Prognosis of sciatica and back-related leg pain in primary care: the ATLAS cohort

Management of low back pain and lumbosacral radicular syndrome: the Guideline of the Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF)

BACKGROUND

Significant progress and new insights have been gained since the Dutch Physical Therapy guideline on low back pain (LBP) in 2013 and the Cesar en Mensendieck guideline in 2009, necessitating an update of these guidelines.

AIM

To update and develop an evidence-based guideline for the comprehensive management of LBP and lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LRS) without serious specific conditions (red flags) for Dutch physical therapists and Cesar and Mensendieck Therapists.

DESIGN

Clinical practice guideline.

SETTING

Inpatient and outpatient.

POPULATION

Adults with LBP and/or LRS.

METHODS

Clinically relevant questions were identified based on perceived barriers in current practice of physical therapy. All clinical questions were answered using published guidelines, systematic reviews, narrative reviews or systematic reviews performed by the project group. Recommendations were formulated based on evidence and additional considerations, as described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework. Patients participated in every phase.

RESULTS

The guideline describes a comprehensive assessment based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for LBP and LRS, including the identification of alarm symptoms and red flags. Patients are assigned to three treatment profiles (low, moderate and high risk of persistent symptoms) based on prognostic factors for persistent LBP. The guideline recommends offering simple and less intensive support to people who are likely to recover quickly (low-risk profile) and more complex and intensive support to people with a moderate or high risk of persistent complaints. Criteria for initiating and discontinuing physical therapy, and referral to a general practitioner are specified. Recommendations are formulated for information and advice, measurement instruments, active and passive interventions and behavior-oriented treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence based physical therapy guideline for the management of patients with LBP and LRS without red flags for physical therapists and Cesar and Mensendieck therapists was developed. Cornerstones of physical therapy assessment and treatment are risk stratification, shared decision-making, information and advice, and exercises.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

This guideline provides guidance for clinicians and patients to optimize treatment outcomes in patients with LBP and LRS and offers transparency for other healthcare providers and stakeholders.

Cost-effectiveness of Transforaminal epidural steroid injections for patients with ACUTE sciatica: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal epidural injections with steroids (TESI) are increasingly being used in patients sciatica. The STAR (steroids against radiculopathy)-trial aimed to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of TESI in patients with acute sciatica (< 8 weeks). This article contains the economic evaluation of the STAR-trial.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to one of three study arms: Usual Care (UC), that is oral pain medication with or without physiotherapy, n = 45); intervention group 1: UC and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TESI) 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml of 40 mg/ml Methylprednisolone and intervention group 2: UC and transforaminal epidural injection (TEI) with 1 ml of 0,5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml of 0.9% NaCl (n = 50). The primary effect measure was health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes were pain, functioning, and recovery. Costs were measured from a societal perspective, meaning that all costs were included, irrespective of who paid or benefited. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation, and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

RESULTS

None of the between-group differences in effects were statistically significant for any of the outcomes (QALY, back pain, leg pain, functioning, and global perceived effect) at the 26-weeks follow-up. The adjusted mean difference in total societal costs was €1718 (95% confidence interval [CI]: - 3020 to 6052) for comparison 1 (intervention group 1 versus usual care), €1640 (95%CI: - 3354 to 6106) for comparison 2 (intervention group 1 versus intervention group 2), and €770 (95%CI: - 3758 to 5702) for comparison 3 (intervention group 2 versus usual care). Except for the intervention costs, none of the aggregate and disaggregate cost differences were statistically significant. The maximum probability of all interventions being cost-effective compared to the control was low (< 0.7) for all effect measures.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that adding TESI (or TEI) to usual care is not cost-effective compared to usual care in patients with acute sciatica (< 8 weeks) from a societal perspective in a Dutch healthcare setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch National trial register: NTR4457 (March, 6th, 2014).

The association of the STarT Back Screening Tool and type of leg pain with low back pain disability trajectories: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Multiple factors influence the recovery process of low back pain (LBP). The identification and increased knowledge of prognostic factors might contribute to a better understanding of the course of LBP. The purpose of this study is to investigate the association of the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) risk score and the type of leg pain (non-radiating LBP, referred non-radicular, and radicular radiating leg pain) with the disability trajectory (at baseline, the slope, and recovery at one year) in adults with low back pain.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study in 347 patients with low back pain who sought physiotherapy care at three primary care practices in the Netherlands. Linear mixed models were estimated to describe the association of the SBST risk score and the type of leg pain with disability at baseline, the slope in the disability trajectory, and at twelve months follow-up.

RESULTS

A medium/high risk score on the SBST is associated with higher baseline disability scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), faster initial recovery, and still a higher disability ODI score at 12 months follow-up. Non-radicular referred and radicular radiating leg pain were associated with worse baseline disability ODI scores in LBP. This association was not present for the initial recovery or at the 12 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The SBST is associated with the LBP recovery trajectory. The SBST might be a useful tool to predict the disability trajectory in a heterogeneous group of people with low back pain in primary care and might, therefore, be recommended in future clinical practice guidelines. The type of leg pain was not associated with the recovery trajectory of LBP. Future research might focus on evaluating different types of leg pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: 109,643.

Prognosis of Patients With Neuropathic Low Back-Related Leg Pain: An Exploratory Study Using Prospective Data From UK Primary Care

This prospective cohort study investigates the prognosis of patients with neuropathic low back-related leg pain consulting in UK primary care. Data from 511 patients were collected using standardised baseline clinical examinations (including magnetic resonance imaging scan findings), self-report questionnaires at baseline, 4 months, 12 months, and 3 years. Cases of possible neuropathic pain (NP) and persistent-NP were identified using either of 2 definitions: 1) clinical diagnosis of sciatica, 2) self-report version of leeds assessment for neurological symptoms and signs (s-LANSS). Mixed-effects models compared pain intensity (highest of mean leg or mean back pain [0-10 Numerical Rating Scale]) over 3-years between persistent-NP versus non-persistent-NP based on 1) clinical diagnosis, 2) s-LANSS. Logistic regression examined associations between potential prognostic factors and persistent-NP at 4 months based on the 2 NP definitions. At 4-months, using both definitions: 1) approximately 4 out of 10 patients had persistent-NP, 2) mean pain intensity was higher for patients with persistent-NP at all follow-up points compared to those without, 3) only pain self-efficacy was significantly associated with persistent-NP (s-LANSS: OR .98, sciatica: .98), but it did not predict cases of persistent-NP in either multivariable model. Based on factors routinely collected from self-report and clinical examination, it was not possible to predict persistent-NP in this population. PERSPECTIVE: This study provides evidence that neuropathic back-related leg pain in patients consulting in primary care is not always persistent. Patients with persistent neuropathic pain had worse outcomes than those without. Neither leg pain intensity, pain self-efficacy nor MRI scan findings predicted cases of persistent neuropathic pain in this patient population.

Efficacy of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in the Treatment of Sciatica Pain: Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Objectives: Sciatica is a debilitating condition that causes pain in its distribution or in the lumbosacral nerve root that is connected to it. Although there are claims that homeopathy can reduce sciatica pain, systematic scientific proof is currently lacking. The objective of the trial was to determine whether individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs) were as effective as identical-looking placebos in treating sciatica pain. Design: This is a double-blind, randomized (1:1), two parallel arms, placebo-controlled trial. Setting: The study was conducted at Mahesh Bhattacharyya Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Howrah, West Bengal, India. Subjects: Sixty participants with sciatica pain were included in this study. Interventions: Verum (n = 30; IHMs plus concomitant care) versus control (n = 30; placebos plus concomitant care). Outcome measures: Primary-Sciatica Bothersome Index (SBI) and Sciatica Frequency Index (SFI) scores and secondary-Roland Morris Pain and Disability Questionnaire (RMPDQ), Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire (OLBPQ) scores: all of them were measured at baseline, and every month, up to 3 months. Results: Intention-to-treat sample (n = 60) was analyzed. Group differences were examined by two-way (split-half) repeated measure analysis of variance, primarily accounting for between groups and time interactions, and additionally, by unpaired t tests comparing the estimates obtained individually every month. The level of significance was set at p < 0.025 and <0.05 two tailed for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Group differences could not achieve significance in SBI (p = 0.044), SFI (p = 0.080), and RMPDQ scores (p = 0.134), but were significant for SF-MPQ (p = 0.007) and OLBPQ (p = 0.036). Gnaphalium polycephalum (n = 6; 10%) was the most frequently prescribed medicine. No harm, serious adverse events, or intercurrent illnesses were recorded in either of the groups. Conclusions: The primary outcome failed to demonstrate evidently that homeopathy was effective beyond placebo, and the trial remained inconclusive. Independent replications are warranted to confirm the findings. Clinical Trial Registration Number: CTRI/2020/10/028617.

