Which Functional Outcomes Can be Measured in Low Back Pain Trials and Therapies?: A Prospective 2-Year Factor-, Cluster-, and Reliability-Multicenter Analysis on 42 Variables in 1049 Individuals

Postural and Lumbopelvic Control: Crucial Factors in the Functionality of Patients with Low Back Pain-A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders in adults worldwide. Alterations in postural and lumbopelvic control and functionality appear to be determining factors in its resolution. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed. Patients with LBP were enrolled. Lumbar pain; postural control (PC), total area of the center of pressure (TACOP), and the velocity of the center of pressure (VCOP); lumbopelvic control (LPC); and functionality were evaluated. Statistical tests were implemented to determine differences between sex and age and correlation models among the variables. Results: Thirty adult patients with LBP were analyzed. A strong relationship was found between pain and functionality [r = 0.64; p < 0.001]. A moderate relationship was found between pain and TACOP [r = 0.395; p = 0.031]. A moderate relationship was observed between TACOP and functionality [0.413; p = 0.023] and between LPC and TACOP [r = 0.416; p = 0.001]. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the significant impact of LBP on postural control, lumbopelvic control, and functionality. These results highlight the importance of addressing postural and lumbopelvic control in LBP treatment. No significant differences based on gender and age were found, but all clinical variables differed significantly between the LBP and control groups, underscoring the unique impairments associated with LBP.

Machine learning-based identification of determinants for rehabilitation success and future healthcare use prevention in patients with high-grade, chronic, nonspecific low back pain: an individual data 7-year follow-up analysis on 154,167 individuals

ABSTRACT

To individually prescribe rehabilitation contents, it is of importance to know and quantify factors for rehabilitation success and the risk for a future healthcare use. The objective of our multivariable prediction model was to determine factors of rehabilitation success and the risk for a future healthcare use in patients with high-grade, chronic low back pain. We included members of the German pension fund who participated from 2012 to 2019 in multimodal medical rehabilitation with physical and psychological treatment strategies because of low back pain (ICD10:M54.5). Candidate prognostic factors for rehabilitation success and for a future healthcare use were identified using Gradient Boosting Machines and Random Forest algorithms in the R-package caret on a 70% training and a 30% test set. We analysed data from 154,167 patients; 8015 with a second medical rehabilitation measure and 5161 who retired because of low back pain within the study period. The root-mean-square errors ranged between 494 (recurrent rehabilitation) and 523 (retirement) days ( R2 = 0.183-0.229), whereas the prediction accuracy ranged between 81.9% for the prediction of the rehabilitation outcome, and 94.8% for the future healthcare use prediction model. Many modifiable prognostic factors (such as duration of the rehabilitation [inverted u-shaped], type of the rehabilitation, and aftercare measure), nonmodifiable prognostic factors (such as sex and age), and disease-specific factors (such as sick leave days before the rehabilitation [linear positive] together with the pain grades) for rehabilitation success were identified. Inpatient medical rehabilitation programmes (3 weeks) may be more effective in preventing a second rehabilitation measure and/or early retirement because of low back pain compared with outpatient rehabilitation programs. Subsequent implementation of additional exercise programmes, cognitive behavioural aftercare treatment, and following scheduled aftercare are likely to be beneficial.

Dose-response relationship and effect modifier of stabilisation exercises in non-specific low back pain: a project-wide individual patient data re-analysis on 1,483 intervention participants

ABSTRACT

To derive a dose-response relationship under consideration of further effect modifiers in exercises on low back pain.In this planned MiSpEx-Network re-analysis, 1,483 intervention participants with low back pain (mean age 40.9 years (SD 14 years)) performed stabilisation exercises (3 weeks supervised, 9 weeks self-administered). Patients reported pain intensity, disability and disability days at baseline, 3 weeks, 12 weeks and 6 months post-randomisation. Exercise characteristics and effect modifiers were prospectively monitored. Beyond the comparison to the aggregated control group, linear mixed models were calculated to determine a dose-response-relationship.The interventions led to small but significantly larger symptom reductions than the control at each measurement. Longer durations of the intervention led to larger symptom reductions. Higher exercise frequencies were associated with a decrease in pain intensity: to train once more per week led to a mean decrease of 0.93 points in pain intensity [95% CI= -1.54 to -0.32]. Disability days were also impacted (estimate=-0.07 [-0.14 to 0.00]), disability was not (-0.09 [-0.67 to 0.48]). Adding perturbation was superior to adding stretching or a behavioural module. The relationships were robust when additional effect modifiers were considered and against the control group' effects. The odds ratio for a clinically important effect with higher exercise frequencies decreased at 3 weeks (OR=0.71 [0.618 to 0.813] for >2.5*week -1 ) and increased at 12 weeks (1.13 [1.006 to 1.270], >1.5*week -1 ).Using longer intervention durations, adding a perturbation component to the stabilisation trainings and utilising higher frequencies (up to a certain point) may lead to an even more beneficial response in patients with low back pain. Developing strategies to maintain a training frequency of at least two times per week may be relevant in stabilisation exercises to treat low back pain.

A Systematic Review of Musculoskeletal Mobilization and Manipulation Techniques Used in Veterinary Medicine

Simple Summary

Neck and back pain are common ailments in animals. While there are medical and surgical treatment options available for select patients, conservative care is the most common form of management of pain, stiffness and muscle spasms. Physical therapists, osteopaths and chiropractors use mobilization and manipulation techniques to evaluate and treat muscle and joint problems in both humans and animals, but there seems to be little scientific evidence available to support their use in veterinary medicine. This study reviews the scientific literature with the goal of identifying the clinical indications, dosages, outcome parameters, and efficacy of mobilization and manipulation techniques in dogs and horses. Fourteen articles were included in this review of which 13 were equine and one was a canine study. There was a large variability in the quality of evidence that supports the use of joint mobilization or manipulation in treating pain, stiffness and muscle hypertonicity in horses. Therefore, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions despite all studies reporting positive effects. Future studies need to establish standardized methods to evaluate the optimal dosages of mobilization and manipulation for use in animals.

Abstract

Mobilization and manipulation techniques are often used in small animal and equine practice; however, questions remain concerning indications, dosing and efficacy. A bibliographic search was performed to identify peer-reviewed publications from 1980 to 2020 that evaluated the clinical effects of musculoskeletal mobilization and manipulation techniques in dogs, cats and horses. The search strategy identified 883 papers for review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The clinical indications, dosages, outcome parameters, and reported efficacy within each publication were recorded and categorized for comparison with scientific quality assessed according to a standardized grading system. Fourteen articles were included in this systematic review of which 13 were equine and one was a canine study. Seven of these were cohort studies and seven were randomized controlled clinical trials. The canine study involved carpal immobilization-remobilization and all equine studies focused on the effects of passive mobilization (n = 5) or manipulation (n = 8) of the axial skeleton. Study quality was low (n = 4), moderate (n = 7), and high (n = 3) and included a wide array of outcome parameters with varying levels of efficacy and duration of therapeutic effects, which prevented further meta-analysis. Therefore, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions despite all studies reporting positive effects. Optimal technique indications and dosages need to be determined to improve the standardization of these treatment options.