Mechanisms-based classifications of musculoskeletal pain: part 3 of 3: symptoms and signs of nociceptive pain in patients with low back (± leg) pain

Effect of pain neuroscience education+ (PNE+) in people with different mechanisms of chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain poses a multifaceted and prevalent challenge that significantly affects an individual's quality of life. Sensory mechanisms, behavioural components (kinesiophobia and catastrophising), and social factors can influence pain perception in both younger and older populations. Moreover, the mechanisms underlying these altered pain phenotypes require further investigation in order to plan appropriate treatment. While Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) has proven effective in managing chronic pain and previous research has been conducted on PNE physiotherapeutic techniques, there remains insufficient evidence on the efficacy of these adjunctive treatments.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence for the efficacy of PNE + PT (PNE+) on pain as a primary outcome and 12 other psychosocial variables as secondary outcomes in patients with different pain mechanisms, and whether PNE+ could be applied to painful diabetic neuropathy.

METHODS

A thorough literature search was conducted in the database Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, ScienceDirect, CINAHL, and Web of Science, using keywords like "Pain Neuroscience Education", and "Chronic Pain" from 2010 to 2024 based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty of the 2558 studies that underwent screening qualified for a meta-analysis and 24 of them for a systematic review. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 was used to assess the quality of the studies. Forest plots were generated using the Revman 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Studies that predominantly addressed central sensitization and neuropathic pain demonstrated moderate-to good-quality evidence. The review findings indicate that PNE+ is effective in reducing experienced pain intensity and experienced pain interference on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS: SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.14), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS SMD -1.71, 95% CI -2.34 to -1.08), reduced kinesiophobia (Tampa scale of Kinesiophobia: SMD -5.29, 95% CI -7.33 to -3.25), and catastrophizing (pain catastrophizing scale: -3.82, 95% CI -6.44 to -1.21).

CONCLUSION

PNE + has been found to be an effective intervention for reducing perceived pain experience, pain interference and other psychosocial variables in the management of chronic pain with different pain mechanisms. Most studies have focused on central sensitization, urging future research to explore PNE+ efficacy in neuropathic pain, such as painful diabetic neuropathy.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023451101.

Classifying Low Back Pain Through Pain Mechanisms: A Scoping Review for Physiotherapy Practice

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability worldwide, often driven by distinct pain mechanisms: nociceptive, neuropathic, and central sensitization. Accurate classification of these mechanisms is critical for guiding effective, targeted treatments. Methods: A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, PEDro, and Web of Science. Eligible studies included adults with LBP and focused on clinical criteria for classifying pain mechanisms. Data on study methods, population characteristics, and outcomes were extracted and synthesized. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Nociceptive pain was characterized by localized symptoms proportional to mechanical triggers, with no neurological signs. Neuropathic pain was associated with burning sensations, dysaesthesia, and a positive neurodynamic straight leg raise (SLR) test. Central sensitization featured widespread pain, hyperalgesia, and disproportionate symptoms. Tools such as painDETECT, DN4, and the Central Sensitisation Inventory (CSI) were validated for neuropathic and central sensitization pain. Central sensitization and neuropathic pain were linked to greater disability and psychological distress compared to nociceptive pain. Conclusions: This review aims to provide a historical perspective on pain mechanism classifications and to explore how previous frameworks have influenced current diagnostic concepts in physiotherapy practice. By synthesizing key clinical criteria used to differentiate between nociceptive, neuropathic, and central sensitization pain, this review proposes a practical framework to improve the accuracy of pain classification in clinical settings.

Lower limb acute onset muscle pain: what do we have to look for? A case of isolated rupture of the rectus femoris

Acute muscle pain is muscle soreness that occurs during or within 24 hours of strenuous activity. Possible causes of acute muscle pain include localized muscle trauma, muscle tear, contusion with acute hemorrhage, or acute compartment syndrome. Isolated ruptures of the rectus femoris muscle are rare clinical conditions that result from excessive muscle strain following an abrupt contraction, incorrect movement, or sudden snap that exceeds the physiological limit of strain that the muscle can withstand. To date, there are few published reports evaluating the results of non-invasive treatment of such injuries. Herein, we report an unusual case of isolated distal rectus femoris tear in a 46-year-old female patient with no risk factors, who initially presented with extensor muscle weakness and pain and was treated conservatively with functional rest, physiotherapy, and cryotherapy.

Pain Neuroscience Education for Acute Pain

In musculoskeletal and sports medicine, pain has traditionally been linked to tissue injury, often assuming a linear correlation between tissue damage and pain intensity. However, modern pain science has illuminated the complexity of the human pain experience, incorporating psychosocial elements, nervous system sensitization, immune responses, and structural changes in the brain as factors. This contemporary understanding of pain has proven highly beneficial for both clinicians treating individuals in pain and those experiencing pain. Pain neuroscience education (PNE) provides individuals in pain with an understanding of the underlying neurobiology and neurophysiology of their pain experience, which has been shown to result in decreased self-reported pain, reduced disability, the alleviation of fear and fear-avoidance behaviors, diminished pain catastrophizing, and improved movement. Currently, research on PNE predominantly focuses on interventions with individuals with persistent or chronic pain conditions. However, those who experience acute, sub-acute, and perioperative pain also have the potential for elevated levels of fear, fear-avoidance, and pain catastrophizing, indicating potential benefits from PNE. This invited commentary seeks to inform readers about the latest advancements in pain science and propose a conceptual model for delivering PNE in acute pain experiences.

Level of Evidence

5.

Understanding How Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy Make Sense of and Cope With Their Symptoms

Lumbar radiculopathy, characterized by pain radiating along a nerve root, significantly diminishes the quality of life due to its neuropathic nature. Patients' understanding of their illness and the coping strategies they employ directly influence how they manage their condition. Understanding these illness representations from the patient's perspective is crucial for healthcare providers seeking to optimize treatment outcomes. This study adopted a qualitative interpretive/constructive paradigm to explore this dynamic. A qualitative evidence synthesis approach, utilizing best-fit framework synthesis for data extraction, was applied to analyze primary qualitative studies focused on patient experiences with lumbar radiculopathy. Using SPiDER (Sample, Phenomenon of interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type) to guide the search strategy, extracted data was mapped against the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM) framework. Sixteen studies, with moderate to minor methodological quality concerns, were included in the analysis. Data mapping across CSM domains generated 14 key review findings. Results suggest that patients with high-threat illness representations often exhibit maladaptive coping behaviors (e.g., activity avoidance) driven by emotional responses. In contrast, problem-solving techniques appear to contribute to positive outcomes (e.g., exercise adherence and effective self-management) in patients who perceive their condition as less threatening. These findings highlight the potential benefits of interventions designed to reduce perceived threat levels and enhance self-efficacy in patients with lumbar radiculopathy, leading to improved self-management and ultimately better health outcomes.

