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

The role of agonist and antagonist muscles in explaining isometric knee extension torque variation with hip joint angle.

PURPOSE: The biarticular rectus femoris (RF), operating on the ascending limb of the force-length curve, produces more force at longer lengths. However, experimental studies consistently report higher knee extension torque when supine (longer RF length) compared to seated (shorter RF length). Incomplete activation in the supine position has been proposed as the reason for this discrepancy, but differences in antagonistic co-activation could also be responsible due to altered hamstrings length. We examined the role of agonist and antagonist muscles in explaining the isometric knee extension torque variation with changes in hip joint angle. METHOD: Maximum voluntary isometric knee extension torque (joint MVC) was recorded in seated and supine positions from nine healthy males (30.2 ± 7.7 years). Antagonistic torque was estimated using EMG and added to the respective joint MVC (corrected MVC). Submaximal tetanic stimulation quadriceps torque was also recorded. RESULT: Joint MVC was not different between supine (245 ± 71.8 Nm) and seated (241 ± 69.8 Nm) positions and neither was corrected MVC (257 ± 77.7 and 267 ± 87.0 Nm, respectively). Antagonistic torque was higher when seated (26 ± 20.4 Nm) than when supine (12 ± 7.4 Nm). Tetanic torque was higher when supine (111 ± 31.9 Nm) than when seated (99 ± 27.5 Nm). CONCLUSION: Antagonistic co-activation differences between hip positions do not account for the reduced MVC in the supine position. Rather, reduced voluntary knee extensor muscle activation in that position is the major reason for the lower MVC torque when RF is lengthened (hip extended). These findings can assist standardising muscle function assessment and improving musculoskeletal modelling applications

Beyond Discharge Disposition: A Scoping Review on Sociodemographic Disparities in Rehabilitation Use after Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this scoping review were to summarize the evidence regarding sex, racial, ethnic, geographic, and socioeconomic disparities in post-acute rehabilitation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Literature searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PEDro. Studies were included if they were original research articles published 1993 or later; used data from the US; included patients after THA and/or TKA; presented results according to relevant sociodemographic variables, including sex, race, ethnicity, geography, or socioeconomic status; and studied utilization of post-acute rehabilitation as an outcome. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Five examined disparities in inpatient rehabilitation and found that Black patients and women experience longer lengths of stay after arthroplasty, and women are less likely than men to be discharged home after inpatient THA rehabilitation. Four studies examined data from skilled nursing facilities and found that insurance type and dual eligibility impact length of stay and rates of community discharge but found conflicting results regarding racial disparities in skilled nursing facility utilization after TKA. Five studies examined home health data and noted that rural agencies provide less care after TKA. Results regarding racial disparities in home health utilization after arthroplasty were conflicting. Six studies of outpatient rehabilitation noted geographic differences in timing of outpatient rehabilitation but mixed results regarding race differences in outpatient rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that sex, race, ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status are associated with disparities in post-acute rehabilitation use after arthroplasty. IMPACT: Rehabilitation providers across the post-acute continuum should be aware of disparities in the population of patients after arthroplasty and regularly assess social determinants of health and other factors that may contribute to disparities. Customized care plans should ensure optimal timing and amount of rehabilitation is provided, and advocate for patients who need additional care to achieve the desired functional outcome

Exercise and manual auricular acupuncture: a pilot assessor-blind randomised controlled trial

Abstract Background Evidence supports the use of exercise for chronic low back pain (CLBP); however, adherence is often poor due to ongoing pain. Auricular acupuncture is a form of pain relief involving the stimulation of points on the outer ear corresponding with specific body parts. It may be a useful adjunct to exercise in managing CLBP; however, there is only limited evidence to support its use with this patient group. Methods/Design This study was designed to test the feasibility of an assessor-blind randomised controlled trial which assess the effects on clinical outcomes and exercise adherence of adding manual auricular acupuncture to a personalised and supervised exercise programme (PEP) for CLBP. No sample size calculation has been carried out as this study aims to identify CLBP referral rates within the catchment area of the study site. The researchers aim to recruit four cohorts of n = 20 participants to facilitate a power analysis for a future randomised controlled trial. A computer generated random allocation sequence will be prepared centrally and used to allocate participants by cohort to one of the following interventions: 1) six weeks of PEP plus manual auricular acupuncture; 2) six weeks of PEP alone. Both groups will also complete a further six weeks of self-paced exercise with telephone follow-up support. In addition to a baseline and exit questionnaire at the beginning and end of the study, the following outcomes will be collected at baseline, and after 7, 13 and 25 weeks: pain frequency and bothersomeness, back-specific function, objective assessment and recall of physical activity, use of analgesia, perceived self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs, and beliefs about the consequences of back pain. Since this is a feasibility study, significance tests will not be presented, and treatment effects will be represented by point estimates and confidence intervals. For each outcome variable, analysis of covariance will be performed on the data, conditioning on the baseline value. Discussion The results of this study investigating the adjuvant effects of auricular acupuncture to exercise in managing CLBP will be used to inform the design of a future multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Trial Registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN94142364

The McKenzie method for the management of acute non-specific low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial [ACTRN012605000032651]