[Efficiency evaluation of the Neuromidin in the treatment of pain of the patients with discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy: results of a multicenter post-registration prospective open comparative trial]

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of the effect of Neuromidine on the dynamics of pain syndrome in the treatment of patients with discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy no more than one year old and moderate intensity of pain syndrome on a visual analog scale were included in the main group (OH, n=62, age - 53.1±15.6 yrs) and the comparison group (HS, n=40, age - 53.7±12.9 yrs). OG patients received Neuromidine (15 mg/1 mL 1 once a day IM for 10 days, then 20 mg 3 times a day for 8 weeks) in addition to the standard drug therapy, HS patients received only standard drug therapy. The duration of the study was 8 weeks. The degree of decrease in the intensity and dynamics of pain syndrome, activity and frequency of pain in the lumbar spine, changes in the level of physical activity, and the severity of emotional disorders were evaluated. The level of inflammatory markers in the blood and the dynamics of monosynaptic spinal H-reflex parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

Before the study, there were no statistically significant differences there were no results of clinical and laboratory-instrumental examination between groups. After 8 weeks, the reduction of pain by VAS in the main group was statistically significant in contrast to the comparison group (p=0.0001). In the main group there was a statistically significant increase in the mean cognitive impairment score (p=0.0029), as well as an improvement in psycho-emotional state with a significant decrease in GAD-7 (p=0.0002) and PHQ-9 (p=0.0096). After 8 weeks of therapy, IL-6 level in the main group was statistically significantly lower (p=0.0027) than in the comparison group. The results of H-reflex study revealed an increase in its amplitude and some shortening of latency at the end of Neuromidine therapy. The drug had no undesirable side effects and was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Administration of Neuromidine 15 mg/1 ml once a day intramuscularly for 10 days followed by 20 mg 3 times a day for 8 weeks has an effective analgesic effect as adjuvant therapy in patients with discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy. The inclusion of Neuromidine in the complex treatment of patients with pain syndrome in discogenic radiculopathy is superior in efficacy to standard drug therapy.

Effect of Transforaminal Epidural Corticosteroid Injections in Acute Sciatica: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) are widely administered for sciatica. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of TESIs in patients with acute sciatica (<8 wk).

METHODS

This study was conducted in 2 Dutch hospitals. Participants (n=141) were randomly assigned to (1) usual care and TESI of 1 ml of 40 mg/ml Methylprednisolone plus 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine (intervention 1); (2) usual care and transforaminal epidural injection with 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml NaCl 0.9% (intervention 2); (3) usual care consisting of oral pain medication with or without physiotherapy (control). Co-primary outcomes were back pain and leg pain intensity, physical functioning, and recovery measured during 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant mean differences in co-primary outcomes between groups during follow-up, except for leg pain when comparing intervention group 1 with control (-0.96 95%CI:-1.83 to -0.09). For secondary outcomes, some statistical significant between-group differences were found for treatment satisfaction and surgery, but only when comparing intervention group 2 to control. Post hoc analyses showed a statistically significant difference in response [50% improvement of leg pain (yes/no)] between intervention 1 and the control group at 3 months and that both intervention groups used less opioids.

DISCUSSION

Except for a statistically significant effect of TESI on leg pain for patients with acute sciatica compared with usual care, there were no differences in co-primary outcomes. Nonetheless, transforaminal epidural injections seem to be associated with less opioid use, which warrants further exploration.

ACUTE RADIATING LOW BACK PAIN IMPACT ON ROUTINE AND FUNCTION OF THE BRAZILIAN POPULATION: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

Acute radiating low back pain is a frequently occurring clinical condition among the population, and it represents a significant portion of urgent care in public health services.

Objective

Consider the clinical characteristics, demographics, as well as the intensity of the pain, discomfort, and dysfunction of patients who show a clinical diagnosis that is compatible with acute radicular pain, new or reoccurring after an asymptomatic period.

Methods

Patients that display a clinical diagnosis that is compatible with acute sciatic nerve pain, with the beginning of it starting within three months, without previous history of a similar occurrence, were seen in an orthopedic health clinic from July 2020 to January 2021.

Results

A total of 42 patients were seen with a compatible diagnosis, which represents 1.4% of all medical visits. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have considered the clinical and demographic characteristics of patients with acute radicular pain in the Brazilian population. This study has found a mean value on the disfunction index that is greater than what is suggested by the current literature.

Conclusion

About 30% of individuals showed functional involvement that was considered crippling, which presented a stronger association with individuals with the presence of motor deficits, intensity of radiating pain, and professional inactivity. Level of Evidence IV, Cross-Sectional Study.

Role of kinesiophobia in the selective motor control during gait in patients with low back-related leg pain

Fear of movement has been related to changes in motor function in patients with low back pain, but little is known about how kinesiophobia affects selective motor control during gait (ability of muscles performing distinct mechanical functions) in patients with low back-related leg pain (LBLP). The aim of the study was to determine the association between kinesiophobia and selective motor control in patients with LBLP. An observational cross-sectional study was performed on 18 patients. Outcome included: kinesiophobia using the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia; pain mechanism using Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Signs and Symptoms; disability using Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; mechanosensitivity using Straight Leg Raise. Surface electromyography was used to assess selective motor control during gait by examining the correlation and coactivation in muscle pairs involved in the stance phase. Pairs included vastus medialis (VM) and medial gastrocnemius (MG), causing opposite moments around the knee joint, and gluteus medius (GM) and MG, as muscles with distinct mechanical functions (weight acceptance vs. propulsion). A strong association was observed between kinesiophobia and correlation (r = 0.63; p = 0.005) and coactivation (r = 0.69; p = 0.001) between VM versus MG. A moderate association was observed between kinesiophobia and correlation (r = 0.58; p = 0.011) and coactivation (r = 0.55; p = 0.019) between GM versus MG. No significant associations were obtained for other outcomes. A high kinesiophobia is associated with low selective motor control of the muscles involved in the weight acceptance and propulsion phases during gait in patients with LBLP. Fear of movement was better associated with decreased neuromuscular control than other clinical variables such as pain mechanism, disability, and mechanosensitivity.

Factors predicting the transition from acute to persistent pain in people with 'sciatica': the FORECAST longitudinal prognostic factor cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Sciatica is a common condition and is associated with higher levels of pain, disability, poorer quality of life, and increased use of health resources compared with low back pain alone. Although many patients recover, a third develop persistent sciatica symptoms. It remains unclear, why some patients develop persistent sciatica as none of the traditionally considered clinical parameters (eg, symptom severity, routine MRI) are consistent prognostic factors.The FORECAST study (factors predicting the transition from acute to persistent pain in people with 'sciatica') will take a different approach by exploring mechanism-based subgroups in patients with sciatica and investigate whether a mechanism-based approach can identify factors that predict pain persistence in patients with sciatica.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a prospective longitudinal cohort study including 180 people with acute/subacute sciatica. N=168 healthy participants will provide normative data. A detailed set of variables will be assessed within 3 months after sciatica onset. This will include self-reported sensory and psychosocial profiles, quantitative sensory testing, blood inflammatory markers and advanced neuroimaging. We will determine outcome with the Sciatica Bothersomeness Index and a Numerical Pain Rating Scale for leg pain severity at 3 and 12 months.We will use principal component analysis followed by clustering methods to identify subgroups. Univariate associations and machine learning methods optimised for high dimensional small data sets will be used to identify the most powerful predictors and model selection/accuracy.The results will provide crucial information about the pathophysiological drivers of sciatica symptoms and may identify prognostic factors of pain persistence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The FORECAST study has received ethical approval (South Central Oxford C, 18/SC/0263). The dissemination strategy will be guided by our patient and public engagement activities and will include peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, social media and podcasts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN18170726; Pre-results.