The Role of Back Muscle Dysfunctions in Chronic Low Back Pain: State-of-the-Art and Clinical Implications

Changes in back muscle function and structure are highly prevalent in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Since large heterogeneity in clinical presentation and back muscle dysfunctions exists within this population, the potential role of back muscle dysfunctions in the persistence of low back pain differs between individuals. Consequently, interventions should be tailored to the individual patient and be based on a thorough clinical examination taking into account the multidimensional nature of CLBP. Considering the complexity of this process, we will provide a state-of-the-art update on back muscle dysfunctions in patients with CLBP and their implications for treatment. To this end, we will first give an overview of (1) dysfunctions in back muscle structure and function, (2) the potential of exercise therapy to address these dysfunctions, and (3) the relationship between changes in back muscle dysfunctions and clinical parameters. In a second part, we will describe a framework for an individualised approach for back muscle training in patients with CLBP.

Care for the patient with low back pain

ABSTRACT

Low back pain (LBP) continues to be one of the most common conditions leading patients to seek medical care globally. The NP is on the frontline, playing an integral role in caring for patients with LBP. Understanding the etiology of LBP is essential in the treatment.

The Biology of Chronic Pain and Its Implications for Pain Neuroscience Education: State of the Art

Pain is an individualized experience for the person suffering from chronic pain. Significant strides have been made in the last few decades in understanding various biological changes that coincide with chronic pain. This state-of-the-art overview looks at the current evidence related to the biology of chronic pain and the implications these findings have on the delivery of pain neuroscience education (PNE). The paper summarizes the various (epi)genetic, neural, endocrine, and immune factors discovered and explored in the scientific literature concerning chronic pain. Each of these biological factors has various implications for the content and delivery of PNE. We discuss the future directions these biological factors have for the clinical implementation of PNE by linking the importance of behavior change, optimizing the learning environment, and using an individualized multimodal treatment approach with PNE. In addition, future directions for research of PNE based on these biological factors are provided with importance placed on individualized patient-centered care and how PNE can be used with traditional modes of care and growing trends with other care methods. PNE was originally and continues to be rooted in understanding chronic pain biology and how that understanding can improve patient care and outcomes.

The Pain Intensity/Quality and Pain Site Association with Muscle Activity and Muscle Activity Distribution in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: Using a Generalized Linear Mixed Model Analysis

Background

Pain can alter muscle activity, although it is not clear how pain intensity and site location affect muscle activity. This study aimed to reveal the complex associations among the pain site, pain intensity/quality, muscle activity, and muscle activity distribution.

Methods

Electromyographic signals were recorded from above a bilateral lumbar erector spinae muscle with a four-channel electrode in 23 patients with chronic low back pain while they performed a lumbar bending and returning task. We calculated the average value of muscle activity during the extension phase (agonist activity) and the centroid of muscle activity, as well as the distance between the centroid of muscle activity and pain site. We also assessed the pain site and pain intensity/quality by the interview and questionnaire method. A generalized linear mixed model analysis was performed to determine the relationships among pain intensity/quality, pain site, and muscle activity.

Results

The results showed that muscle activity during the extension phase was significantly negatively associated with neuropathic pain and “pain caused by light touch.” In addition, the distance between the centroid of muscle activity and pain site during the extension phase was significantly positively associated with intermittent pain, “throbbing pain,” “splitting pain,” “punishing-cruel,” and “pain caused by light touch.”

Conclusions

Our findings suggest the existence of a motor adaptation that suppresses muscle activity near the painful area as the pain intensity increases. Furthermore, the present study indicates that the presence or absence of this motor adaptation depended on the pain quality.

Characterisation of motor cortex organisation in patients with different presentations of persistent low back pain

Persistence of low back pain is thought to be associated with different underlying pain mechanisms, including ongoing nociceptive input and central sensitisation. We hypothesised that primary motor cortex (M1) representations of back muscles (a measure of motor system adaptation) would differ between pain mechanisms, with more consistent observations in individuals presumed to have an ongoing contribution of nociceptive input consistently related to movement/posture. We tested 28 participants with low back pain sub-grouped by the presumed underlying pain mechanisms: nociceptive pain, nociplastic pain and a mixed group with features consistent with both. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to study M1 organisation of back muscles. M1 maps of multifidus (deep and superficial) and longissimus erector spinae were recorded with fine-wire electromyography and thoracic erector spinae with surface electromyography. The nociplastic pain group had greater variability in M1 map location (centre of gravity) than other groups (p < .01), which may suggest less consistency, and perhaps relevance, of motor cortex adaptation for that group. The mixed group had greater overlap of M1 representations between deep/superficial muscles than nociceptive pain (deep multifidus/longissimus: p = .001, deep multifidus/thoracic erector spinae: p = .008) and nociplastic pain (deep multifidus/longissimus: p = .02, deep multifidus/thoracic erector spinae: p = .02) groups. This study provides preliminary evidence of differences in M1 organisation in subgroups of low back pain classified by likely underlying pain mechanisms. Despite the sample size, differences in cortical re-organisation between subgroups were detected. Differences in M1 organisation in subgroups of low back pain supports tailoring of treatment based on pain mechanism and motor adaptation.

Applicability of pain neuroscience education: Where are we now?

BACKGROUND

Explaining pain to patients through pain neuroscience education (PNE) is currently a widespread treatment studied in the musculoskeletal context. Presently, there is sufficient evidence supporting the effectiveness of PNE in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. However, clinicians must pay attention to the actual possibility to transfer research findings in their specific clinical context.

OBJECTIVE

We analysed the applicability of results of studies focused on PNE, which has not been done previously.

METHODS

A detailed discussion on PNE applicability is provided, starting from published randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of PNE.

RESULTS

This paper markedly points out the awareness of clinicians on the need for an accurate contextualization when choosing PNE as an intervention in clinical practice.

"How does physical examination findings influence physiotherapists' decision-making when matching treatment to patients with low back pain?"

BACKGROUND

Further clinical data how low-back pain (LBP) symptoms and signs manifests in physiotherapy clinical reasoning and treatment decision-making is needed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to explore and describe how symptoms and signs portrayed in three case descriptions of LBP influences physiotherapy treatment decision-making.