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem. Effective treatment of acute LBP is important because it prevents patients from developing chronic LBP, the stage of LBP that requires costly and more complex treatment. Physiotherapists commonly use a system of diagnosis and exercise prescription called the McKenzie Method to manage patients with LBP. However, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of the McKenzie Method for these patients. We have designed a randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether the addition of the McKenzie Method to general practitioner care results in better outcomes than general practitioner care alone for patients with acute LBP. METHODS/DESIGN: This paper describes the protocol for a trial examining the effects of the McKenzie Method in the treatment of acute non-specific LBP. One hundred and forty eight participants who present to general medical practitioners with a new episode of acute non-specific LBP will be randomised to receive general practitioner care or general practitioner care plus a program of care based on the McKenzie Method. The primary outcomes are average pain during week 1, pain at week 1 and 3 and global perceived effect at week 3. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide the first rigorous test of the effectiveness of the McKenzie Method for acute non-specific LBP

Comparison of the effectiveness of three manual physical therapy techniques in a subgroup of patients with low back pain who satisfy a clinical prediction rule: Study protocol of a randomized clinical trial [NCT00257998]

BACKGROUND: Recently a clinical prediction rule (CPR) has been developed and validated that accurately identifies patients with low back pain (LBP) that are likely to benefit from a lumbo-pelvic thrust manipulation. The studies that developed and validated the rule used the identical manipulation procedure. However, recent evidence suggests that different manual therapy techniques may result similar outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of three different manual therapy techniques in a subgroup of patient with low back pain that satisfy the CPR. METHODS/DESIGN: Consecutive patients with LBP referred to physical therapy clinics in one of four geographical locations who satisfy the CPR will be invited to participate in this randomized clinical trial. Subjects who agree to participate will undergo a standard evaluation and complete a number of patient self-report questionnaires including the Oswestry Disability Index (OSW), which will serve as the primary outcome measure. Following the baseline examination patients will be randomly assigned to receive the lumbopelvic manipulation used in the development of the CPR, an alternative lumbar manipulation technique, or non-thrust lumbar mobilization technique for the first 2 visits. Beginning on visit 3, all 3 groups will receive an identical standard exercise program for 3 visits (visits 3,4,5). Outcomes of interest will be captured by a therapist blind to group assignment at 1 week (3(rd )visit), 4 weeks (6(th )visit) and at a 6-month follow-up. The primary aim of the study will be tested with analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the change in OSW score from baseline to 4-weeks (OSW(Baseline )– OSW(4-weeks)) as the dependent variable. The independent variable will be treatment with three levels (lumbo-pelvic manipulation, alternative lumbar manipulation, lumbar mobilization). DISCUSSION: This trial will be the first to investigate the effectiveness of various manual therapy techniques for patients with LBP who satisfy a CPR

A description of physical therapists' knowledge in managing musculoskeletal conditions

BACKGROUND: Physical therapists increasingly provide direct access services to patients with musculoskeletal conditions, and growing evidence supports the cost-effectiveness of this mode of healthcare delivery. However, further evidence is needed to determine if physical therapists have the requisite knowledge necessary to manage musculoskeletal conditions. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to describe physical therapists' knowledge in managing musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: This study utilized a cross-sectional design in which 174 physical therapist students from randomly selected educational programs and 182 experienced physical therapists completed a standardized examination assessing knowledge in managing musculoskeletal conditions. This same examination has been previously been used to assess knowledge in musculoskeletal medicine among medical students, physician interns and residents, and across a variety of physician specialties. RESULTS: Experienced physical therapists had higher levels of knowledge in managing musculoskeletal conditions than medical students, physician interns and residents, and all physician specialists except for orthopaedists. Physical therapist students enrolled in doctoral degree educational programs achieved significantly higher scores than their peers enrolled in master's degree programs. Furthermore, experienced physical therapists who were board-certified in orthopaedic or sports physical therapy achieved significantly higher scores and passing rates than their non board-certified colleagues. CONCLUSION: The results of this study may have implications for health and public policy decisions regarding the suitability of utilizing physical therapists to provide direct access care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions

The effectiveness of the McKenzie method in addition to first-line care for acute low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low back pain is a highly prevalent and disabling condition worldwide. Clinical guidelines for the management of patients with acute low back pain recommend first-line treatment consisting of advice, reassurance and simple analgesics. Exercise is also commonly prescribed to these patients. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term effect of adding the McKenzie method to the first-line care of patients with acute low back pain.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A multi-centre randomized controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up was conducted between September 2005 and June 2008. Patients seeking care for acute non-specific low back pain from primary care medical practices were screened. Eligible participants were assigned to receive a treatment programme based on the McKenzie method and first-line care (advice, reassurance and time-contingent acetaminophen) or first-line care alone, for 3 weeks. Primary outcome measures included pain (0-10 Numeric Rating Scale) over the first seven days, pain at 1 week, pain at 3 weeks and global perceived effect (-5 to 5 scale) at 3 weeks. Treatment effects were estimated using linear mixed models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One hundred and forty-eight participants were randomized into study groups, of whom 138 (93%) completed the last follow-up. The addition of the McKenzie method to first-line care produced statistically significant but small reductions in pain when compared to first-line care alone: mean of -0.4 points (95% confidence interval, -0.8 to -0.1) at 1 week, -0.7 points (95% confidence interval, -1.2 to -0.1) at 3 weeks, and -0.3 points (95% confidence interval, -0.5 to -0.0) over the first 7 days. Patients receiving the McKenzie method did not show additional effects on global perceived effect, disability, function or on the risk of persistent symptoms. These patients sought less additional health care than those receiving only first-line care (<it>P </it>= 0.002).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>When added to the currently recommended first-line care of acute low back pain, a treatment programme based on the McKenzie method does not produce appreciable additional short-term improvements in pain, disability, function or global perceived effect. However, the McKenzie method seems to reduce health utilization although it does not reduce patient's risk of developing persistent symptoms.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12605000032651</p