Some magnetic resonance imaging findings may predict future low back pain and disability: a systematic review

QUESTIONS

Do magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings predict future low back pain (LBP), associated disability and global recovery in people with current LBP? Do MRI findings predict these outcomes in people with no current LBP? Do MRI findings predict these outcomes in a mixed sample of people with and without current LBP?

DESIGN

This review is an update of a previous systematic review investigating the relationship between lumbar spine MRI findings and future LBP.

PARTICIPANTS

People with or without LBP with lumbar MRI scans.

OUTCOME MEASURES

MRI findings, pain and disability.

RESULTS

Of the included studies, 28 reported on participants with current LBP, eight reported on participants with no LBP and four reported on a mixed sample. Most results were based on single studies and did not demonstrate clear relationships between MRI findings and future LBP. In populations with current LBP, pooling demonstrated that the presence of Modic type 1 changes alone or Modic type 1 and 2 changes were associated with slightly worse pain or disability outcomes in the short term, and the presence of disc degeneration was associated with worse pain and disability outcomes in the long term. In populations with current LBP, pooling demonstrated no evidence of an association between the presence of nerve root compression and disability outcomes in the short term, and no evidence of an association between the presence of disc height reduction, disc herniation, spinal stenosis, high-intensity zone and clinical outcomes in the long term. In populations with no LBP, pooling demonstrated that the presence of disc degeneration may increase the likelihood of experiencing pain in the long term. In mixed populations, no pooling was possible; however, single studies demonstrated that Modic type 1, 2 or 3 changes and disc herniation were each associated with worse pain in the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that some MRI findings may have weak associations with future LBP; however, larger high-quality studies are needed to resolve uncertainty.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021252919.

Prognostic factors associated with outcome following an epidural steroid injection for disc-related sciatica: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

Clinical guidelines recommend epidural steroid injection (ESI) as a treatment option for severe disc-related sciatica, but there is considerable uncertainty about its effectiveness. Currently, we know very little about factors that might be associated with good or poor outcomes from ESI. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and appraise the evidence investigating prognostic factors associated with outcomes following ESI for patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica.

METHODS

The search strategy involved the electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and reference lists of eligible studies. Selected papers were quality appraised independently by two reviewers using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Between-study heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling of results.

RESULTS

3094 citations were identified; 15 studies were eligible. Overall study quality was low with all judged to have moderate or high risk of bias. Forty-two prognostic factors were identified but were measured inconsistently. The most commonly assessed prognostic factors were related to pain and function (n = 10 studies), imaging features (n = 8 studies), patient socio-demographics (n = 7 studies), health and lifestyle (n = 6 studies), clinical assessment findings (n = 4 studies) and injection level (n = 4 studies). No prognostic factor was found to be consistently associated with outcomes following ESI. Most studies found no association or results that conflicted with other studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little, and low quality, evidence to guide practice in terms of factors that predict outcomes in patients following ESI for disc-related sciatica. The results can help inform some of the decisions about potential prognostic factors that should be assessed in future well-designed prospective cohort studies.

Effectiveness of Epidural Steroid Injection Depending on Discoradicular Contact: A Prospective Randomized Trial

Lumbar radicular pain is a major public health and economic problem. It is among the most common reasons for professional disability. The most common cause of lumbar radicular pain is intervertebral disc herniation, which results from degenerative disc changes. The dominant pain mechanisms are direct pressure of the hernia on the nerve root and the local inflammatory process triggered by intervertebral disc herniation. Treatment of lumbar radicular pain includes conservative, minimally invasive, and surgical treatment. The number of minimally invasive procedures is constantly increasing, and among these methods is epidural administration of steroids and local anesthetic through a transforaminal approach (ESI TF). The aim of this research was to examine the effectiveness of ESI TF as measured by a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), depending on whether there is contact between the herniated intervertebral disc and the nerve root. In both groups of participants, there was a significant reduction in pain intensity, but there was no significant difference between the groups. In the group with disc herniation and nerve root contact, the only significant reduction was in pain intensity (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in measurements in other domains of the ODI. In the group without disc herniation and nerve contact, there was a significant difference in all domains except weight lifting. In the group without contact, there was significant improvement after 1 month (p = 0.001) and 3 months (p < 0.001) according to the ODI, while there was no significant improvement in the group with contact. In addition, there were no significant differences in the distribution of participants based on the ODI and whether disc herniation and nerve contact was present. The results suggest that transforaminal epidural administration of steroids is a clinically effective method for treating lumbar radicular pain caused by intervertebral disc herniation in people with and without nerve root contact, without significant differences.

How effective are physiotherapy interventions in treating people with sciatica? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Physiotherapy interventions are prescribed as first-line treatment for people with sciatica; however, their effectiveness remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review was to establish the short-, medium- and long-term effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions compared to control interventions for people with clinically diagnosed sciatica.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO CRD42018103900. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to January 2021 without language restrictions. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials evaluating physiotherapy interventions compared to a control intervention in people with clinical or imaging diagnosis of sciatica. Primary outcome measures were pain and disability. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers with consensus reached by discussion or third-party arbitration if required. Risk of bias was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool with third-party consensus if required. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed with random effects models using Revman v5.4. Subgroup analyses were undertaken to examine the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions compared to minimal (e.g. advice only) or substantial control interventions (e.g. surgery).

RESULTS

Three thousand nine hundred and fifty eight records were identified, of which 18 trials were included, with a total number of 2699 participants. All trials had a high or unclear risk of bias. Meta-analysis of trials for the outcome of pain showed no difference in the short (SMD - 0.34 [95%CI - 1.05, 0.37] p = 0.34, I² = 98%), medium (SMD 0.15 [95%CI - 0.09, 0.38], p = 0.22, I²= 80%) or long term (SMD 0.09 [95%CI - 0.18, 0.36], p = 0.51, I²= 82%). For disability there was no difference in the short (SMD - 0.00 [95%CI - 0.36, 0.35], p = 0.98, I² = 92%, medium (SMD 0.25 [95%CI - 0.04, 0.55] p = 0.09, I² = 87%), or long term (SMD 0.26 [95%CI - 0.16, 0.68] p = 0.22, I² = 92%) between physiotherapy and control interventions. Subgroup analysis of studies comparing physiotherapy with minimal intervention favoured physiotherapy for pain at the long-term time points. Large confidence intervals and high heterogeneity indicate substantial uncertainly surrounding these estimates. Many trials evaluating physiotherapy intervention compared to substantial intervention did not use contemporary physiotherapy interventions.

CONCLUSION

Based on currently available, mostly high risk of bias and highly heterogeneous data, there is inadequate evidence to make clinical recommendations on the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for people with clinically diagnosed sciatica. Future studies should aim to reduce clinical heterogeneity and to use contemporary physiotherapy interventions.

Digital physical therapy practice and payment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case series

BACKGROUND

Insurance regulation and reimbursement are barriers to physical therapy-delivered digital practice.

OBJECTIVE

The present case series describes the clinical reasoning, outcomes, and practical use of digital tools to improve pain and movement of patients seen for musculoskeletal pain during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CASE DESCRIPTION

Three patients, 2 with low back pain and 1 with cervicogenic headache, were treated at a private outpatient clinic. Collaborative reasoning was used to determine appropriate use of digital tools. Because of the pandemic, one patient used telephone visits to complete treatment (25% of total visits), one used telehealth visits only during stay-at-home orders (33% of total visits), and one was evaluated and treated entirely using telehealth (100% of total visits). All visits were billed and paid for by the patient or insurance at the same rate as an in-person visit.

OUTCOMES

All 3 patients met self-reported goals for physical therapy, met or surpassed their risk-adjusted predicted functional status score, and expressed high satisfaction with treatment.

CONCLUSION

Individualized prescription and execution of digital physical therapy practice allowed patients with musculoskeletal pain to have effective physical therapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Removal of regulatory and payment barriers were necessary for the provision of care.

Frequency and determinants of surgical treatment in patients with uncomplicated disc-related sciatica hospitalized in the Rheumatology Department of Lille University Hospital

Background

Disc-related sciatica is a frequent condition. Most cases of sciatica evolve favorably. Although several randomized controlled trials have reported that surgery is more effective than conservative management in the short-term, no significant differences in pain or functional disability have been reported in the longer term. As such, discounting complications requiring urgent intervention, surgery is generally only performed in patients in whom medical treatment has failed. Our objective was to determine the rate and predictive factors of surgical treatment one year after in-hospital conservative management of disc-related sciatica.