DESIGN

This was an exploratory interview study using inductive content analysis.

METHOD

Fifteen semi-structured individual interviews were used to collect data of physiotherapists' treatment decision-making regrading three diverse LBP case descriptions. The participants were men, women, experienced and novice, working in primary healthcare settings in one sparsely populated region and in one larger city in Sweden.

FINDINGS

Two overarching themes were identified influencing decision-making for the treatment of LBP:1) Explicit assessment features distinguish treatment approaches; with categories describing how symptoms and signs were used to target treatment (nature of pain induce reflections on plausible cause; narrative details trigger attention and establishes knowledge-enhancing foci; pain-movement-relationship is essential; diverse emphasis of pain modulation and targeted treatment approaches): and 2) Preconceived notion of treatment, with categories describing personal treatment rationales, unrelated to the presented symptoms and signs (passive treatment avoidance and motor control exercise ambiguity).

CONCLUSION

This study identifies how assessment details lead to decisions on diverse treatment approaches for LBP, but also that treatment decisions can be based on preconceived beliefs unrelated to the clinical presentation. The results underpin the mix of knowledge sources that clinicians need to balance and the necessity of self-awareness of preconceptions for informed and meaningful clinical decision-making.

Methods to discriminate between mechanism-based categories of pain experienced in the musculoskeletal system: a systematic review

ABSTRACT

Mechanism-based classification of pain has been advocated widely to aid tailoring of interventions for individuals experiencing persistent musculoskeletal pain. Three pain mechanism categories (PMCs) are defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, and nociplastic pain. Discrimination between them remains challenging. This study aimed to build on a framework developed to converge the diverse literature of PMCs to systematically review methods purported to discriminate between them; synthesise and thematically analyse these methods to identify the convergence and divergence of opinion; and report validation, psychometric properties, and strengths/weaknesses of these methods. The search strategy identified articles discussing methods to discriminate between mechanism-based categories of pain experienced in the musculoskeletal system. Studies that assessed the validity of methods to discriminate between categories were assessed for quality. Extraction and thematic analysis were undertaken on 184 articles. Data synthesis identified 200 methods in 5 themes: clinical examination, quantitative sensory testing, imaging, diagnostic and laboratory testing, and pain-type questionnaires. Few methods have been validated for discrimination between PMCs. There was general convergence but some disagreement regarding findings that discriminate between PMCs. A combination of features and methods, rather than a single method, was generally recommended to discriminate between PMCs. Two major limitations were identified: an overlap of findings of methods between categories due to mixed presentations and many methods considered discrimination between 2 PMCs but not others. The results of this review provide a foundation to refine methods to differentiate mechanisms for musculoskeletal pain.

Female Overrepresentation in Low Back-Related Leg Pain: A Retrospective Study of the Autonomic Response to a Minimally Invasive Procedure

Background

The newly proposed low back pain treatment requires case classification according to the pain mechanism (nociceptive, neuropathic or nociplastic) to determine the most effective therapeutic approach. However, there is a lack of objective tools for distinguishing these pain mechanisms. The aim of the study was to identify which symptoms, signs, and standard diagnostic parameters would allow predicting the nociplastic pain (NP) subtype among low back leg pain (LBLP) patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of an LBLP case–control study database was carried out. The presence of NP was assumed if the patient presented with myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and developed a short-term intensive vasodilatation reaction in the perceived lower leg pain area after provocation by a minimally invasive procedure. Clinical data and standard LBLP diagnostic parameters were analyzed to classify patients as NP (+) vs NP (-). Next, to predict NP probability, logistic regression analysis and a diagnostic classification tree were constructed.

Results

NP was confirmed in 43.75% of LBLP patients. Women represented 95.24% of all NP (+) patients. The diagnostic classification tree indicated that NP was highly probable if the LBLP subject was female and the result of a positive straight leg raise (SLR) test was lower than 45 degrees. If the SLR test result was greater than or equal to 45 degrees, a negative result on the Bragard test would have diagnostic value. This classification tree was approved to a certain extent in the logistic regression model (deviance residuals, min: −1.8519; 1Q: −0.5551; median: −0.1907; 3Q: 0.6565 and max: 2.1058) but should be verified in a larger group of subjects.

Conclusion

Female sex, but not clinical data or standard diagnostic parameters, is indicative of nociplastic pain in LBLP patients. More sophisticated statistical methods, based on directly measurable parameters, should be proposed to distinguish NP involvement in LBLP.

The why, where, and how clinical reasoning model for the evaluation and treatment of patients with low back pain

BACKGROUND

There is considerable overlap between pain referral patterns from the lumbar disc, lumbar facets, the sacroiliac joint (SIJ), and the hip. Additionally, sciatic like symptoms may originate from the lumbar spine or secondary to extra-spinal sources such as deep gluteal syndrome (GPS). Given that there are several overlapping potential anatomic sources of symptoms that may be synchronous in patients who have low back pain (LBP), it may not be realistic that a linear deductive approach can be used to establish a diagnosis and direct treatment in this group of patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this theoretical clinical reasoning model is to provide a framework to help clinicians integrate linear and non-linear clinical reasoning approaches to minimize clinical reasoning errors related to logically fallacious thinking and cognitive biases.

METHODS

This masterclass proposes a hypothesis-driven and probabilistic approach that uses clinical reasoning for managing LBP that seeks to eliminate the challenges related to using any single diagnostic paradigm.

CONCLUSIONS

This model integrates the why (mechanism of primary symptoms), where (location of the primary driver of symptoms), and how (impact of mechanical input and how it may or may not modulate the patient's primary complaint). The integration of these components individually, in serial, or simultaneously may help to develop clinical reasoning through reflection on and in action. A better understanding of what these concepts are and how they are related through the proposed model may help to improve the clinical conversation, academic application of clinical reasoning, and clinical outcomes.

Evaluating sensory profiles in nociplastic chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional validation study

BACKGROUND

Sensory profiles (SPs) may be useful in classifying patients based on sensory sensitivity and behavioral responses to stimuli to develop personalized treatments for nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP). The Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (AASP) identifies four sensitivity and behavioral response-related quadrants: Sensory Sensitive, Sensation Avoiding, Low Registration, and Sensation Seeking. It is an appropriate questionnaire for evaluating SPs; however, it has not been validated in CLBP.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, agreement, and construct validity of the AASP in a CLBP population with nociplastic pain in primary care physiotherapy.

DESIGN

Two evaluations were performed at a 2-week interval in this non-experimental cross-sectional study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with CLBP.

