scholarly journals Isokinetic Trunk Strength in Acute Low Back Pain Patients Compared to Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 2576
Author(s):  
Waleska Reyes-Ferrada ◽  
Luis Chirosa-Rios ◽  
Angela Rodriguez-Perea ◽  
Daniel Jerez-Mayorga ◽  
Ignacio Chirosa-Rios
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Reference Values ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Isokinetic Strength ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Trunk Strength

Background: The purpose of this systematic review was to: (I) determine the quality of evidence from studies assessing trunk isokinetic strength in subjects with acute low back pain (ALBP) compared to healthy subjects and (II) establish reference values of isokinetic trunk strength in subjects with ALBP. Methodology: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statements were followed using keywords associated with trunk, strength and low back pain. Four databases were used: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and SPORTDiscus. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). Results: A total of 1604 articles were retrieved, four included in this review. All were evaluated as high risk of bias (Rob). Due to the high Rob and the diversity of protocols, instruments and variables used, it was not possible to determine reference values for subjects with ALBP, we can only establish a range of flexion peak torque (PT) between 175.1 and 89.7 Nm at 60°/s and between 185 and 81.5 Nm at 120°/s, and for extension PT between 240.0 and 91.5 Nm at 60°/s and between 217.5 and 69.2 Nm at 120°/s in subjects with ALBP. Conclusions: Due to the low quality of the evidence and the diversity of protocols used when measuring trunk isokinetic strength, it is necessary to carry out new high-quality research to establish reference values of trunk strength in subjects with ALBP.

Comparison of quality of life in low back pain patients and healthy subjects by using WHOQOL-BREF

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Taghipour Darzi ◽  
Samaneh Pourhadi ◽  
Somayeh Hosseinzadeh ◽  
Mahmood Haji Ahmadi ◽  
Mohammad Dadian
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Patients

scholarly journals Summarizing the Effects of Different Exercise Types in Chronic Low Back Pain – A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilhelmus JA Grooten ◽  
Carina Boström ◽  
Åsa Stephansson Dedering ◽  
Marie Halvorsen ◽  
Roman P Kuster ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Exercise Therapy ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Moderate Evidence ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Review Of Reviews

Abstract Background Recently, a review of reviews concluded that exercise therapy of any type makes no difference to the effect on pain or disability in adult patients with acute low back pain (LBP). Whether this is also the case for exercise therapy in chronic LBP is still unknown. Objectives To summarize and synthesize systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) investigating the effects on pain and disability of common exercise types used in chronic LBP. Methods We included systematic reviews from several databases in which ≥ 75% of the studies were RCTs on adults between 18 and 70 years of age suffering from chronic or recurrent LBP for a period of at least 12 weeks. These were grouped into nine exercise types: Aerobic training, Aquatic exercises, Motor control exercises (MCE), Resistance training, Pilates, Sling exercises, Traditional Chinese Exercises (TCE), Walking, and Yoga. The study quality was assessed with AMSTAR-2. For each type of exercise, a narrative analysis was performed, and the levels of evidence for the effects of exercise were assessed through GRADE. Results The wide search resulted in 2,345 studies, and out of the 246 full texts that were screened, 41 SR/MA were included. Of these, 10 SR/MA were of high quality, 15 of moderate, 14 of low, and two of critically low quality. We found low to moderate evidence of mainly short-term and small beneficial effects on pain and disability for MCE, Resistance training, Pilates, TCE, and Yoga compared to no intervention. Few reviews were found for Aerobic, Aquatic, Sling, and Walking exercises, but with promising results. Aquatic exercises seem to be more beneficial compared to land exercises (low level of evidence). Conclusions In line with previous studies but in a broader perspective, this systematic review of reviews showed that there is low to moderate evidence that exercises are effective for reducing pain and disability compared to no or minimal interventions, but that no exercise type is more effective than other conservative interventions (very low to moderate evidence). Systematic review registration number PROSPERO: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=190409

scholarly journals Plausibility of Using a Checklist With YouTube to Facilitate the Discovery of Acute Low Back Pain Self-Management Content: Exploratory Study