Methods

Retrospective, observational, single-center study conducted in the Rheumatology Department of the Lille University Hospital Center between 2014 and 2018.

Results

In the study population (n=405), the frequency of surgery one year after hospitalization was 34.8%. Median time to surgery was 31 days. In multivariate analysis, working [odds ratio (OR) 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5; 3.6)], impulsive pain (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.3; 3.1), motor loss (OR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.2; 2.4) and number of infiltrations (OR 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2; 1.7) were predictive of surgery. A decrease in numeric pain-scale rating of the leg between the beginning and end of hospitalization was associated with fewer cases of surgery (OR 0.921, 95% CI: 0.861; 0.985).

Conclusions

A proportion of 34.8% of the patients hospitalized for disc-related sciatica did undergo surgery within one year of our medical management protocol. Several predictive factors for surgery were found.

Identifying the neural marker of chronic sciatica using multimodal neuroimaging and machine learning analyses

INTRODUCTION

Sciatica is a pain disorder often caused by the herniated disk compressing the lumbosacral nerve roots. Neuroimaging studies have identified functional abnormalities in patients with chronic sciatica (CS). However, few studies have investigated the neural marker of CS using brain structure and the classification value of multidimensional neuroimaging features in CS patients is unclear.

METHODS

Here, structural and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was acquired for 34 CS patients and 36 matched healthy controls (HCs). We analyzed cortical surface area, cortical thickness, amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF), regional homogeneity (REHO), between-regions functional connectivity (FC), and assessed the correlation between neuroimaging measures and clinical scores. Finally, the multimodal neuroimaging features were used to differentiate the CS patients and HC individuals by support vector machine (SVM) algorithm.

RESULTS

Compared to HC, CS patients had a larger cortical surface area in the right banks of the superior temporal sulcus and rostral anterior cingulate; higher ALFF value in the left inferior frontal gyrus; enhanced FCs between somatomotor and ventral attention network. Three FCs values were associated with clinical pain scores. Furthermore, the three multimodal neuroimaging features with significant differences between groups and the SVM algorithm could classify CS patients and HC with an accuracy of 90.00%.

DISCUSSION

Together, our findings revealed extensive reorganization of local functional properties, surface area, and network metrics in CS patients. The success of patient identification highlights the potential of using artificial intelligence and multimodal neuroimaging markers in chronic pain research.

Providing information at the initial consultation to patients with low back pain across general practice, chiropractic and physiotherapy - a cross-sectorial study of Danish primary care

OBJECTIVE

Clinical guidelines for managing low back pain (LBP) emphasise patient information, patient education and physical activity as key components. Little is known about who actually receives information. This study investigates to what extent information at the first consultation with general practitioner (GP), chiropractor (DC) and physiotherapist (PT) in Danish primary care is provided to patients with LBP.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This cross-sectorial study was conducted as a prospective survey registration of LBP consultations at the three primary health care professions in Denmark.

INTERVENTION

Clinicians ticked off a paper survey chart during or after consultations with patients who visited the clinic for LBP (Approval number: ID # 11.220).

SUBJECTS

33 GPs, 43 DCs and 61 PTs registered first-time consultations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was provision of information, overall and across care settings.

RESULTS

The overall proportion of patients provided with information was 72%, but this varied among professions (GP, 44%; DC, 76%; and PT, 74%). Provision of information increased to 78% if patients had increased emotional distress or back-related leg pain below the knee. The strongest association with provision of information was having two or three signs of elevated distress (OR 2.58 and 5.05, respectively, p= 0.00) or physical disability (OR 2.55, p= 0.00).

CONCLUSION

In more than a quarter of first-time consultations, patient information was not provided. Large variation in providing information was found across the settings. The proportion provided with information increased for sub-populations having elevated distress or back-related leg pain below the knee.Key Points Clinical guidelines recommend patient information, patient education and physical activity for managing low back pain (LBP)  • Information is not provided in more than a quarter of first-time consultations in Danish primary care settings that manage these patients. • Information increased for the sub-populations having elevated distress and back-related leg pain below the knee. • The conducted primary care surveys monitored clinical activity and illustrated variations in provision of information.

Disc degeneration could be recovered after chemonucleolysis with condoliase.-1 year clinical outcome of condoliase therapy

BACKGROUND

Condoliase-induced chemonucleolysis is a less-invasive alternative treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH); however, its long-term clinical outcome is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate 1-year clinical outcomes and assess radiographs after chemonucleolysis with condoliase.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with LDH who received condoliase injection with a follow-up period of >1 year. Sixty patients (37 men, 23 women; mean age, 44.5 ± 18.9 years; mean follow-up period, 22.0 ± 6.0 months) were analyzed. Changes in disc height and degeneration were evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for leg and back pain and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were obtained. All data were assessed at baseline, 1-month, 3-month, and 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment was subsequently required in 8 patients (12.5%) after condoliase therapy. Their ODI and VAS scores for leg pain and back pain significantly improved at 1 year, as in those who received condoliase therapy only. On MRI, progression of Pfirrmann grade was observed in 23 patients (44.2%) at 3 months; however, 8 patients recovered to baseline at 1 year. The mean disc height decreased at 3 months; however, it recovered at 1 year. Disc height recovery (disc recovery rate >50%) was observed in 30.8% of the patients. Patients with disc height recovery were significantly younger than those without. Patients with longer symptom duration (≥1 year) showed significantly lower rates of effectiveness compared with those with shorter symptom durations (<1 year).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemonucleolysis with condoliase is a safe and minimally invasive treatment. Disc degeneration induced by chemonucleolysis could be recovered, particularly in younger patients. Prolonged symptom duration had adverse effects on outcome; thus, therapeutic intervention at the optimal time is needed.

Reliability of the straight leg raise test for suspected lumbar radicular pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The passive straight leg raise (SLR) and crossed SLR are recommended tests for lumbar radicular pain. There are no recent reviews of test reliability.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize SLR and crossed SLR reliability in patients with suspected lumbar radicular pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

METHOD

MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched for studies published before April 2021 that reported SLR or crossed SLR reliability in patients with low back-related leg pain. Supplemental analyses also included patients with low back pain only. Study selection, risk of bias assessment (QAREL), and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Kappa, intraclass correlation coefficients, and smallest detectable difference (SDD₉₅) quantified reliability. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Confidence in the evidence was determined by applying GRADE principles.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Fifteen studies met selection criteria. One-hundred-eighty-nine participants had low back-related leg pain. Four-hundred-thirty-nine were included in supplemental analyses. Meta-analyses showed at least fair inter-rater reliability when a positive SLR required provocation of lower extremity symptoms or pain. SLR reliability was at least moderate when testing included structural differentiation (e.g., ankle dorsiflexion). A low prevalence of positive crossed SLR tests led to wide-ranging reliability estimates. Confidence in the evidence for identifying a positive SLR or crossed SLR was moderate to very low. SDD₉₅ values for different raters measuring SLR range of motion ranged from 13 to 20°.

CONCLUSIONS

Reliability data support testing SLR with structural differentiation manoeuvres. Crossed SLR reliability data are inconclusive. Measurement error likely prohibits using SLR range of motion for clinical decision-making.

Acupuncture for chronic sciatica: protocol for a multicenter randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic Sciatica is a disabling condition causing considerable medical, social and financial implications. Currently, there is no recognised long-term effective treatment to alleviate sciatica. Acupuncture has been widely used for treating chronic pains with persistent analgesic effects. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for chronic sciatica with follow-up in 52 weeks.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicenter randomised sham-controlled trial. A total of 216 patients with chronic sciatica will be enrolled and randomly assigned to the acupuncture or sham acupuncture group. There will be 10 treatment sessions applied in 4 weeks with frequency decreased over time. Patients will complete follow-ups during 52 weeks. The primary outcomes are changes in leg pain intensity and disability from baseline to week 4. Secondary outcomes include back pain intensity, frequency and bothersomeness, quality of life, and global perceived effect. Adverse events will be recorded in detail.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval of this trial was granted from the ethics committee of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine and all study centres (No. 2020BZYLL0803). Written informed consent will be obtained from enrolled patients. Trial results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100044585 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, http://www.chictr.org.cn, registered on 24 March 2021); preresults.