METHODS

Questionnaires were used to compare outcomes with the AASP. Reliability was evaluated by assessing internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was evaluated in response to the a priori hypothesis.

RESULTS

Ninety patients with CLBP were included. Internal consistency was excellent for all SPs (Cronbach's alpha, 0.91-0.92). Test-retest reliability Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC (3,2)) 0.82-0.87, for the SPs (95% CI 0.74-0.91, p< .001). Construct validity correlated positively with Low Registration, Sensory Sensitive, and Sensation Avoiding and negatively with Sensation Seeking.

CONCLUSION

The AASP is suitable for evaluating SPs in primary care CLBP patients.

Current Evidence for Diagnosis of Common Conditions Causing Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Standardized Terminology Recommendations

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize current evidence for diagnosis of common conditions causing low back pain and to propose standardized terminology use.

METHODS

A systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted from inception through December 2018. Electronic databases searched included PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Index to Chiropractic Literature. Methodological quality was assessed with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists.

RESULTS

Of the 3995 articles screened, 36 (8 systematic reviews and 28 individual studies) met final eligibility criteria. Diagnostic criteria for identifying likely discogenic, sacroiliac joint, and zygapophyseal (facet) joint pain are supported by clinical studies using injection-confirmed tissue provocation or anesthetic procedures. Diagnostic criteria for myofascial pain, sensitization (central and peripheral), and radicular pain are supported by expert consensus-level evidence. Criteria for radiculopathy and neurogenic claudication are supported by studies using combined expert-level consensus and imaging findings.

CONCLUSION

The absence of high-quality, objective, gold-standard diagnostic methods limits the accuracy of current evidence-based criteria and results in few high-quality studies with a low risk of bias in patient selection and reference standard diagnosis. These limitations suggest practitioners should use evidence-based criteria to inform working diagnoses rather than definitive diagnoses for low back pain. To avoid the unnecessary complexity and confusion created by multiple overlapping and nonspecific terms, adopting International Association for the Study of Pain terminology and definitions is recommended.

Development of an Evidence-Based Practical Diagnostic Checklist and Corresponding Clinical Exam for Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to use scientific evidence to develop a practical diagnostic checklist and corresponding clinical exam for patients presenting with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

An iterative process was conducted to develop a diagnostic checklist and clinical exam for LBP using evidence-based diagnostic criteria. The checklist and exam were informed by a systematic review focused on summarizing current research evidence for office-based clinical evaluation of common conditions causing LBP.

RESULTS

Diagnostic categories contained within the checklist and exam include nociceptive pain, neuropathic pain, and sensitization. Nociceptive pain subcategories include discogenic, myofascial, sacroiliac, and zygapophyseal (facet) joint pain. Neuropathic pain categories include neurogenic claudication, radicular pain, radiculopathy, and peripheral entrapment (piriformis and thoracolumbar syndrome). Sensitization contains 2 subtypes, central and peripheral sensitization. The diagnostic checklist contains individual diagnostic categories containing evidence-based criteria, applicable examination procedures, and checkboxes to record clinical findings. The checklist organizes and displays evidence for or against a working diagnosis. The checklist may help to ensure needed information is obtained from a patient interview and exam in a variety of primary spine care settings (eg, medical, chiropractic).

CONCLUSION

The available evidence informs reasonable working diagnoses for many conditions causing or contributing to LBP. A practical diagnostic process including an exam and checklist is offered to guide clinical evaluation and demonstrate evidence for working diagnoses in clinical settings.

Effects of pulsed low-frequency magnetic field therapy on pain intensity in patients with musculoskeletal chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of pulsed low-frequency magnetic field (PLFMF) on the management of chronic low back pain (CLBP).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A randomised double-blinded controlled clinical trial will be conducted, involving 200 patients with CLBP. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either active PLFMF (experimental arm) or sham treatment (control arm) using a permuted-block design which will be stratified according to three subtypes of musculoskeletal CLBP (nociceptive, peripheral neuropathic or central sanitisation). The intervention consists of three sessions/week for 6 weeks. The primary outcome is the percentage change in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain at week 24 after treatment completion with respect to the baseline. Secondary outcomes include percentage NRS pain during treatment and early after treatment completion, short form 36 quality of life, Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire; Depression Anxiety Stress Scale 21, Patient Specific Functional Scale, Global perceived effect of condition change, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Modified Fatigue Impact Scale. Measures will be taken at baseline, 3 and 6 weeks during the intervention and 6, 12 and 24 weeks after completing the intervention. Adverse events between arms will be evaluated. Data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is funded by Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU). It has been approved by the institutional review board of IAU (IRB- 2017-03-129). The study will be conducted at King Fahd Hospital of the University and will be monitored by the Hospital monitoring office for research and research ethics. The trial is scheduled to begin in September 2018. Results obtained will be presented in international conferences and will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12618000921280, prospectively.

Analysis of Motor Control in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Key to Personalized Care?

SYNOPSIS

Motor control exercise has been shown to be effective in the management of low back pain (LBP). However, the effect sizes for motor control exercise are modest, possibly because studies have used a one-size-fits-all approach, while the literature suggests that patients may differ in presence or type of motor control issues. In this commentary, we address the question of whether consideration of such variation in motor control issues might contribute to more personalized motor control exercise for patients with LBP. Such an approach is plausible, because motor control changes may play a role in persistence of pain through effects on tissue loading that may cause nociceptive afference, particularly in the case of peripheral sensitization. Subgrouping systems used in clinical practice, which comprise motor control aspects, allow reliable classification that is, in part, aligned with findings in studies on motor control in patients with LBP. Motor control issues may have heuristic value for treatment allocation, as the different presentations observed suggest different targets for motor control exercise, but this remains to be proven. Finally, clinical assessment of patients with LBP should take into account more aspects than motor control alone, including pain mechanisms, musculoskeletal health, and psychosocial factors, and may need to be embedded in a stratification approach based on prognosis to avoid undue diagnostic procedures. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):380-388. Epub 12 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.7916.