10.2196/23366 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. e23366
Author(s):  
Andrey Zheluk ◽  
Jess Maddock
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Information Quality ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Management Intervention ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Youtube Videos

Background Access to guideline-consistent effective care for acute low back pain (ALBP) is generally regarded as limited. Researchers have recognized the potential of YouTube as a clinical and patient education resource that may improve access to appropriate care. However, the heterogeneity of evaluation approaches and variable quality of health information have generally limited the potential of YouTube as a self-management intervention. Objective This study aims to increase the understanding of ALBP content available on YouTube in 2020 and to establish the plausibility of using a simple checklist to facilitate the discovery of YouTube content consistent with current guidelines. We examined the following 4 research questions: how was the data set defined, what are the metadata characteristics of the videos in the data set, what is the information quality of ALBP YouTube videos, and what are the characteristics of the YouTube data set based on an ALBP self-management checklist? Methods This was an exploratory, qualitative infodemiology study. We identified videos in our data set through YouTube search based on popular ALBP-relevant search terms identified through Google Trends for YouTube. We accessed YouTube metadata using the YouTube data tools developed by the University of Amsterdam. We used a modified Brief DISCERN checklist to examine the information quality. We developed a checklist based on the 2018 Lancet Low Back Pain guidelines to examine self-management content. Results We analyzed a data set of 202 YouTube videos authored by chiropractors, physicians, physiotherapists, and instructors of yoga and other disciplines. We identified clear differences in the ALBP videos in our data set based on the authors’ disciplines. We found that the videos authored by each discipline strongly featured a specific intervention domain, that is, education, treatment, or exercise. We also found that videos authored by physicians were consistently coded with the highest ALBP self-management content scores than all other disciplines. Conclusions The results returned by YouTube in response to a search for back pain–related content were highly variable. We suggest that a simple checklist may facilitate the discovery of guideline-concordant ALBP self-management content on YouTube. Further research may identify the clinical contexts in which the use of an ALBP checklist with YouTube is feasible.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Pain Management Services for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of Published Studies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saja Almazrou ◽  
Rachel A Elliott ◽  
Roger D Knaggs ◽  
Shiekha S AlAujan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Management Services

Abstract Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a highly prevalent condition that has substantial impact on patients, the healthcare system and society. Pain management services (PMS), which aim to address the complex nature of back pain, are recommended in clinical practice guidelines to manage CLBP. Although the effectiveness of such services has been widely investigated in relation to CLBP, the quality of evidence underpinning the use of these services remains moderate. Therefore the aim is to summarize and critically appraise the current evidence for the cost effectiveness of pain management services for managing chronic back pain. Methods: Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from their inception to February 2019. Full economic evaluations undertaken from any perspective conducted alongside randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or based on decision analysis models were included. Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) risk assessment and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist were used to assess the methodological quality of eligible studies. Results: Five studies fulfilled eligibility criteria. The interventions varied significantly between studies in terms of the number and types of treatment modalities, intensity and the duration of the program. Interventions were compared with either standard care, which varied according to the country and the setting; or to surgical interventions. Three studies showed that pain management services are cost effective, while two studies showed that these services are not cost effective. In this review, three out of five studies had a high risk of bias based on the design of the randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In addition, there were limitations in the statistical and sensitivity analyses in the economic evaluations. Therefore, the results from these studies need to be interpreted with caution. Conclusion Pain management services may be cost effective for the management of low back pain. However, this systematic review highlights the variability of evidence supporting pain management services for patients with back pain. This is due to the quality of the published studies and the variability of the setting, interventions, comparators and outcomes.

scholarly journals Clinical evaluation and red flags of acute low back pain in primary care

