Effective treatments for chronic spinal pain are essential to reduce the related high personal and socioeconomic costs.
To compare pain neuroscience education combined with cognition-targeted motor ...control training with current best-evidence physiotherapy for reducing pain and improving functionality, gray matter morphologic features, and pain cognitions in individuals with chronic spinal pain.
Multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted from January 1, 2014, to January 30, 2017, among 120 patients with chronic nonspecific spinal pain in 2 outpatient hospitals with follow-up at 3, 6, and 12 months.
Participants were randomized into an experimental group (combined pain neuroscience education and cognition-targeted motor control training) and a control group (combining education on back and neck pain and general exercise therapy).
Primary outcomes were pain (pressure pain thresholds, numeric rating scale, and central sensitization inventory) and function (pain disability index and mental health and physical health).
There were 22 men and 38 women in the experimental group (mean SD age, 39.9 12.0 years) and 25 men and 35 women in the control group (mean SD age, 40.5 12.9 years). Participants in the experimental group experienced reduced pain (small to medium effect sizes): higher pressure pain thresholds at primary test site at 3 months (estimated marginal EM mean, 0.971; 95% CI, -0.028 to 1.970) and reduced central sensitization inventory scores at 6 months (EM mean, -5.684; 95% CI, -10.589 to -0.780) and 12 months (EM mean, -6.053; 95% CI, -10.781 to -1.324). They also experienced improved function (small to medium effect sizes): significant and clinically relevant reduction of disability at 3 months (EM mean, -5.113; 95% CI, -9.994 to -0.232), 6 months (EM mean, -6.351; 95% CI, -11.153 to -1.550), and 12 months (EM mean, -5.779; 95% CI, -10.340 to -1.217); better mental health at 6 months (EM mean, 36.496; 95% CI, 7.998-64.995); and better physical health at 3 months (EM mean, 39.263; 95% CI, 9.644-66.882), 6 months (EM mean, 53.007; 95% CI, 23.805-82.209), and 12 months (EM mean, 32.208; 95% CI, 2.402-62.014).
Pain neuroscience education combined with cognition-targeted motor control training appears to be more effective than current best-evidence physiotherapy for improving pain, symptoms of central sensitization, disability, mental and physical functioning, and pain cognitions in individuals with chronic spinal pain. Significant clinical improvements without detectable changes in brain gray matter morphologic features calls into question the relevance of brain gray matter alterations in this population.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02098005.
Summary Non-specific low back pain affects people of all ages and is a leading contributor to disease burden worldwide. Management guidelines endorse triage to identify the rare cases of low back ...pain that are caused by medically serious pathology, and so require diagnostic work-up or specialist referral, or both. Because non-specific low back pain does not have a known pathoanatomical cause, treatment focuses on reducing pain and its consequences. Management consists of education and reassurance, analgesic medicines, non-pharmacological therapies, and timely review. The clinical course of low back pain is often favourable, thus many patients require little if any formal medical care. Two treatment strategies are currently used, a stepped approach beginning with more simple care that is progressed if the patient does not respond, and the use of simple risk prediction methods to individualise the amount and type of care provided. The overuse of imaging, opioids, and surgery remains a widespread problem.
Despite optimal medical management (OMM), low back pain (LBP) can be disabling, particularly after spinal surgery. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective in reducing neuropathic leg pain; ...however, evidence is limited for LBP. This prospective, open-label, parallel-group trial randomized (1:1) failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients with predominant LBP to SCS plus OMM (SCS group) or OMM alone (OMM group) at 28 sites in Europe and the Americas. If trial stimulation was successful, a multicolumn SCS system was implanted. Outcomes were assessed at baseline (before randomization) and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after randomization. Patients could change treatment groups at 6 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with ≥50% reduction in LBP (responder) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included change in pain intensity, functional disability, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The results are posted at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration number NCT01697358. In the intent-to-treat analysis, there were more responders in the SCS group than in the OMM group (13.6%, 15/110 vs 4.6%, 5/108, difference 9% with 95% confidence interval 0.6%-17.5%, P = 0.036) at 6 months. The SCS group improved in all secondary outcomes compared with the OMM group. The OMM group only improved in HRQoL. In the SCS group, 17.6% (18/102) experienced SCS-related adverse events through 6 months, with 11.8% (12/102) requiring surgical reintervention. Adding multicolumn SCS to OMM improved pain relief, HRQoL, and function in a traditionally difficult-to-treat population of failed back surgery syndrome patients with predominant LBP. Improvements were sustained at 12 and 24 months.