Diverse Role of Biological Plasticity in Low Back Pain and Its Impact on Sensorimotor Control of the Spine

Pain is complex. It is no longer acceptable to consider pain solely as a peripheral phenomenon involving activation of nociceptive neurons. The contemporary understanding of pain involves consideration of different underlying pain mechanisms and an increasing awareness of plasticity in all of the biological systems. Of note, recent advances in technology and understanding have highlighted the critical importance of neuroimmune interactions, both in the peripheral and central nervous systems, and the interaction between the nervous system and body tissues in the development and maintenance of pain, including low back pain (LBP). Further, the biology of many tissues changes when challenged by pain and injury, as reported in a growing body of literature on the biology of muscle, fat, and connective tissue. These advances in understanding of the complexity of LBP have implications for our understanding of pain and its interaction with the motor system, and may change how we consider motor control in the rehabilitation of LBP. This commentary provides a state-of-the-art overview of plasticity of biology in LBP. The paper is divided into 4 parts that address (1) biology of pain mechanisms, (2) neuroimmune interaction in the central nervous system, (3) neuroimmune interaction in the periphery, and (4) brain and peripheral tissue interaction. Each section considers the implications for clinical management of LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):389-401. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8716.

The type and pain provoking nature of exercise prescribed for low back pain: A survey of Australian health professionals

OBJECTIVES

To explore the type of exercise prescribed by Australian health professionals for LBP, and whether the exercises prescribed are pain-free or into pain.

METHODS

A survey of physiotherapists and exercise physiologists was conducted from all states/territories in Australia. The survey contained two chronic LBP vignettes with different pain mechanisms (dominant nociceptive or central sensitisation pain) and one acute LBP vignette. Respondents were asked if they would prescribe advice to stay active and exercise. If exercise was prescribed, respondents were asked to specify the type and pain provoking nature (exercise with no pain, exercise to the start of pain, exercise with pain at a tolerable level or exercise irrespective of pain).

RESULTS

The response rate was 17%(218/1276). Most respondents prescribed advice to stay active(≥95%) and exercise(≥90%) for all vignettes. Irrespective of the vignette, several exercises were prescribed [aerobic (57-85% of clinicians), motor control (62-84% of clinicians), range of motion (72-75% of clinicians)]. Strengthening exercise was prescribed more for chronic(>60%) than acute LBP(23%). Irrespective of the exercise, between 20 and 25% of respondents prescribed pain-free exercise, between 71 and 79% of respondents prescribed exercise into pain, and ≤4% prescribed exercise irrespective of pain for acute and chronic LBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Several exercises are prescribed for LBP, irrespective of pain mechanism or duration, with more clinicians prescribing strengthening exercise for chronic than acute LBP. Most clinicians prescribed exercise into pain for acute and chronic LBP, irrespective of the exercise. Further research should determine which exercises are beneficial based on pain mechanism and duration, and whether exercise into pain should be prescribed for LBP.

The interrater reliability of a pain mechanisms-based classification for patients with nonspecific neck pain

OBJECTIVE

To examine the interrater reliability and agreement of a pain mechanisms-based classification for patients with nonspecific neck pain (NSNP).

METHODS

Design - Observational, cross-sectional reliability study with a simultaneous examiner design.

SETTING

University hospital-based outpatient physical therapy clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

A random sample of 48 patients, aged between 18 and 75 years old, with a primary complaint of neck pain was included.

INTERVENTIONS

Subjects underwent a standardized subjective and clinical examination, performed by 1 experienced physical therapist. Two assessors independently classified the participants' NSNP on 3 main outcome measures.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Cohen kappa, percent agreement, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to determine the interrater reliability for (1) the predominant pain mechanism; (2) the predominant pain pattern; and (3) the predominant dysfunction pattern (DP).

RESULTS

There was almost perfect agreement between the 2 physical therapists' judgements on the predominant pain mechanism, kappa=.84 (95% CI, .65-1.00), p<.001. There was substantial agreement between the raters' judgements on the predominant pain pattern and predominant DP with respectively kappa=.61 (95% CI, .42-.80); and kappa=.62 (95% CI, .44-.79), p<.001.

CONCLUSION(S)

The proposed classification exhibits substantial to almost perfect interrater reliability. Further validity testing in larger neck pain populations is required before the information is used in clinical settings.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03147508 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147508).

Difference between subjects in early chronic phase of low back pain with and without neuropathic component: observational cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain in early chronic low back pain is insufficiently recognized and treated.

AIM

The aim of this study was to establish if there is a difference among chronic low back pain subjects with and without neuropathic pain and healthy subjects, in clinical characteristic and the level of trunk muscle activation.

DESIGN

Cross sectional observational study.

SETTING

Rehabilitation clinic, inpatient and outpatient.

POPULATION

Thirty-three subjects in early chronic phase of low back pain and 26 healthy subjects were included in this research.

METHODS

Clinical characteristics and relative thickness change of lumbar multifidus and transversal abdominal muscle, measured by ultrasound, in neuropathic, non-neuropathic chronic low back pain and healthy subjects were analyzed.

RESULTS

Chronic low back pain subjects with neuropathic pain reported higher level of pain on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (back pain P=0.016, leg pain P=0.006), had higher Oswestry Disability Score (P=0.029), had lower motor (P=0.001) and sensory leg scores (P=0.000), and decreased level of activation of transversal abdominal muscle (P=0.000) comparing to chronic low back pain group without neuropathic pain. Low back pain subjects with leg pain ≥5 on VAS were 11.2 times more prone to develop neuropathic pain. Motor leg score ≤47 increases this chance 35 times. Sensory leg score ≤25 increases this chance 14 times. Reduced activation of transversal abdominal muscle for 40-50% increases this chance 7-24 times.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic low back pain subjects with neuropathic pain were more painful and disabled, had lower motor and sensory scores, and lower relative thickness change of transversal abdominal muscle comparing to the low back pain group without neuropathic pain. Self -reported leg pain intensity of 5 or more on VAS, motor score of 47 and less, sensory scores of 25 and less and diminished activation of transversal abdominal muscle significantly increase the chance that chronic low back pain subject has neuropathic component of pain.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

Neuropathic pain in early chronic low back pain subjects might be more readily recognized if patients with radiculopathy and diminished activation of transversal abdominal muscle were regularly screened for neuropathic pain.

Mobilization of the lumbar spine in a 76-year-old male with mechanical low back pain and an abdominal aortic aneurysm: A case report

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are found in 1-12% of older males. Low back pain (LBP) is prevalent with incidence increasing with age and can respond to manual therapy (MT). To date, the safety of the application of MT for LBP in the presence of a known AAA has not been reported. This case reports on the short-term effects of MT in a patient with LBP and AAA and pre- and post-therapy imaging.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 76-year-old male presented with mechanical LBP, groin pain, and a known 4.2-cm AAA. A lumbar magnetic resonance imaging showed significant multilevel abnormalities. Abdominal screening did not elicit back or groin pain. Lumbar and hip range of motion and accessory motion testing reproduced his complaints. He was treated with lumbar and hip MT.

