these devices decompress neural structures within the neural foramina and therefore provide pain relief. X-STOP is one such device that is currently approved in the United States for the treatment of mild to moderate NIC resulting from LSS. This manuscript presents a focused review of NIC and LSS and comprehensively presents literature related to the use of the X-STOP IPD device. Key words: Interspinous process distraction (IPD), X STOP, interspinous spacer (ISS), lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), neurogenic intermittent claudication (NIC), low back pain, sciatica

scholarly journals Mechanism of low back pain and lower extremity pain.

1985 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 383-391
Author(s):  
Katsumasa Fujikawa
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document