Low back pain is a very common symptom. It occurs in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries and all age groups from children to the elderly population. Globally, years lived with ...disability caused by low back pain increased by 54% between 1990 and 2015, mainly because of population increase and ageing, with the biggest increase seen in low-income and middle-income countries. Low back pain is now the leading cause of disability worldwide. For nearly all people with low back pain, it is not possible to identify a specific nociceptive cause. Only a small proportion of people have a well understood pathological cause—eg, a vertebral fracture, malignancy, or infection. People with physically demanding jobs, physical and mental comorbidities, smokers, and obese individuals are at greatest risk of reporting low back pain. Disabling low back pain is over-represented among people with low socioeconomic status. Most people with new episodes of low back pain recover quickly; however, recurrence is common and in a small proportion of people, low back pain becomes persistent and disabling. Initial high pain intensity, psychological distress, and accompanying pain at multiple body sites increases the risk of persistent disabling low back pain. Increasing evidence shows that central pain-modulating mechanisms and pain cognitions have important roles in the development of persistent disabling low back pain. Cost, health-care use, and disability from low back pain vary substantially between countries and are influenced by local culture and social systems, as well as by beliefs about cause and effect. Disability and costs attributed to low back pain are projected to increase in coming decades, in particular in low-income and middle-income countries, where health and other systems are often fragile and not equipped to cope with this growing burden. Intensified research efforts and global initiatives are clearly needed to address the burden of low back pain as a public health problem.
Low back pain: a call for action Buchbinder, Rachelle; van Tulder, Maurits; Öberg, Birgitta ...
The Lancet (British edition),
06/2018, Volume:
391, Issue:
10137
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Low back pain is the leading worldwide cause of years lost to disability and its burden is growing alongside the increasing and ageing population.1 Because these population shifts are more rapid in ...low-income and middle-income countries, where adequate resources to address the problem might not exist, the effects will probably be more extreme in these regions. Most low back pain is unrelated to specific identifiable spinal abnormalities, and our Viewpoint, the third paper in this Lancet Series,2,3 is a call for action on this global problem of low back pain.
Many clinical practice guidelines recommend similar approaches for the assessment and management of low back pain. Recommendations include use of a biopsychosocial framework to guide management with ...initial non-pharmacological treatment, including education that supports self-management and resumption of normal activities and exercise, and psychological programmes for those with persistent symptoms. Guidelines recommend prudent use of medication, imaging, and surgery. The recommendations are based on trials almost exclusively from high-income countries, focused mainly on treatments rather than on prevention, with limited data for cost-effectiveness. However, globally, gaps between evidence and practice exist, with limited use of recommended first-line treatments and inappropriately high use of imaging, rest, opioids, spinal injections, and surgery. Doing more of the same will not reduce back-related disability or its long-term consequences. The advances with the greatest potential are arguably those that align practice with the evidence, reduce the focus on spinal abnormalities, and ensure promotion of activity and function, including work participation. We have identified effective, promising, or emerging solutions that could offer new directions, but that need greater attention and further research to determine if they are appropriate for large-scale implementation. These potential solutions include focused strategies to implement best practice, the redesign of clinical pathways, integrated health and occupational interventions to reduce work disability, changes in compensation and disability claims policies, and public health and prevention strategies.