OUTCOMES

After three visits, he reported that his groin pain resolved, and his back pain could be managed with home exercise. He reported a +6 on the global rating of change. Repeated follow-up imaging of his AAA demonstrated no significant change of his AAA.

DISCUSSION

No immediate adverse events were recorded, and repeated follow-up imaging indicated no significant AAA expansion. Considering that mobilization causes similar displacement to active motion, research into the safety of MT in this population is warranted as are guidelines for appropriate initial and ongoing clinical screening during treatment in this population.

Clinical classification criteria for nonspecific low back pain: A Delphi-survey of clinical experts

BACKGROUND

Nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) is a common problem. Attempts have been made to classify NSLBP patients into homogenous subgroups. Classification systems based on identifying the underlying mechanism(s) driving the disorder are clinically useful to guide specific interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To establish consensus among experts regarding clinical criteria suggestive of a dominance of 'articular', 'myofascial', 'neural', 'central', and 'sensorimotor control' dysfunction patterns (DPs) in NSLBP patients.

STUDY DESIGN

A 2-phase sequential design of a focus group and Delphi-study.

METHODS

A focus group with 10 academic experts was organized to elaborate on the different DPs discernible in LBP patients. Consecutively, a 3-round online Delphi-survey was designed to obtain consensual symptoms and physical examination findings for the 5 DPs resulting from the focus group.

RESULTS

Fifteen musculoskeletal physical therapists from Belgium and the Netherlands experienced in assessing and treating LBP patients completed the Delphi-survey. Respectively, 34 (response rate, 100.0%), 20 (58.8%) and 15 (44.12%) respondents replied to rounds 1, 2 and 3. Twenty-two 'articular', 20 'myofascial', 21 'neural', 18 'central' and 11 'sensorimotor control' criteria reached a predefined ≥80% consensus level. For example, after round 2, 85.0% of the Delphi-experts agreed to identify 'referred pain below the knee' as a subjective examination criterion suggestive for a predominant 'neural DP'.

CONCLUSION

These indicators suggestive of a clinical dominance of the proposed DPs could help clinicians to assess and diagnose NSLBP patients. Future reliability and validity testing is needed to determine how these criteria may help to improve physical therapy outcome for NSLBP patients.

Sagittal lumbopelvic alignment in patients with low back pain and the effects of a high-load lifting exercise and individualized low-load motor control exercises-a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Assessment of posture and lumbopelvic alignment is often the main focus in the classification and treatment of patients with low back pain (LBP). However, little is known regarding the effects of motor control interventions on objective measures of lumbopelvic alignment.

PURPOSE

The primary aim of this study was to describe the variation of sagittal lumbopelvic alignment in patients with nociceptive mechanical LBP. The secondary aim was to compare the effects of a high-load lifting exercise (HLL) and low-load motor control exercises (LMC) on the change in lumbopelvic alignment with a special emphasis on patients with high and low degrees of lumbar lordosis (lu) and sacral angle (sa).

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of HLL and LMC.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients from the primary study, that is, patients categorized with nociceptive mechanical LBP, who agreed to participate in the radiographic examination were included (n=66).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Lateral plain radiographic images were used to evaluate lumbopelvic alignment regarding the lumbar lordosis and the sacral angle as outcomes, with posterior bend as an explanatory variable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The participants were recruited to the study from two occupational health-care facilities. They were randomized to either the HLL or the LMC intervention group and offered 12 supervised exercise sessions. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and following the end of intervention period 2 months after baseline. Between- and within-group analyses of intervention groups and subgroups based on the distribution of the baseline values for the lumbar lordosis and the sacral angle, respectively (LOW, MID, and HIGH), were performed using both parametric and non-parametric statistics.

RESULTS

The ranges of values for the present sample were 26.9-91.6° (M=59.0°, standard deviation [SD]=11.5°) for the lumbar lordosis and 18.2-72.1° (M=42.0°, SD=9.6°) for the sacral angle. There were no significant differences between the intervention groups in the percent change of eitheroutcome measure. Neither did any outcome change significantly over time within the intervention groups. In the subgroups, based on the distribution of respective baseline values, LOW_lu showed a significantly increased lumbar lordosis, whereas HIGH_sa showed a significantly decreased sacral angle following intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the wide distribution of values for lumbopelvic alignment for patients with nociceptive mechanical LBP. Further research is needed to investigate subgroups of other types of LBP and contrast findings to those presented in this study. Our results also suggest that retraining of the lumbopelvic alignment could be possible for patients with LBP.

Association Between Symptoms of Central Sensitization and Cognitive Behavioral Factors in People With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Cross-sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this cross-sectional study was to analyze the relationship between symptoms of central sensitization (CS) and important cognitive behavioral and psychosocial factors in a sample of patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

METHODS

Participants with chronic nonspecific low back pain for at least 3 months were included in the study. They completed several questionnaires and a functional test. Pearson's correlation was used to analyze associations between symptoms of CS and pain behavior, functioning, pain, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, and illness perceptions. Additionally, a between-group analysis was performed to compare patients with and without clinically relevant symptoms of CS.

RESULTS

Data from 38 participants were analyzed. Significant associations were found between symptoms of CS and all other outcomes, especially current pain (r = 0.510, P = .001), mean pain during the past 7 days (r = 0.505, P = .001), and pain catastrophizing (r = 0.518, P = .001). Patients with clinically relevant symptoms of CS scored significantly worse on all outcomes compared with persons without relevant symptoms of CS, except on functioning (P = .128).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms of CS were significantly associated with psychosocial and cognitive behavioral factors. Patients exhibiting a clinically relevant degree of symptoms of CS scored significantly worse on most outcomes, compared with the subgroup of the sample with fewer symptoms of CS.

Rehabilitation management of low back pain - it's time to pull it all together!

In the past, rehabilitation research initiatives for low back pain (LBP) have targeted outcome enhancement through personalized treatment approaches, namely through classification systems (CS). Although the use of CS has enhanced outcomes, common management practices have not changed, the prevalence of LBP is still high, and only selected patients meet the CS profile, namely those with a nociceptive context. Similarly, although practice guidelines propose some level of organization and occasionally a timeline of care provision, each mainly provides best practice for isolated treatment approaches. Moreover, there is no theoretical framework that has been proposed that guides the rehabilitation management process of mechanical LBP. In this commentary, we propose a model constituted of five domains (nociceptive drivers, nervous system dysfunction drivers, comorbidities drivers, cognitive–emotional drivers, and contextual drivers) grounded as mechanisms driving pain and/or disability in LBP. Each domain is linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, where once a patient is deemed suitable for rehabilitation, the clinician assesses elements of each domain in order to identify where the relative treatment efforts should be focused. This theoretical model is designed to provide a more comprehensive management overview, by appreciating the relative contribution of each domain driving pain and disability. Considering that the multiple domains driving pain and disability, and their interaction, requires a model that is comprehensive enough to identify and address each related issue, we consider that the proposed model has several positive implications for rehabilitation of this painful and highly prevalent musculoskeletal disorder.

