Spinal cord stimulation for predominant low back pain in failed back surgery syndrome: study protocol for an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (PROMISE study)

Background: Although results of case series support the use of spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome patients with predominant low back pain, no confirmatory randomized controlled trial has been undertaken in this patient group to date. PROMISE is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study designed to compare the clinical effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation plus optimal medical management with optimal medical management alone in patients with failed back surgery syndrome and predominant low back pain. Method/Design: Patients will be recruited in approximately 30 centers across Canada, Europe, and the United States. Eligible patients with low back pain exceeding leg pain and an average Numeric Pain Rating Scale score >= 5 for low back pain will be randomized 1:1 to spinal cord stimulation plus optimal medical management or to optimal medical management alone. The investigators will tailor individual optimal medical management treatment plans to their patients. Excluded from study treatments are intrathecal drug delivery, peripheral nerve stimulation, back surgery related to the original back pain complaint, and experimental therapies. Patients randomized to the spinal cord stimulation group will undergo trial stimulation, and if they achieve adequate low back pain relief a neurostimulation system using the Specify (R) 5-6-5 multi-column lead (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) will be implanted to capture low back pain preferentially in these patients. Outcome assessment will occur at baseline (pre-randomization) and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months post randomization. After the 6-month visit, patients can change treatment to that received by the other randomized group. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with >= 50% reduction in low back pain at the 6-month visit. Additional outcomes include changes in low back and leg pain, functional disability, health-related quality of life, return to work, healthcare utilization including medication usage, and patient satisfaction. Data on adverse events will be collected. The primary analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Healthcare use data will be used to assess costs and long-term cost-effectiveness. Discussion: Recruitment began in January 2013 and will continue until 2016

Segmental stabilizing exercises and low back pain: What is the evidence?

Study design: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of segmental stabilizing exercises for acute, subacute and chronic low back pain with regard to pain, recurrence of pain, disability and return to work. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PEDro and article reference lists were searched from 1988 onward. Randomized controlled trials with segmental stabilizing exercises for adult low back pain patients were included. Four comparisons were foreseen: (1) effectiveness of segmental stabilizing exercises versus treatment by general practitioner (GP); (2) effectiveness of segmental stabilizing exercises versus other physiotherapy treatment; (3) effectiveness of segmental stabilizing exercises combined with other physiotherapy treatment versus treatment by GP and (4) effectiveness of segmental stabilizing exercises combined with other physiotherapy treatment versus other physiotherapy treatment. Results: Seven trials were included. For acute low back pain, segmental stabilizing exercises are equally effective in reducing short-term disability and pain and more effective in reducing long-term recurrence of low back pain than treatment by GP. For chronic low back pain, segmental stabilizing exercises are, in the short and long term, more effective than GP treatment and may be as effective as other physiotherapy treatments in reducing disability and pain. There is limited evidence that segmental stabilizing exercises additional to other physiotherapy treatment are equally effective for pain and more effective concerning disability than other physiotherapy treatments alone. There is no evidence concerning subacute low back pain. Conclusion: For low back pain, segmental stabilizing exercises are more effective than treatment by GP but they are not more effective than other physiotherapy interventions

Factors Associated with Low Back Pain Songket at Talang Aur Village Subdistrict Indralaya District Ogan Ilir

Background : Low back pain is a pain occuring below part of the back and capable of moving to feet particulary in the back and outside. In working, the songket workers sit on a non-laying chair. It will result in the emerge of the low back pain. Based on the issue, it is carried out a research aiming to recognize any factors corerlating with to the low back pain of the workers.Method : This research was conducted in 56 songket workers at Talang Aur village subdistrict Indralaya, district Ogan Ilir. This study uses cross sectional design. Data is processed and presented in frequency distribution tables, analyzed analytically by using chi square test. Data collected concist of secondary and primary data.Result : From the analysis of chi square test is known, there is a relation between of age and the low back pain (p value=0,045), there is no correlation between the working period and the low back pain (p value=0,3), there is no correlation between the long time of work and the low back pain (p value=0,860), there is no correlation between the resting time and the low back pain (p value=1,00), there is no correlation between the body mass index and the low back pain (p value=0,412),and there is a relation between the sitting potition in work and the low back pain (p value=0,455).Conclusion : Age has a significant statistical relationship with the complaint of low back pain. There was no statistically significant relationship between the period of employment, length of work, rest, and body mass index to the complaint of low back pain in songket producers at Talang Aur village year 2011

Conservative management of low back pain

Back pain is prevalent worldwide, but back pain disability has reached epidemic proportions in many industrialised societies. Few patients have serious medical pathology or direct neurological involvement requiring surgery. Although the causes remain unclear, physical stress and its consequences on discs, facet joints and supporting soft tissues at work or leisure are important, sometimes aggravated by adverse psychosocial factors. Modern management emphasises the role of self-care, beginning in primary care with the first episode. Without root compression, bed rest should not exceed 48 hours. Emphasis is on encouraging a rapid return to physical fitness and other activities, including employment, acknowledging that returning to a normal life may require working through pain. Medication facilitates this. No one should remain in pain beyond six weeks without being referred to a specialist service for a physical and psychosocial assessment by appropriately trained professionals and with consultant support for investigation, pain management and rehabilitation when needed

Chronic non-specific low back pain - sub-groups or a single mechanism?

