Lombalgia crônica em pacientes com lúpus eritematoso sistêmico: prevalência e preditores da força muscular de extensão de tronco e sua correlação com a incapacidade

The burden of non-specific chronic low back pain among adults in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: a protocol for a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health concern, affecting individuals of all age groups across the world. In about 90% of LBP cases, there is no specific cause identified and is, therefore, referred to as non-specific LBP. Due to the non-specific nature of LBP, investigations such as radiological and laboratory investigations are unnecessary and results to delayed diagnosis and improper treatment culminating in LBP progressing into chronic LBP (CLBP). LBP is now the leading cause of disability with a significant socioeconomic burden. Despite all these challenges, CLBP is regarded as a trivial condition in low-and-middle-income countries and remains poorly investigated. The distribution of CLBP in Africa is unclear.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The research will be conducted in two phases. The initial phase will be an observational, cross-sectional hospital-based study that will be recruiting 650 participants, to determine the prevalence and risk factors of CLBP. A standardised questionnaire will be used to collect baseline data on the socio-demographic characteristics of participants and other variables of interest (exercise history, occupational posture, level of education and the income status). Disability will be assessed using the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire and the psychological risk factors will be assessed using the Illness-Behaviour Questionnaire (IBQ) and the Fear-Avoidance Belief Questionnaire (FABQ). The second phase will be a retrospective, top-down, prevalence-based cost-of-illness study of the 2018-2019 health records, to estimate the burden of CLBP from the healthcare system's perspective. The SPSS V.25.0 statistical package will be used for data entry and analysis. Statistical analysis will include descriptive statistics by means of graphs and cross tabulations, inferential statistics by means of logistic regression and χ² test. A p value of 0.05 will be deemed statistically significant.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol was approved by the University of KwaZulu-Natal's Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (Ref. No.: BREC/00000205/2019) and the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health Research Ethics (Ref. No.: KZ_201909_002). This will be the first LBP cost-of-illness study in the sub-Saharan Africa, and, therefore, it will close these knowledge gaps and present important evidence on the estimated burden of CLBP in this context. The results of this study will be presented to the Department of Health and to the respective stakeholders and decision-makers to discuss the findings and draw their attention to the prioritisation of LBP research, its management, prevention programmes and implementation of educational programme and for the planning of cost-containment policies.

Fatigue Measurements in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

Fatigue is a frequent, disabling issue in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). It is, however, difficult to quantify. The Ad Hoc Committee on SLE Response Criteria for Fatigue in 2007 recommended using the Krupp Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Since then, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Scale has also been validated in SLE. We performed a review of instruments used to measure fatigue in adult SLE patients from 2007 onward.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Medline, and Embase (January 2008-October 2017), identifying clinical trials and observational studies in adult SLE, where fatigue was a specifically measured outcome. All English and French studies were reviewed to determine fatigue measures and results.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Eight scales were used. The visual analog scale (VAS), FSS, and FACIT-Fatigue Scale were most frequent. FSS was the most often used instrument in both clinical trials and observational studies. Twenty-five of the 37 studies demonstrated a difference in fatigue that was statistically significant and clinically meaningful. Of the 12 studies that did not, 6 used FSS, 3 used VAS, 2 used the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue, and 1 used the Brief Fatigue Index. All 6 studies using the FACIT-Fatigue Scale detected clinically meaningful and statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSION

VAS, FSS, and FACIT-Fatigue Scale were the most frequently used instruments in adult SLE studies from 2008 to 2017. Many studies detected clinically important changes in fatigue. Fatigue remains a key measure in both clinical trials and observational SLE studies.