Disentangling 'sciatica' to understand and characterise somatosensory profiles and potential pain mechanisms

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to investigate if patients with lumbar radicular pain only and those with combined lumbar radicular pain + radiculopathy differ in their somatosensory profiles and pain experiences.

METHODS

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) was performed in 26 patients (mean age 47 ± 10 years, 10 females) with unilateral leg pain in the L5 or S1 distribution in their main pain area (MPA) and contralateral mirror side, in the relevant foot dermatome on the symptomatic side and in the hand dorsum. Pain experience was captured on the painDETECT.

RESULTS

Eight patients presented with lumbar radicular pain only and 18 patients with combined radicular pain + radiculopathy. Patients with radicular pain only demonstrated widespread loss of function (mechanical detection) bilaterally in the MPA (p<0.003) and hand (p=0.002), increased heat sensitivity in both legs (p<0.019) and cold/heat sensitivity in the hand (p<0.024). QST measurements in the dermatome did not differ compared to HCs and patients with radiculopathy. Patients with lumbar radiculopathy were characterised by a localised loss of function in the symptomatic leg in the MPA (warm, mechanical, vibration detection, mechanical pain threshold, mechanical pain sensitivity p<0.031) and dermatome (mechanical, vibration detection p<0.001), consistent with a nerve root lesion. Pain descriptors did not differ between the two groups with the exception of numbness (p<0.001). Patients with radicular pain did not report symptoms of numbness, while 78% of patients with radiculopathy did.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinct differences in somatosensory profiles and pain experiences were demonstrated for each patient group, suggesting differing underlying pain mechanisms.

[Entrapment neuropathies: a contemporary approach to pathophysiology, clinical assessment, and management : German version]

Entrapment neuropathies such as carpal tunnel syndrome, radiculopathies, or radicular pain are the most common peripheral neuropathies and also the most common cause for neuropathic pain. Despite their high prevalence, they often remain challenging to diagnose and manage in a clinical setting. Summarising the evidence from both preclinical and clinical studies, this review provides an update on the aetiology and pathophysiology of entrapment neuropathies. Potenzial mechanisms are put in perspective with clinical findings. The contemporary assessment is discussed and diagnostic pitfalls highlighted. The evidence for the noninvasive and surgical management of common entrapment neuropathies is summarised and future areas of research are identified.

Axially Loaded Magnetic Resonance Imaging Identification of the Factors Associated with Low Back-Related Leg Pain

This retrospective observational study was conducted to identify factors associated with low back-related leg pain (LBLP) using axially loaded magnetic resonance imaging (AL-MRI). Ninety patients with low back pain (LBP) underwent AL-MRI of the lumbar spine. A visual analog scale and patient pain drawings were used to evaluate pain intensity and location and determine LBLP cases. The values of AL-MRI findings were analyzed using a logistic regression model with a binary dependent variable equal to one for low back-related leg pain and zero otherwise. Logistic regression results suggested that intervertebral joint effusion (odds ratio (OR) = 4.58; p = 0.035), atypical ligamenta flava (OR = 5.77; p = 0.003), and edema of the lumbar intervertebral joint (OR = 6.41; p = 0.003) were more likely to be present in LBLP patients. Advanced disc degeneration (p = 0.009) and synovial cysts (p = 0.004) were less frequently observed in LBLP cases. According to the AL-MRI examinations, the odds of having LBLP are more likely if facet effusion, abnormal ligamenta flava, and lumbar facet joint edema are present on imaging than if not. The assessment of lumbar spine morphology in axial loaded MRI adds value to the potential understanding of LBLP, but further longitudinal and loaded–unloaded comparative studies are required to determine the role of acute dynamic changes and instability in LBLP development.

Effectiveness of stratified treatment for back pain in Danish primary care: A randomized controlled trial

Background

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of stratified care demonstrated superior clinical outcomes and cost‐effectiveness for low back pain (LBP) patients in UK primary care. This is the first study in Europe, outside of the original UK study, to investigate the clinical efficacy and cost‐effectiveness of stratified care compared with current practice for patients with non‐specific LBP.

Methods

The study was a two‐armed RCT. Danish primary care patients with LBP were randomized to stratified care (n = 169) or current practice (n = 164). Primary outcomes at 3‐ and 12‐months' follow‐up were Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDMQ), patient‐reported global change and time off work. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, patient satisfaction, healthcare resource utilization and quality‐adjusted life years.

Results

Intention‐to‐treat analyses found no between‐group difference in RMDQ scores at 3 months (0.5, 95% CI −1.8 to 0.9) or 12 months (0.4, −2.1 to 1.3). No overall differences were found between the arms at 3 and 12 months with respect to time off work or secondary outcomes. Stratified care intervention resulted in significantly fewer treatment sessions (3.5 [SD 3.1] vs. 4.5 [3.5]) and significantly lower total healthcare costs (€) (13.4 [529] vs. 228 [830], p = .002). There was no difference in cost‐effectiveness (0.09, 0.05 to 0.13 vs. 0.10, 0.07–0.14, p = .70).

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between patients with non‐specific LBP receiving stratified care and those receiving current practice. However, stratified care may reduce total healthcare costs if implemented in Danish primary care.

Significance

Stratified care for low back pain based on risk profile is recommended by recent evidence based clinical guidelines. This study is the first broad replication of the STarT Back Trial in Europe. Therefore, the study adds to the body of knowledge evaluating the effectiveness of stratified care for low back pain in primary care, and provides insight into the effects of stratification on clinical practice.

STeroids Against Radiculopathy (STAR) trial: a statistical analysis plan

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal epidural injections with steroids (TESI) are used increasingly for patients with sciatica. However, their safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness are still a matter of debate. This a priori statistical analysis plan describes the methodology of the analysis for the STAR trial that assesses the (cost-)effectiveness of TESI during the acute stage of sciatica (< 8 weeks).

METHODS

The STAR trial is a multicentre, randomized controlled, prospective trial (RCT) investigating the (cost-)effectiveness of TESI by making a three-group comparison among patients with acute sciatica due to a herniated lumbar disc (< 8 weeks): (1) TESI combined with levobupivacaine added to oral pain medication (intervention group 1) versus oral pain medication alone (control group), (2) intervention group 1 versus transforaminal epidural injection with levobupivacaine and saline solution added to oral pain medication (intervention group 2), and (3) intervention group 2 versus control group. Co-primary outcomes were physical functioning (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire), pain intensity (10-point numerical rating scale), and global perceived recovery (7-point Likert scale, dichotomized into 'recovered' and 'not recovered'). For all three comparisons, we defined the following minimal clinically relevant between-group differences: two points for pain intensity (range 0-10), four points for physical functioning (range 0-24) and a 20% difference in recovery rate. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and patient satisfaction (7-point Likert scale) and surgery rate. We also collected resource use data to perform an economic evaluation. Analyses will be conducted by intention-to-treat with p < 0.05 (two-tailed) for all three comparisons. Effects will be estimated using mixed models by maximum likelihood. For each comparison, mean differences, or difference in proportions, between groups will be tested per time point and an overall mean difference, or difference in proportions, between groups during the complete duration of follow-up (6 months) will be estimated. In the economic evaluation, Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations will be used to handle missing data. Cost and effect differences will be estimated using seemingly unrelated regression, and uncertainty will be estimated using bootstrapping techniques.

DISCUSSION

This statistical analysis plan provides detailed information on the intended analysis of the STAR trial, which aims to deliver evidence about the (cost-)effectiveness of TESI during the acute phase of sciatica (< 8 weeks).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch National trial register NTR4457 (6 March 2014).

Physical Therapy Referral From Primary Care for Acute Back Pain With Sciatica : A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined primary care management for acute sciatica, including referral to physical therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether early referral to physical therapy reduced disability more than usual care (UC) alone for patients with acute sciatica.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02391350).

SETTING

2 health care systems in Salt Lake City, Utah.

PATIENTS

220 adults aged 18 to 60 years with sciatica of less than 90 days' duration who were making an initial primary care consultation.

INTERVENTION

All participants received imaging and medication at the discretion of the primary care provider before enrollment. A total of 110 participants randomly assigned to UC were provided 1 session of education, and 110 participants randomly assigned to early physical therapy (EPT) were provided 1 education session and then referred for 4 weeks of physical therapy, including exercise and manual therapy.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (OSW) score after 6 months. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity, patient-reported treatment success, health care use, and missed workdays.