Copyright 2008 Wand and O'Connell; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background: Low back pain is a substantial health problem and has subsequently attracted a considerable amount of research. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of a variety of interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain indicate limited effectiveness for most commonly applied interventions and approaches. Discussion: Many clinicians challenge the results of clinical trials as they feel that this lack of effectiveness is at odds with their clinical experience of managing patients with back pain. A common explanation for this discrepancy is the perceived heterogeneity of patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. It is felt that the effects of treatment may be diluted by the application of a single intervention to a complex, heterogeneous group with diverse treatment needs. This argument presupposes that current treatment is effective when applied to the correct patient. An alternative perspective is that the clinical trials are correct and current treatments have limited efficacy. Preoccupation with sub-grouping may stifle engagement with this view and it is important that the sub-grouping paradigm is closely examined. This paper argues that there are numerous problems with the sub-grouping approach and that it may not be an important reason for the disappointing results of clinical trials. We propose instead that current treatment may be ineffective because it has been misdirected. Recent evidence that demonstrates changes within the brain in chronic low back pain sufferers raises the possibility that persistent back pain may be a problem of cortical reorganisation and degeneration. This perspective offers interesting insights into the chronic low back pain experience and suggests alternative models of intervention. Summary: The disappointing results of clinical research are commonly explained by the failure of researchers to adequately attend to sub-grouping of the chronic non-specific low back pain population. Alternatively, current approaches may be ineffective and clinicians and researchers may need to radically rethink the nature of the problem and how it should best be managed

Therapy for Low Back Pain with Acupuncture and Turmeric

Background: Low Back pain (LBP) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder, affecting 70% - 85% of the adult population, and twelve months after onset of LBP, 45% - 75% of patients are still sick. Low back pain in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is usually associated with kidney or renal meridians. In She syndrome, lower back pain is often caused by pathogen wind, damp, cold, heat and blood stasis, whereas in the Xi syndrome lower back pain usually caused by deficiency of Jing, Qi, Yin, or Yang of the kidney. Purpose: To know the effect of acupuncture therapy at Pishu (BL 20), Shenshu (BL 23), Dachangshu (BL 25), Waiguan (TE 5) as well as herbal therapy using turmeric (Curcuma domestica) on low back pain sufferers. Methods: Acupuncture therapy at Pishu (BL 20), Shenshu (BL 23), Dachangshu (BL 25), Waiguan (TE 5) were given 12 times, 3 times a week. Herbal therapy was given for 30 days, taken 3 times a day with a dose of turmeric 1 gram. Results: This therapy could reduce the scale of low back pain from scale 8 to 0 and the spasme scale from 3 to 0, that also reducing the frequency of low back pain. Conclusion: Acupuncture therapy at Pishu (BL 20), Shenshu (BL 23), Dachangshu (BL 25), Waiguan (TE 5) and herbal therapy with 3 g of turmeric (Curcuma domestica) could resolve lower back pain

Reduced pressure pain thresholds in response to exercise in chronic fatigue syndrome but not in chronic low back pain: an experimental study

Objective The aims of this study were to examine (i) base line pressure pain thresholds in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and those with chronic low back pain compared with healthy subjects, (ii) the change in mean pain threshold in response to exercise, and (iii) associations with exercise induced increase in nitric oxide Participants Twenty six patients with chronic fatigue syndrome suffering of chronic pain, 21 patients with chronic low back pain and 31 healthy subjects Methods Participants underwent a submaximal aerobic exercise protocol on a bicycle ergometer, preceded and followed by venous blood sampling (nitric oxide) and algometry (hand arm calf low back) Results Patients with chronic fatigue syndrome presented overall lower pain thresholds compared with healthy sub jects and patients with chronic low back pain (p<0 05) No significant differences were found between healthy subjects and patients with chronic low back pain After submaximal aerobic exercise, mean pain thresholds decreased in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and increased in the others (p<0 01) At baseline nitric oxide levels were significantly higher in the chronic low back pain group After controlling for body mass index no significant differences were seen be tween the groups at baseline or in response to exercise Nitric oxide was not related to pain thresholds in either group Conclusion The results suggest hyperalgesia and abnormal central pain processing during submaximal aerobic exercise in chronic fatigue syndrome, but not in chronic low back pain Nitric oxide appeared to be unrelated to pain processin

Outcome of low back pain patients referred to orthopeadic outpatient clinic

Background: Musculoskeletal complaints are the commonest encounters in primary care. Low back pain management is commonly initiated by the family practitioner. Guidelines are limited as to when patients should be referred for specialist treatment by the orthopaedic department. Objectives: Evaluate the justification of low back pain referrals to Orthopedic outpatients (OOP), Mater Dei Hospital, Malta and assess whether these merited specialist consultation. Method: Anonymous data was collected over a 3- month period, where 100 low back pain new case referrals were evaluated during OOP. Data collection was based on routine questions normally brought forward during a consultation and a management plan which was documented in a spreadsheet. Data was analyzed using the same software. Results: Out of the total number of patients reviewed, 57 had been referred for the first time to OOP. Out of these, only 10 required an MRI with a scheduled follow up appointment. The remainder were referred for physiotherapy or pain clinic and discharged to follow-up in the community by the primary care physician. Out of 43 patients who had had previous OOP appointments complaining of lower back pain, 5 patients required an MRI and follow up appointment, remainder were discharged with physiotherapy or pain clinic appointments. Conclusion: The majority of patients seen at OOP could have been managed in primary care. It reflects the importance of developing local management guidelines for low back pain, which would assist general practitioners. It is indicative that referral to OOP should only be triggered when all treatment options available in the primary care are exhausted. This would lead to patients achieving targeted treatment timely within the community, resulting in shorter waiting time for outpatient visits.peer-reviewe