Effects of Low-Load Motor Control Exercises and a High-Load Lifting Exercise on Lumbar Multifidus Thickness: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of low-load motor control (LMC) exercises and a high-load lifting (HLL) exercise, on lumbar multifidus (LM) thickness on either side of the spine and whether the effects were affected by pain intensity or change in pain intensity.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is evidence that patients with low back pain (LBP) may have a decreased size of the LM muscles with an asymmetry between sides in the lower back. It has also been shown that LMC training can affect this asymmetry. It is, however, not known whether a high-load exercise has the same effect.

METHODS

Sixty-five participants diagnosed with nociceptive mechanical LBP were included and randomized into LMC exercises or a HLL exercise, the deadlift. The LM thickness was measured using rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI), at baseline and after a 2-month training period.

RESULTS

There were no differences between interventions regarding effect on LM muscle thickness. However, the analysis showed a significant effect for asymmetry. The thickness of the LM muscle on the small side increased significantly compared with the large side in both intervention groups, without influence of pain at baseline, or change in pain intensity.

CONCLUSION

At baseline, there was a difference in thickness of the LM muscles between sides. It seems that exercises focusing on spinal alignment may increase the thickness of the LM muscles on the small side, irrespective of exercise load. The increase in LM thickness does not appear to be mediated by either current pain intensity or the magnitude of change in pain intensity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

March 2017 Letters to the Editor-in-Chief

Letters to the Editor-in-Chief of JOSPT as follows: "Regarding 'Unraveling the Complexity of Low Back Pain'" with Authors' Response "Beall's List Has Vanished: What Next?" with Editor-in-Chief Response J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(3):219-223. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0202.

Immediate and lasting effects of a thoracic spine manipulation in a patient with signs of cervical radiculopathy and upper extremity hyperalgesia: A case report

Patients with cervical radiculopathy (CR) may present with accompanying symptoms of hyperalgesia, allodynia, heaviness in the arm, and non-segmental pain that do not appear to be related to a peripheral spinal nerve. These findings may suggest the presence of central or autonomic nervous system involvement, requiring a modified management approach. The purpose of this case report is to describe the treatment of a patient with signs of CR and upper extremity (UE) hyperalgesia who had a significant decrease in her UE pain and hypersensitivity after a single thoracic spine manipulation (TSM). A 48-year-old female presented to physical therapy with acute neck pain radiating into her left UE that significantly limited her ability to sleep and work. After a single TSM, the patient demonstrated immediate and lasting reduction in hyperalgesia, hypersensitivity to touch, elimination of perceived heaviness and coldness in her left UE, and improved strength in the C6-8 myotome, allowing for improved functional activity capacity and tolerance to a multi-modal PT program. Based on these results, clinicians should consider the early application of TSM in patients with CR who have atypical, widespread, or severe neurological symptoms that limit early mobilization and tolerance to treatment at the painful region.

Revisiting the Corticomotor Plasticity in Low Back Pain: Challenges and Perspectives

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a recurrent debilitating condition that costs billions to society. Refractoriness to conventional treatment, lack of improvement, and associated movement disorders could be related to the extensive brain plasticity present in this condition, especially in the sensorimotor cortices. This narrative review on corticomotor plasticity in CLBP will try to delineate how interventions such as training and neuromodulation can improve the condition. The review recommends subgrouping classification in CLBP owing to brain plasticity markers with a view of better understanding and treating this complex condition.

Subjective and clinical assessment criteria suggestive for five clinical patterns discernible in nonspecific neck pain patients. A Delphi-survey of clinical experts

BACKGROUND

Nonspecific neck pain patients form a heterogeneous group with different musculoskeletal impairments. Classifying nonspecific neck pain patients into subgroups based on clinical characteristics might lead to more comprehensive diagnoses and can guide effective management.

OBJECTIVE

To establish consensus among a group of experts regarding the clinical criteria suggestive of a clinical dominance of 'articular', 'myofascial', 'neural', 'central' and 'sensorimotor control' dysfunction patterns distinguishable in patients with nonspecific neck pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Delphi study.

METHODS

A focus group with 10 academic experts was organized to elaborate on the different dysfunction patterns discernible in neck pain patients. Consecutively, a 3-round online Delphi-survey was designed to obtain consensual symptoms and physical examination findings for the 5 distinct dysfunction patterns resulting from the focus group.

RESULTS

A total of 21 musculoskeletal physical therapists from Belgium and the Netherlands experienced in assessing and treating neck pain patients completed the 3-round Delphi-survey. Respectively, 33 (response rate, 100.0%), 27 (81.8%) and 21 (63.6%) respondents replied to rounds 1, 2 and 3. Eighteen 'articular', 16 'myofascial', 20 'neural', 18 'central' and 10 'sensorimotor control' clinical indicators reached a predefined ≥80% consensus level.

CONCLUSION

These indicators suggestive of a clinical dominance of 'articular', 'myofascial', 'neural', 'central', and 'sensorimotor control' dysfunction patterns may help clinicians to assess and diagnose patients with nonspecific neck pain. Future validity testing is needed to determine how these criteria may help to improve the outcome of physical therapy interventions in nonspecific neck pain patients.

Listening is therapy: Patient interviewing from a pain science perspective

The interview of a patient attending physical therapy is the cornerstone of the physical examination, diagnosis, plan of care, prognosis, and overall efficacy of the therapeutic experience. A thorough, skilled interview drives the objective tests and measures chosen, as well as provides context for the interpretation of those tests and measures, during the physical examination. Information from the interview powerfully influences the treatment modalities chosen by the physical therapist (PT) and thus also impacts the overall outcome and prognosis of the therapy sessions. Traditional physical therapy focuses heavily on biomedical information to educate people about their pain, and this predominant model focusing on anatomy, biomechanics, and pathoanatomy permeates the interview and physical examination. Although this model may have a significant effect on people with acute, sub-acute or postoperative pain, this type of examination may not only gather insufficient information regarding the pain experience and suffering, but negatively impact a patient's pain experience. In recent years, physical therapy treatment for pain has increasingly focused on pain science education, with increasing evidence of pain science education positively affecting pain, disability, pain catastrophization, movement limitations, and overall healthcare cost. In line with the ever-increasing focus of pain science in physical therapy, it is time for the examination, both subjective and objective, to embrace a biopsychosocial approach beyond the realm of only a biomedical approach. A patient interview is far more than "just" collecting information. It also is a critical component to establishing an alliance with a patient and a fundamental first step in therapeutic neuroscience education (TNE) for patients in pain. This article highlights the interview process focusing on a pain science perspective as it relates to screening patients, establishing psychosocial barriers to improvement, and pain mechanism assessment.