Summary
Spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz is a promising therapy for non‐surgical refractory back pain; however, published data are currently limited. We present a subanalysis of prospectively ...collected clinical outcome data for non‐surgical refractory back pain patients treated with 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation, from the independent cohorts of two previous studies (SENZA‐RCT and SENZA‐EU). Clinical outcomes were evaluated at pre‐implantation (baseline), 3 months, 6 months and 12 months following 10 kHz spinal cord stimulator implantation. These included: pain relief; responder rate (≥ 50% pain relief from baseline); remission rate (VAS ≤ 3.0 cm); disability (Oswestry Disability Index(ODI)); and opioid use. At 3 months, average back pain decreased by 70% in the combined cohort (60% in the SENZA‐RCT and 78% in the SENZA‐EU cohorts). This was sustained at 12 months, with a 73% back pain responder rate and 68% remission rate in the combined cohort. Leg pain relief results were generally comparable to those for back pain relief. At 12 months, the combined cohort had an average decrease in ODI scores of 15.7% points from baseline and opioid use more than halved. In conclusion, 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation reduced pain, disability and opioid consumption in non‐surgical refractory back pain subjects. Application of this therapy may improve the care of non‐surgical refractory back pain patients and reduce their opioid consumption.
Retrospective analysis of an insurance claims database.
To examine the comorbidities, treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and direct medical costs of patients with chronic low back ...pain (CLBP) in clinical practice.
Although the socioeconomic impact of CLBP is substantial, characterization of comorbidities, pain-related pharmacotherapy, and health care resource use/costs of patients with CLBP relative to non-CLBP controls have been infrequently documented.
Using the LifeLink Health Plan Claims Database (IMS Health Inc., Watertown, MA), patients with CLBP, defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, were identified and matched (age, sex, and region) with non-CLBP individuals. Comorbidities, pain-related pharmacotherapy, and health care service use/costs (pharmacy, outpatient, inpatient, total) were compared for the 2 groups during 2008.
A total of 101,294 patients with CLBP and controls were identified (55% women; mean age was 47.2 ± 11.6 years). Relative to controls, patients with CLBP had a greater comorbidity burden including a significantly higher (P < 0.0001) frequency of musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain conditions and common sequelae of pain such as depression (13.0% vs. 6.1%), anxiety (8.0% vs. 3.4%), and sleep disorders (10.0% vs. 3.4%). Pain-related pharmacotherapy was significantly greater (P < 0.0001) among patients with CLBP including opioids (37.0% vs. 14.8%; P < 0.0001), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (26.2% vs. 9.6%; P < 0.0001), and tramadol (8.2% vs. 1.2%; P < 0.0001). Prescribing of "adjunctive" medications for treating conditions associated with pain (i.e., depression, anxiety, and insomnia) was also significantly greater (P < 0.0001) among patients with CLBP; 36.3% of patients received combination therapy. Health care costs were significantly higher in the CLBP cohort (P < 0.0001), reflecting greater resource utilization. Total direct medical costs were estimated at $8386 ± $17,507 in the CLBP group and $3607 ± $10,845 in the control group; P < 0.0001).
Patients with CLBP are characterized by greater comorbidity and economic burdens compared with those without CLBP. This economic burden can be attributed to greater prescribing of pain-related medications and increased health resource utilization.
More than two-thirds of pregnant women experience low-back pain and almost one-fifth experience pelvic pain. The two conditions may occur separately or together (low-back and pelvic pain) and ...typically increase with advancing pregnancy, interfering with work, daily activities and sleep.
To update the evidence assessing the effects of any intervention used to prevent and treat low-back pain, pelvic pain or both during pregnancy.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth (to 19 January 2015), and the Cochrane Back Review Groups' (to 19 January 2015) Trials Registers, identified relevant studies and reviews and checked their reference lists.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any treatment, or combination of treatments, to prevent or reduce the incidence or severity of low-back pain, pelvic pain or both, related functional disability, sick leave and adverse effects during pregnancy.