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marwah Y. Abdullah ◽  
Reem A. Bana ◽  
Seham O. Aldogil ◽  
Mutlaq A. Alsolami ◽  
Reem A. Alshihri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Red Flags ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Primary Care Settings

Back pain has been reported as a common cause for various patients to present in an emergency or primary care settings. Besides, the management of back pain has been associated with a huge economic burden and remarkably impacts the quality of life of the affected patients. The diagnosis of acute low-back pain can be adequately achieved by conducting proper clinical evaluation and knowing the characteristics of each condition. The present review discusses the clinical evaluation and red flags for diagnosing patients presenting with acute low-back pain. An adequate examination of patients is conducted by obtaining a thorough history and successful physical examination. It should be noted that obtaining an adequate history might not be enough in some cases, and physical examination might not show any diagnostic clues. However, we also reported various red flags for detecting serious conditions, including malignancy, infections, inflammation, and others. These might help establish a further assessment of these patients, including imaging and laboratory studies. Therefore, these cases should be managed as early as possible to enhance the prognosis and intervene against any potential complications. 

Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute low back pain: systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justine Binny ◽  
Ngar Lok Joshua Wong ◽  
Shirali Garga ◽  
Chung-Wei Christine Lin ◽  
Chris G. Maher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Electric Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Quality Evidence

Abstract Background and aims There has been no comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute low back pain (LBP). The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of TENS for acute LBP. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO (inception to May 2018) for randomised placebo controlled trials. The primary outcome measure was pain relief in the immediate term (within 2-weeks of administration) assessed using the 100 mm visual analogue scale. A mean difference of at least 10 points on the 100-point pain scale was considered clinically significant. Methodological quality of the eligible studies was assessed using the PEDro scale and overall quality assessment rating was assessed using GRADE. Results Three placebo controlled studies (n = 192) were included. One low quality trial (n = 63) provides low quality evidence that ~30 min treatment with TENS in an emergency-care setting provides clinically worthwhile pain relief for moderate to severe acute LBP in the immediate term compared with sham TENS [Mean Difference (MD) – 28.0 (95% CI – 32.7, −23.3)]. Two other studies which administered a course of TENS over 4–5 weeks, in more usual settings provide inconclusive evidence; MD −2.75 (95% CI −11.63, 6.13). There was limited data on adverse events or long term follow-up. Conclusions The current evidence is insufficient to support or dismiss the use of TENS for acute LBP. Implications There is insufficient evidence to guide the use of TENS for acute LBP. There is low quality evidence of moderate improvements in pain with a short course of TENS (~30 min) during emergency transport of patients to the hospital. Future research should evaluate whether TENS has an opioid sparing role in the management of acute LBP.

Influence of Frailty Status on Pain, Disability, and Quality of Life in Older Adults with Acute Low Back Pain: Results from the Back Complaints in the Elders (BACE-Brazil) Study

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
A.A.O. Leopoldino ◽  
R.Z. Megale ◽  
J.B.M. Diz ◽  
B.S. Moreira ◽  
D.C. Felício ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Frailty Status ◽  
Acute Low Back Pain ◽  
Using Data

ABSTRACT A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from a prospective cohort study to investigate whether frailty is associated with pain intensity, disability caused by low back pain (LBP), and quality of life in an older population with acute non-specific LBP. Six hundred and two individuals with a mean age of 67.6 (standard deviation [SD] 7.0) years were included in the analysis. In relation to frailty status, 21.3 per cent of the sample were classified as robust, 59.2 per cent were classified as pre-frail, and 19.5 per cent were classified as frail. In the unadjusted analysis, pre-frail and frail groups showed significantly higher pain and disability scores than the robust group. Moreover, the same two groups exhibited lower scores in both physical and mental domains of quality of life than the robust group. After adjusting for socio-demographic and clinical variables, disability scores and the physical component of quality of life were significantly associated with frailty. In older adults with acute LBP, frailty is associated with more disability and worse scores in the physical component of quality of life.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document