RESULTS

Participants in the EPT group had greater improvement from baseline to 6 months for the primary outcome (relative difference, -5.4 points [95% CI, -9.4 to -1.3 points]; P = 0.009). The OSW and several secondary outcomes favored EPT after 4 weeks. After 1 year, between-group differences favored EPT for the OSW (relative difference, -4.8 points [CI, -8.9 to -0.7 points]) and back pain intensity (relative difference, -1.0 points [CI, -1.6 to -0.4 points]). The EPT group was more likely to self-report treatment success after 1 year (45.2%) than the UC group (27.6%) (relative risk, 1.6 [CI, 1.1 to 2.4]). There were no significant differences in health care use or missed workdays.

LIMITATION

The patients and providers were unblinded, and specific physical therapy interventions responsible for effects could not be determined.

CONCLUSION

Referral from primary care to physical therapy for recent-onset sciatica improved disability and other outcomes compared with UC.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Illness perceptions as an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether illness perceptions, measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, are an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability at 12 weeks.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational cohort study.

SETTING

26 outpatient primary care physiotherapy practices throughout the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Acute nonspecific low back pain patients between the age of 18 and 60 years, with or without radiating pain, and a pain-free episode of at least three months before onset.

INTERVENTIONS

Standard physiotherapy care according to Dutch clinical practice guidelines.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Chronic low back pain defined as pain ≥3/10 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and as pain-related disability ≥19/70 on the Pain Disability Index measured after 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Two hundred and four people with acute nonspecific low back pain completed both assessments. In the multivariable analyses, adjusted for pain intensity, disability, duration, radiating pain, depressed mood, associations of illness perceptions were OR 1.04 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.08) for pain and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.09) for pain-related disability.

CONCLUSIONS

Illness perceptions independently predicted chronic low back pain but not pain-related disability at 12 weeks. The added predictive value of illness perceptions was relatively low.

Validation of the Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for Back pain patients (Q-SAP)

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that not only pain intensity but also impairment of quality of life and functionality are important parameters for the evaluation of treatment of chronic low back pain patients. The aim of the study was to validate a specific self-questionnaire for symptom assessment and their influence on quality of life and functionality of chronic low back pain patients (Questionnaire for Symptom Assessment in Pain disorders for back pain patients, Q-SAP).

METHODS

The self-questionnaire consists of two parts (for back and if applicable leg symptoms) and was tested in 152 chronic low back pain patients with and without radiculopathy. Test-retest reliability, exploratory factor analysis, convergent validity, criterion-related validity and the sensitivity to detect patient reported changes were investigated.

RESULTS

The questionnaire showed a good to excellent test-retest reliability. In the factor analysis nociceptive and neuropathic pain components could be separated and the highest convergent validities were shown for the painDETECT, EQ-5D-3L and the FFbH-R. The criterion-related validity showed concordance of QST and the Q-SAP Back for warmth induced pain and numbness. Regarding the sensitivity to patient-reported changes, a moderate correlation was found for both parts of the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The Q-SAP was tested as a useful, valid and reliable tool. This new questionnaire records classical nociceptive and neuropathic pain symptoms of chronic low back pain patients depending on their local distribution. Furthermore, the questionnaire records the intensity of these symptoms and their influence on quality of life and functionality and can be used for the evaluation of treatment.

SIGNIFICANCE

The Q-SAP Back/Leg is a new self-questionnaire for CLBP patients with or without radiating leg pain that precisely assesses neuropathic and nociceptive symptoms. In contrast to other questionnaires, the Q-SAP Back/Leg evaluates not only symptom intensities but also their impact on the patient's quality of life and functionality. Furthermore, this questionnaire requests the symptoms depending on their anatomical distribution.

Stratified versus usual care for the management of primary care patients with sciatica: the SCOPiC RCT

BACKGROUND

Sciatica has a substantial impact on patients and society. Current care is 'stepped', comprising an initial period of simple measures of advice and analgesia, for most patients, commonly followed by physiotherapy, and then by more intensive interventions if symptoms fail to resolve. No study has yet tested a model of stratified care in which patients are subgrouped and matched to different care pathways based on their prognosis and clinical characteristics.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a stratified care model compared with usual, non-stratified care.

DESIGN

This was a two-parallel group, multicentre, pragmatic, 1 : 1 randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from primary care (42 general practices) in North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales and Cheshire in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years, had suspected sciatica, had access to a mobile phone/landline, were not pregnant, were not receiving treatment for the same problem and had not had previous spinal surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

In stratified care, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services was used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 received advice and up to two sessions of physiotherapy, group 2 received up to six sessions of physiotherapy, and group 3 was fast-tracked to magnetic resonance imaging and spinal specialist opinion. Usual care was based on the stepped-care approach without the use of any stratification tools/algorithms. Patients were randomised using a remote web-based randomisation service.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms (six point ordinal scale, collected via text messages). Secondary outcomes (at 4 and 12 months) included pain, function, psychological health, days lost from work, work productivity, satisfaction with care and health-care use. A cost-utility analysis was undertaken over 12 months. A qualitative study explored patients' and clinicians' views of the fast-track care pathway to a spinal specialist.

RESULTS

A total of 476 patients were randomised (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89.3% (88.3% and 90.3% in the stratified and usual care arms, respectively). Relief from symptoms was slightly faster (2 weeks median difference) in the stratified care arm, but this difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.46; p = 0.288). On average, participants in both arms reported good improvement from baseline, on most outcomes, over time. Following the assessment at the research clinic, most participants in the usual care arm were referred to physiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The stratified care model tested in this trial was not more clinically effective than usual care, and was not likely to be a cost-effective option. The fast-track pathway was felt to be acceptable to both patients and clinicians; however, clinicians expressed reluctance to consider invasive procedures if symptoms were of short duration.

LIMITATIONS

Participants in the usual care arm, on average, reported good outcomes, making it challenging to demonstrate superiority of stratified care. The performance of the algorithm used to allocate patients to treatment pathways may have influenced results.

FUTURE WORK

Other approaches to stratified care may provide superior outcomes for sciatica.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN75449581.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 49. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Physiotherapy for people with painful peripheral neuropathies: a narrative review of its efficacy and safety

Pharmacological treatment for peripheral neuropathic pain has only modest effects and is often limited by serious adverse responses. Alternative treatment approaches including physiotherapy management have thus gained interest in the management of people with peripheral neuropathies. This narrative review summarises the current literature on the efficacy and safety of physiotherapy to reduce pain and disability in people with radicular pain and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, 2 common peripheral neuropathies. For chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, the current evidence based on 8 randomised controlled trials suggests that exercise may reduce symptoms in patients with established neuropathy, but there is a lack of evidence for its preventative effect in patients who do not yet have symptoms. For radicular pain, most of the 21 trials investigated interventions targeted at improving motor control or reducing neural mechanosensitivity. The results were equivocal, with some indication that neural tissue management may show some benefits in reducing pain. Adverse events to physiotherapy seemed rare; however, these were not consistently reported across all studies. Although it is encouraging to see that the evidence base for physiotherapy in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain is growing steadily, the mixed quality of available studies currently prevents firm treatment recommendations. Based on promising preliminary data, suggestions are made on potential directions to move the field forward.

Entrapment neuropathies: a contemporary approach to pathophysiology, clinical assessment, and management

Entrapment neuropathies such as carpal tunnel syndrome, radiculopathies, or radicular pain are the most common peripheral neuropathies and also the most common cause for neuropathic pain. Despite their high prevalence, they often remain challenging to diagnose and manage in a clinical setting. Summarising the evidence from both preclinical and clinical studies, this review provides an update on the aetiology and pathophysiology of entrapment neuropathies. Potential mechanisms are put in perspective with clinical findings. The contemporary assessment is discussed and diagnostic pitfalls highlighted. The evidence for the noninvasive and surgical management of common entrapment neuropathies is summarised and future areas of research are identified.

Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial

Background

Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care.

Methods

We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as “completely recovered” or “much better” on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581.

Findings

Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4–13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4–14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89–1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care.