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
We included 34 RCTs examining 5121 pregnant women, aged 16 to 45 years and, when reported, from 12 to 38 weeks' gestation. Fifteen RCTs examined women with low-back pain (participants = 1847); six examined pelvic pain (participants = 889); and 13 examined women with both low-back and pelvic pain (participants = 2385). Two studies also investigated low-back pain prevention and four, low-back and pelvic pain prevention. Diagnoses ranged from self-reported symptoms to clinicians' interpretation of specific tests. All interventions were added to usual prenatal care and, unless noted, were compared with usual prenatal care. The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to low, raising concerns about the confidence we could put in the estimates of effect. For low-back painResults from meta-analyses provided low-quality evidence (study design limitations, inconsistency) that any land-based exercise significantly reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.03 to -0.25; participants = 645; studies = seven) and functional disability (SMD -0.56; 95% CI -0.89 to -0.23; participants = 146; studies = two). Low-quality evidence (study design limitations, imprecision) also suggested no significant differences in the number of women reporting low-back pain between group exercise, added to information about managing pain, versus usual prenatal care (risk ratio (RR) 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.17; participants = 374; studies = two). For pelvic painResults from a meta-analysis provided low-quality evidence (study design limitations, imprecision) of no significant difference in the number of women reporting pelvic pain between group exercise, added to information about managing pain, and usual prenatal care (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.23; participants = 374; studies = two). For low-back and pelvic painResults from meta-analyses provided moderate-quality evidence (study design limitations) that: an eight- to 12-week exercise program reduced the number of women who reported low-back and pelvic pain (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; participants = 1176; studies = four); land-based exercise, in a variety of formats, significantly reduced low-back and pelvic pain-related sick leave (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.94; participants = 1062; studies = two).The results from a number of individual studies, incorporating various other interventions, could not be pooled due to clinical heterogeneity. There was moderate-quality evidence (study design limitations or imprecision) from individual studies suggesting that osteomanipulative therapy significantly reduced low-back pain and functional disability, and acupuncture or craniosacral therapy improved pelvic pain more than usual prenatal care. Evidence from individual studies was largely of low quality (study design limitations, imprecision), and suggested that pain and functional disability, but not sick leave, were significantly reduced following a multi-modal intervention (manual therapy, exercise and education) for low-back and pelvic pain.When reported, adverse effects were minor and transient.
There is low-quality evidence that exercise (any exercise on land or in water), may reduce pregnancy-related low-back pain and moderate- to low-quality evidence suggesting that any exercise improves functional disability and reduces sick leave more than usual prenatal care. Evidence from single studies suggests that acupuncture or craniosacral therapy improves pregnancy-related pelvic pain, and osteomanipulative therapy or a multi-modal intervention (manual therapy, exercise and education) may also be of benefit.Clinical heterogeneity precluded pooling of results in many cases. Statistical heterogeneity was substantial in all but three meta-analyses, which did not improve following sensitivity analyses. Publication bias and selective reporting cannot be ruled out.Further evidence is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimates of effect and change the estimates. Studies would benefit from the introduction of an agreed classification system that can be used to categorise women according to their presenting symptoms, so that treatment can be tailored accordingly.
Globally, more than half a billion people are suffering from chronic low back pain, which results in poor quality of life for patients and major welfare cost for society. Currently, e-Health has been ...considered as a potential strategy to deliver self-management programs for chronic low back pain, but its effects are uncertain.
To assess the efficacy on pain intensity and disability of e-Health based self-management programs on chronic low back pain.
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Searches of Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Elsevier, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and ProQuest from inception through 2nd April 2019.
Randomized controlled trials were screened and selected if they examined e-Health based self-management programs on chronic low back pain and assessed pain intensity and disability as primary outcomes. Risks of bias were assessed by two independent reviewers. Evidence quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Meta-analyses were performed to investigate the effects of e-Health based self-management programs on pain intensity and disability for chronic low back pain. Subgroup analyses were conducted.
Eight randomized controlled trials were included. For pain intensity, moderate-quality evidence indicated there was a clinically important effect of e-Health based self-management programs for relieving pain both at immediate and short-term follow-ups. For disability, moderate-quality evidence showed there was a clinically important effect of e-Health based self-management programs for improving disability at immediate follow-up, and low-quality of evidence showed no significant difference at short-term follow-ups, but with a favorable trend. The results of subgroup analyses indicated that m-Health based self-management programs showed better immediate effects on both pain and disability than web-Health based programs, and programs with durations ≤ 8 weeks demonstrated a better immediate effect on pain than those with durations >8 weeks, but not on disability.
Generally, e-Health based self-management programs may play a positive role in improving pain and disability within short-term period for chronic low back pain patients. More rigorous trials are warranted to determine the optimal delivery mode, duration, and long-term effect of e-Health based self-management programs.
PDF
