Motor control or graded activity exercises for chronic low back pain? A randomised controlled trial

Background: Chronic low back pain remains a major health problem in Australia and around the world. Unfortunately the majority of treatments for this condition produce small effects because not all patients respond to each treatment. It appears that only 25-50% of patients respond to exercise. The two most popular types of exercise for low back pain are graded activity and motor control exercises. At present however, there are no guidelines to help clinicians select the best treatment for a patient. As a result, time and money are wasted on treatments which ultimately fail to help the patient

Avoidable costs of physical treatments for chronic back, neck and shoulder pain within the Spanish National Health Service: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Back, neck and shoulder pain are the most common causes of occupational disability. They reduce health-related quality of life and have a significant economic impact. Many different forms of physical treatment are routinely used. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of physical treatments which, despite the absence of evidence supporting their effectiveness, were used between 2004 and 2007 for chronic and non-specific neck pain (NP), back pain (BP) and shoulder pain (SP), within the Spanish National Health Service in the Canary Islands (SNHSCI).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Chronic patients referred from the SNHSCI to private physical therapy centres for NP, BP or SP, between 2004 and 2007, were identified. The cost of providing physical therapies to these patients was estimated. Systematic reviews (SRs) and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for NP, BP and SP available in the same period were searched for and rated according to the Oxman and AGREE criteria, respectively. Those rated positively for ≥70% of the criteria, were used to categorise physical therapies as Effective; Ineffective; Inconclusive; and Insufficiently Assessed. The main outcome was the cost of physical therapies included in each of these categories.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>8,308 chronic cases of NP, 4,693 of BP and 5,035 of SP, were included in this study. Among prescribed treatments, 39.88% were considered Effective (physical exercise and manual therapy with mobilization); 23.06% Ineffective; 13.38% Inconclusive, and 23.66% Insufficiently Assessed. The total cost of treatments was € 5,107,720. Effective therapies accounted for € 2,069,932.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Sixty percent of the resources allocated by the SNHSCI to fund physical treatment for NP, BP and SP in private practices are spent on forms of treatment proven to be ineffective, or for which there is no evidence of effectiveness.</p

Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the treatment of non-specific acute low back pain: a randomised controlled multicentre trial protocol [ISRCTN65814467]

BACKGROUND: Low back pain and its associated incapacitating effects constitute an important healthcare and socioeconomic problem, as well as being one of the main causes of disability among adults of working age. The prevalence of non-specific low back pain is very high among the general population, and 60–70% of adults are believed to have suffered this problem at some time. Nevertheless, few randomised clinical trials have been made of the efficacy and efficiency of acupuncture with respect to acute low back pain. The present study is intended to assess the efficacy of acupuncture for acute low back pain in terms of the improvement reported on the Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ) on low back pain incapacity, to estimate the specific and non-specific effects produced by the technique, and to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS/DESIGN: Randomised four-branch controlled multicentre prospective study made to compare semi-standardised real acupuncture, sham acupuncture (acupuncture at non-specific points), placebo acupuncture and conventional treatment. The patients are blinded to the real, sham and placebo acupuncture treatments. Patients in the sample present symptoms of non specific acute low back pain, with a case history of 2 weeks or less, and will be selected from working-age patients, whether in paid employment or not, referred by General Practitioners from Primary Healthcare Clinics to the four clinics participating in this study. In order to assess the primary and secondary result measures, the patients will be requested to fill in a questionnaire before the randomisation and again at 3, 12 and 48 weeks after starting the treatment. The primary result measure will be the clinical relevant improvement (CRI) at 3 weeks after randomisation. We define CRI as a reduction of 35% or more in the RMQ results. DISCUSSION: This study is intended to obtain further evidence on the effectiveness of acupuncture on acute low back pain and to isolate the specific and non-specific effects of the treatment

Individuals with chronic low back pain have greater difficulty in engaging in positive lifestyle behaviours than those without back pain: An assessment of health literacy

Background: Despite the large volume of research dedicated to understanding chronic low back pain (CLBP), patient outcomes remain modest while healthcare costs continue to rise, creating a major public health burden. Health literacy - the ability to seek, understand and utilise health information - has been identified as an important factor in the course of other chronic conditions and may be important in the aetiology of CLBP. Many of the currently available health literacy measurement tools are limited since they measure narrow aspects of health literacy. The Health Literacy Measurement Scale (HeLMS) was developed recently to measure broader elements of health literacy. The aim of this study was to measure broad elements of health literacy among individuals with CLBP and without LBP using the HeLMS.Methods: Thirty-six community-dwelling adults with CLBP and 44 with no history of LBP responded to the HeLMS. Individuals were recruited as part of a larger community-based spinal health study in Western Australia. Scores for the eight domains of the HeLMS as well as individual item responses were compared between the groups.Results: HeLMS scores were similar between individuals with and without CLBP for seven of the eight health literacy domains (p &gt; 0.05). However, compared to individuals with no history of LBP, those with CLBP had a significantly lower score in the domain &lsquo;Patient attitudes towards their health&rsquo; (mean difference [95% CI]: 0.46 [0.11- 0.82]) and significantly lower scores for each of the individual items within this domain (p &lt; 0.05). Moderate effect sizes ranged from d = 0.47-0.65.Conclusions: Although no differences were identified in HeLMS scores between the groups for seven of the health literacy domains, adults with CLBP reported greater difficulty in engaging in general positive health behaviours. This aspect of health literacy suggests that self-management support initiatives may benefit individuals with CLBP.<br /

Chapter 2 European guidelines for prevention in low back pain : November 2004.

Summary of the concepts of prevention in low back pain (LBP): • The general nature and course of commonly experienced LBP means that there is limited scope for preventing its incidence (first-time onset). Prevention, in the context of this guideline, is focused primarily on reduction of the impact and consequences of LBP. • Primary causative mechanisms remain largely undetermined: risk factor modification will not necessarily achieve prevention. • There is considerable scope, in principle, for prevention of the consequences of LBP – e.g. episodes (recurrence), care seeking, disability, and workloss. • Different interventions and outcomes will be appropriate for different target populations (general population, workers, and children) yet inevitably there is overlap. • Interventions that are essentially treatments in the clinical environment, focused on management of current symptoms, are not considered as ‘prevention’ for the purposes of this guideline: they are covered in the accompanying clinical guideline

Motor control exercise for chronic low back pain: A randomized placebo-controlled trial

Background. The evidence that exercise intervention is effective for treatment of chronic low back pain conics from trials that are not placebo-controlled

The effect of motor control exercise versus placebo in patients with chronic low back pain

Background: While one in ten Australians suffer from chronic low back pain this condition remains extremely difficult to treat. Many contemporary treatments are of unknown value. One potentially useful therapy is the use of motor control exercise. This therapy has a biologically plausible effect, is readily available in primary care and it is of modest cost. However, to date, the efficacy of motor control exercise has not been established. Methods: This paper describes the protocol for a clinical trial comparing the effects of motor control exercise versus placebo in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain. One hundred and fifty-four participants will be randomly allocated to receive an 8-week program of motor control exercise or placebo (detuned short wave and detuned ultrasound). Measures of outcomes will be obtained at follow-up appointments at 2, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcomes are: pain, global perceived effect and patient-generated measure of disability at 2 months and recurrence at 12 months. Discussion: This trial will be the first placebo-controlled trial of motor control exercise. The results will inform best practice for treating chronic low back pain and prevent its occurrence