Interpretation

The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

Why managing sciatica is difficult: patients' experiences of an NHS sciatica pathway. A qualitative, interpretative study

OBJECTIVES

Amid a political agenda for integrated, high-value care, the UK is implementing its Low Back and Radicular Pain Pathway. To align care with need, it is imperative to understand the patients' perspective. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to explore how people experience being managed for sciatica within an National Health Service (NHS) pathway.

DESIGN

Qualitative interpretative study.

SETTING

Musculoskeletal Service in an NHS, Primary Care Trust, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample comprised 14 people aged ≥18 years with a clinical presentation of sciatica, who were currently under the care of a specialist physiotherapist (the specialist spinal triage practitioner), had undergone investigations (MRI) and received the results within the past 6 weeks. People were excluded if they had previously undergone spinal surgery or if the suspected cause of symptoms was cauda equina syndrome or sinister pathology. Participants were sampled purposively for variation in age and gender. Data were collected using individual semi-structured interviews (duration: 38-117 min; median: 82.6 min), which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

A series of problems with the local pathway (insufficient transparency and information; clinician-led decisions; standardised management; restricted access to specialist care; and a lack of collaboration between services) made it difficult for patients to access the management they perceived necessary. Patients were therefore required to be independent and proactive or have agency. This was, however, difficult to achieve (due to the impact of sciatica and because patients lacked the necessary skills, funds and support) and together with the pathway issues, this negated patients' capability to manage sciatica.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel paper explores how patients experience the process of being managed within a sciatica pathway. While highlighting the need to align with recommended best practice, it shows the need to be more person-centred and to support and empower patient agency.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov reference (UOS-2307-CR); Pre-results.

Burden of Sciatica on US Medicare Recipients

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates the disease burden of sciatica on the US Medicare cohort.

BACKGROUND DATA

Sciatica is a common disability that has important physical, mental, and economic effects. The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (HOS) is a demographic and outcomes survey used to monitor the performance of Medicare Advantage health plans in the United States. The HOS includes data on demographics, chronic medical conditions, and patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Medicare HOS data for cohorts from 2007 to 2013 were obtained. Patients were placed into two categories based on the survey results: with or without a history of sciatica. Baseline demographics, chronic medical conditions, and physical health symptoms were aggregated. In addition, average VR-12 physical component summary and mental component summary scores were calculated for each group at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. A Fisher exact test was used to assess significance for categorical variables, and a t-test was used for continuous variables. VR-12 changes as small as 1 to 2 units have been found to be clinically and socially relevant.

RESULTS

The baseline cohort data of 1,000,952 patients yielded 250,869 patients (25%) who reported the diagnosis of sciatica, compared with 750,083 patients (75%) without sciatica. Patients with a history of sciatica tended to be younger, less educated, and notably with more medical comorbidities. Physical component summary outcomes were approximately 8 units lower in the sciatica group at baseline and 7 units lower at 2-year follow-up. Mental component summary outcomes were 6 units lower in the sciatica group at baseline and 5 units lower at 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A large percentage of the US Medicare cohort suffers from symptomatic sciatica. Our study identified a 25% prevalence in the Medicare cohort. In addition, sciatica is associated with an increased incidence of comorbid medical conditions and poor health-related quality of life.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III STUDY DESIGN:: Observational-Cohort Study.

The influence of nociceptive and neuropathic pain states on the processing of acute electrical nociceptive stimulation: A dynamic causal modeling study

INTRODUCTION

Despite the worldwide increase in prevalence of chronic pain and the subsequent scientific interest, researchers studying the brain and brain mechanisms in pain patients have not yet clearly identified the exact underlying mechanisms. Quantifying the neuronal interactions in electrophysiological data could help us gain insight into the complexity of chronic pain. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine how different underlying pain states affect the processing of nociceptive information.

METHODS

Twenty healthy participants, 20 patients with non-neuropathic low back-related leg pain and 20 patients with neuropathic failed back surgery syndrome received nociceptive electrical stimulation at the right sural nerve with simultaneous electroencephalographic recordings. Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) was used to infer hidden neuronal states within a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Pain intensity ratings and stimulus intensity of the nociceptive stimuli did not differ between groups. Compared to healthy participants, both patient groups had the same winning DCM model, with an additional forward and backward connection between the somatosensory cortex and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

DISCUSSION

The additional neuronal connection with the prefrontal cortex as seen in both pain patient groups could be a reflection of the higher attention towards pain in pain patients and might be explained by the higher levels of pain catastrophizing in these patients.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to the similar pain intensity ratings of an acute nociceptive electrical stimulus between pain patients and healthy participants, the brain is processing these stimuli in a different way.

Understanding sciatica: illness and treatment beliefs in a lumbar radicular pain population. A qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Several pathological processes contribute to lumbar radicular pain (LRP), commonly known as sciatica. It is not known how patients rationalise the experience of sciatica or understand the diagnosis. Providing clinicians with a better understanding of how patients conceptualise sciatica will help them to tailor information for patients on the management and treatment of the condition.

AIM

To understand patients' beliefs regarding their illness following a diagnosis of LRP, how these beliefs were developed, and the impact of illness beliefs on treatment beliefs.

DESIGN & SETTING

Qualitative interview study from a single NHS musculoskeletal interface service (in Wales, UK).

METHOD

Thirteen patients recently diagnosed with LRP were consecutively recruited. Individual semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

Four main themes were generated: (1) the illness experience (2) the concept of sciatica, (3) treatment beliefs, and (4) the desire for credible information.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis of LRP is often communicated and understood within a compressive conceptual illness identity. Explaining symptoms with a compressive pathological model is easily understood by patients but may not accurately reflect the spectrum of pathological processes known to contribute to radicular pain. This model appears to inform patient beliefs about treatments. Clinicians should take care to fully explain the pathology prior to shared decision-making with patients.

New insight to the characteristics and clinical course of clusters of patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica

BACKGROUND

Referral to secondary care is common for a considerable proportion of patients with persistent sciatica symptoms. It is unclear if information from clinical assessment can further identify distinct subgroups of disc-related sciatica, with perhaps different clinical courses.

AIMS

This study aims to identify and describe clusters of imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica patients using latent class analysis, and compare their clinical course.

METHODS

The study population were 466 patients with disc-related sciatica. Variables from clinical assessment were included in the analysis. Characteristics of the identified clusters were described and their clinical course over 2 years was compared.

RESULTS

A four-cluster solution was optimal. Cluster 1 (n = 110) had mild back and leg pain; cluster 2 (n = 59) had moderate back and leg pain; cluster 3 (n = 158) had mild back pain and severe leg pain; cluster 4 (n = 139) had severe back and leg pain. Patients in cluster 4 had the most severe profile in terms of disability, distress and comorbidity and the lowest reported global change and the smallest proportion of patients with a successful outcome at 2 years. Of the 135 patients who underwent surgery, 42% and 41% were in clusters 3 and 4, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a strict diagnosis of sciatica, this work identified four clusters of patients primarily differentiated by back and leg pain severity. Patients with severe back and leg pain had the most severe profile at baseline and follow-up irrespective of intervention. This simple classification system may be useful when considering prognosis and management with sciatica patients.

SIGNIFICANCE

Using data from a large observational prospective study, this work identifies four distinct clusters of patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica. This classification could be used when considering prognosis and management with sciatica patients at their initial consultation.

Subgrouping patients with sciatica in primary care for matched care pathways: development of a subgrouping algorithm

Background

Sciatica is a painful condition managed by a stepped care approach for most patients. Currently, there are no decision-making tools to guide matching care pathways for patients with sciatica without evidence of serious pathology, early in their presentation. This study sought to develop an algorithm to subgroup primary care patients with sciatica, for initial decision-making for matched care pathways, including fast-track referral to investigations and specialist spinal opinion.

Methods

This was an analysis of existing data from a UK NHS cohort study of patients consulting in primary care with sciatica (n = 429). Factors potentially associated with referral to specialist services, were identified from the literature and clinical opinion. Percentage of patients fast-tracked to specialists, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for identifying this subgroup, were calculated.

Results

The algorithm allocates patients to 1 of 3 groups, combining information about four clinical characteristics, and risk of poor prognosis (low, medium or high risk) in terms of pain-related persistent disability. Patients at low risk of poor prognosis, irrespective of clinical characteristics, are allocated to group 1. Patients at medium risk of poor prognosis who have all four clinical characteristics, and patients at high risk of poor prognosis with any three of the clinical characteristics, are allocated to group 3. The remainder are allocated to group 2. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of the algorithm for patient allocation to fast-track group 3, were 51, 73 and 22% respectively.