Physical Activity Might Be of Greater Importance for Good Spinal Control Than If You Have Had Pain or Not: A Longitudinal Study

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal design. A cohort followed in 3 waves of data collection.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to describe the relationships between the performance of 2 tests of spinal control at the age of 52 years and low back pain, physical activity level, and fitness earlier in life, as well as to describe the cross-sectional relationships between these measures.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Altered spinal control has been linked to pain; however, other stimuli may also lead to inability to control the movements of the spine.

METHODS

Participants answered questions about physical activity and low back pain, and performed physical fitness tests at the age of 16, 34, and 52 years. The fitness test battery included tests of endurance in the back and abdominal muscles, a submaximal bicycle ergometer test to estimate maximal oxygen uptake, and measurements of hip flexion, thoracic spine flexibility, and anthropometrics. Two tests were aggregated to a physical fitness index. At the age of 52, also 2 tests of spinal control, the standing Waiter's bow (WB) and the supine double leg lower (LL) were performed.

RESULTS

Logistic regression analyses showed that higher back muscle endurance at the age of 34 years could positively predict WB performance at 52 years and higher physical fitness at the age of 34 could positively predict LL performance at 52 years. Regarding cross-sectional relationships, an inability to perform the WB correctly was associated with lower physical fitness, flexibility and physical activity, and larger waist circumference. An inability to correctly perform the LL was associated with lower physical fitness. One-year prevalence of pain was not significantly associated with WB or LL test performance.

CONCLUSION

An active life resulting in higher physical fitness is related to better spinal control in middle-aged men and women. This further strengthens the importance of physical activity throughout the life span.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Individualized low-load motor control exercises and education versus a high-load lifting exercise and education to improve activity, pain intensity, and physical performance in patients with low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common disorder. Patients with low back pain frequently have aberrant and pain-provocative movement patterns that often are addressed with motor control exercises.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of low-load motor control (LMC) exercise and those of a high-load lifting (HLL) exercise.

METHODS

Seventy participants with recurrent low back pain, who were diagnosed with nociceptive mechanical pain as their dominating pain pattern, were randomized to either LMC or HLL exercise treatments. Participants were offered 12 treatment sessions over an 8-week period. All participants were also provided with education regarding pain mechanisms.

METHODS

Participants were assessed prior to and following treatment. The primary outcome measures were activity (the Patient-Specific Functional Scale) and average pain intensity over the last 7 days (visual analog scale). The secondary outcome measure was a physical performance test battery that included 1 strength, 3 endurance, and 7 movement control tests for the lumbopelvic region.

RESULTS

Both interventions resulted in significant within-group improvements in pain intensity, strength, and endurance. The LMC group showed significantly greater improvement on the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (4.2 points) compared with the HLL group (2.5 points) (P<.001). There were no significant between-group differences in pain intensity (P=.505), strength, and 1 of the 3 endurance tests. However, the LMC group showed an increase (from 2.9 to 5.9) on the movement control test subscale, whereas the HLL group showed no change (from 3.9 to 3.1) (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

An LMC intervention may result in superior outcomes in activity, movement control, and muscle endurance compared to an HLL intervention, but not in pain intensity, strength, or endurance. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01061632).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapy, level 2b-.

Diagnostic accuracy of self-report and subjective history in the diagnosis of low back pain with non-specific lower extremity symptoms: A systematic review

Subjective history questions/self-report items are commonly used to triage the patient with low back pain and related leg symptoms. However the value of the history taking process for decision-making to identify common classifications/diagnosis for patients presenting with low back related leg pain (LBRLP) have not been considered. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of self-report items/history-taking questions used to identify patients with LBRLP. Eligible studies included: 1)subjects with low back pain AND related lower extremity pain, 2)details of subjective examination/self-report items, 3)cohort, prospective/longitudinal studies, and randomized control trials, 4)use of statistical reporting, 5)an acceptable reference standard. Quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. A synthesis of history items that met the threshold for at least a small shift in the likelihood of the condition with a +LR ≥ 2 or -LR ≤ 0.5 were reported. Conditions commonly reported in the literature: lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbosacral nerve root compression/radiculopathy, disc herniation and neurophysiological low back pain ± leg pain. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. This is the first systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies that examined only the history-taking items for their ability to identify LBRLP conditions. Clustering key items may provide a more precise clinical picture necessary to detect and treat a patient's presentation. History questions formed within the interview and their contributing value for decision-making remain understudied. There is a need for better designs to determine a more accurate diagnostic power to identify conditions with LBRLP.

Metastatic cancer mimicking mechanical low back pain: a case report

OBJECTIVE AND IMPORTANCE

The purpose of this report is to describe the clinical course of a patient referred to physiotherapy (PT) for the treatment of low back pain who was subsequently diagnosed with metastatic non-small cell carcinoma of the lung.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

A 48-year old woman was referred to PT for the evaluation and treatment of an insidious onset of low back pain of 2 month duration. The patient did not have a history of cancer, recent weight changes, or general health concerns. The patient's history and physical examination were consistent with a mechanical neuromusculoskeletal dysfunction and no red flag findings were present that warranted immediate medical referral.

INTERVENTION

Short-term symptomatic improvements were achieved using the treatment-based classification approach. However, despite five PT sessions over the course of 5 weeks, the patient did not experience long-term symptomatic improvement. On the sixth session, the patient reported a 2-day history of left hand weakness and headaches. This prompted the physiotherapist to refer the patient to the emergency department where she was diagnosed with lung cancer.

CONCLUSION

Differential diagnosis is a key component of PT practice. The ability to reproduce symptoms or achieve short-term symptomatic gains is not sufficient to rule out sinister pathology. This case demonstrates how extra caution should be taken in patients who are smokers with thoracolumbar region pain of unknown origin. The need for caution is magnified when one can achieve no more than short-term improvements in the patient's symptoms.