Conclusion

We developed an algorithm to support clinical decisions regarding early referral for primary care patients with sciatica. Limitations of this study include the low positive predictive value and use of data from one cohort only. On-going research is investigating whether the use of this algorithm and the linked care pathways, leads to faster resolution of sciatica symptoms.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2686-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The addition of neurodynamic exercises to extension-oriented exercises among patients with chronic back-related leg pain: A study protocol

BACKGROUND

Patients with back-related leg pain exhibit nociceptive and neuropathic characteristics. Few studies have investigated the combination of interventions considering these characteristics.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if the addition of neurodynamic exercises (EEN) to extension-oriented exercises (EE) promotes additional benefits in individuals with back-related leg pain and a directional preference.

METHODS

Patients will be randomized to either EE or EEN. Patients from both groups will receive 7 sessions over 3 weeks. Low back and leg pain, function, quality of life, disability, and global perceived effect will be evaluated at baseline, 3 weeks after randomization and 1-month follow-up. A linear mixed model will be used for outcomes analysis.

Factors associated with costs and health outcomes in patients with Back and leg pain in primary care: a prospective cohort analysis

Background

There is limited research on the economic burden of low back-related leg pain, including sciatica. The aim of this study was to describe healthcare resource utilisation and factors associated with cost and health outcomes in primary care patients consulting with symptoms of low back-related leg pain including sciatica.

Methods

This study is a prospective cohort of 609 adults visiting their family doctor with low back-related leg pain, with or without sciatica in a United Kingdom (UK) Setting. Participants completed questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments, received an MRI scan, and were followed-up for 12-months. The economic analysis outcome was the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) calculated from the EQ-5D-3 L data obtained at baseline, 4 and 12-months. Costs were measured based on patient self-reported information on resource use due to back-related leg pain and results are presented from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and Societal perspective. Factors associated with costs and outcomes were obtained using a generalised linear model.

Results

Base-case results showed improved health outcomes over 12-months for the whole cohort and slightly higher QALYs for patients in the sciatica group. NHS resource use was highest for physiotherapy and GP visits, and work-related productivity loss highest from a societal perspective. The sciatica group was associated with significantly higher work-related productivity costs. Cost was significantly associated with factors such as self-rated general health and care received as part of the study, while quality of life was significantly predicted by self-rated general health, and pain intensity, depression, and disability scores.

Conclusions

Our results contribute to understanding the economics of low back- related leg pain and sciatica and may provide guidance for future actions on cost reduction and health care improvement strategies.

Trial registration

13/09/2011 Retrospectively registered; ISRCTN62880786.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4257-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Inflammatory biomarkers do not distinguish between patients with sciatica and referred leg pain within a primary care population: results from a nested study within the ATLAS cohort

Background

There is increasing interest in the role of pro-inflammatory cytokines in the pathogenesis of sciatica and whether these could be potential targets for treatment. We sought to investigate serum biomarker levels in patients with low back-related leg pain, including sciatica.

Methods

Primary care consulters aged > 18 with low back-related leg pain were recruited to a cohort study (ATLAS). Participants underwent a standardised clinical assessment, lumbar spine MRI and a subsample (n = 119) had samples taken for biomarker analysis. Participants were classified having: a) clinically confirmed sciatica or referred leg pain, and then subdivided into those with (or without) MRI confirmed nerve root compression due to disc prolapse. Seventeen key cytokines, chemokines and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) implicated in sciatica pathogenesis including TNFα and IL-6, were assayed in duplicate using commercial multiplex detection kits and measured using a Luminex suspension array system. Median biomarker levels were compared between the groups using a Mann Whitney U test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association between clinical measures and biomarker levels adjusted for possible confounders such as age, sex, and symptom duration.

Results

No difference was found in the serum level of any of the 17 biomarkers tested in patients with (n = 93) or without (n = 26) clinically confirmed sciatica, nor between those with (n = 44) or without (n = 49) sciatica and MRI confirmed nerve root compression.

Conclusion

In this cohort, no significant differences in serum levels of TNFα, IL-6 or any other biomarkers were seen between patients with sciatica and those with back pain with referred leg pain. These results suggest that in patients with low back-related leg pain, serum markers associated with inflammation do not discriminate between patients with or without clinically confirmed sciatica or between those with or without evidence of nerve root compression on MRI.

Use of Manual Therapy for Posterior Pelvic Girdle Pain

Use of manual therapies in the treatment of posterior pelvic pain is a common practice. The rationale for use of manual therapies is often associated with the structural movement of the sacroiliac joint. Increasing evidence has shown this not to be the case, as manual therapy's effect is more neurophysiological in nature. This article seeks to clarify the difference between the two explanations as well as to expand upon outside influences such as expectations, therapeutic alliance, and equipoise that may influence the outcome of treatment. Treatment effects may be maximized with manual therapy if clinicians have an understanding of the role of each of these variables in their treatment approach.

'Life on hold': The lived experience of radicular symptoms. A qualitative, interpretative inquiry

BACKGROUND

Patients with radicular symptoms can experience high levels of pain and disability with at least a third experiencing on-going symptoms 12 months after onset.

AIMS

To explore 'what matters' about living with radicular symptoms at the point of seeing a spinal specialist and to consider how care can be aligned to best address need.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, based on the principles of interpretative phenomenological analysis, 14 participants with a clinical presentation of radicular symptoms were purposively recruited from an NHS, Musculoskeletal Service in the UK. Individual, semi-structured interviews were undertaken, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were managed using a Framework approach and analysed thematically.

FINDINGS

Radicular symptoms were experienced as a protracted journey of acute exacerbations of symptoms that were difficult to make sense of. Adversely affecting almost all aspects of life, participants struggled to maintain their physical and functional independence; their important relationships; social networks and the roles and activities that provided joy and purpose. The impact of radicular symptoms was a 'life on hold' and an uncertain future, and 3/14 reported suicidal thoughts.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper, the first to focus on the lived experience of radicular symptoms at the point of seeing a spinal specialist, reveals the severity and devastating impact of radicular symptoms. Important implications have been identified regarding the need for clinicians to legitimise the symptoms and impact of radicular symptoms; to identify early those patients who might benefit from injection/surgery; and to signpost appropriate patients to sources of psychological support.

Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of work-related chronic low back pain: comparisons of different lumbar disc patterns

Background

Currently, there is a lack of comparative research about different lumbar disc patterns in patients with work-related chronic low back pain (CLBP) based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis. Therefore, this study, on different patterns of lumbar disc degeneration or herniation in patients with CLBP, is valuable. In this study, we retrospectively investigated lumbar degenerative changes in patients with CLBP by using MRI analysis.

Materials and methods

Two hundred and eighty-three patients (110 women and 173 men) with work-related CLBP were enrolled and divided into four groups based on intervertebral disc morphology from MRI analysis, including normal discs (ND) group, degenerative discs (DD) group, bulging discs (BD) group, and herniated discs (HD) group. Demographic characteristics, occupational information, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were analyzed. Moreover, multiple parameters were investigated in the MRI analysis.

Results

The mean age of all 283 patients was 41.8±12.0 years (range, 18-80) and the mean duration of CLBP for all patients was 24.5±24.9 months. There were no significant differences in the patients' BMI, history of smoking, and education level (P>0.05). The three most common occupational types were manual worker, desk worker, and technician. The VAS and ODI scores of patients with CLBP in the DD, BD, and HD groups were significantly higher than those of patients in the ND group (P<0.05). The degrees of degeneration of L4/5 and L5/S1 were significantly higher than those of other intervertebral discs (P<0.05). The disc heights of L4/5 in the BD and HD groups were significantly lower than those of the ND group (P<0.05) and the disc height of L5/S1 in the HD group was significantly lower than that of the ND group (P<0.05). At the neutral position, the distances of L3/4, L4/5, and L5/S1 discs' bulge/herniation in the BD and HD groups were significantly higher than those in the ND and DD groups (P<0.05).

Conclusion

In summary, more severe degenerative changes of lower lumbar discs (L4/5 and L5/S1) such as higher degree of degeneration of disc, lower disc height, and significant displacement of disc were found in patients with work-related CLBP based on MRI analysis.