A randomized controlled trial investigating effects of an individualized pedometer driven walking program on chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Walking is an easily prescribed physical activity for people with low back pain (LBP). However, the evidence for its effectiveness to improve pain and disability levels for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) within a community setting has not been evaluated. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a clinician guided, pedometer-driven, walking intervention for increasing physical activity and improving clinical outcomes compared to education and advice. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial recruiting N = 174 adults with CLBP. Participants were randomly allocated into either a standardized care group (SG) or pedometer based walking group (WG) using minimization allocation with a 2:1 ratio to the WG. Prior to randomization all participants were given a standard package of education and advice regarding self-management and the benefits of staying active. Following randomization the WG undertook a physiotherapist guided pedometer-driven walking program for 12 weeks. This was individually tailored by weekly negotiation of daily step targets. Main outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Other outcomes included, numeric pain rating, International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Back Beliefs questionnaire (BBQ), Physical Activity Self-efficacy Scale, and EQ-5D-5L quality of life estimate. RESULTS: N = 138 (79%) participants completed all outcome measures at 12 weeks reducing to N = 96 (55%) at 12 months. Both observed and intention to treat analysis did not show any statistically significant difference in ODI change score between the WG and the SG at all post-intervention time points. There were also no significant between group differences for change scores in all secondary outcome measures. Post hoc sensitivity analyses revealed moderately disabled participants (baseline ODI ≥ 21.0) demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 months in the WG compared to SG, while WG participants with a daily baseline step count < 7500 steps demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found no significant difference in change of levels of (ODI) disability between the SG and WG following the walking intervention. However, ODI responses to a walking program for those with moderate levels of baseline disability and those with low baseline step count offer a potential future focus for continued research into the benefit of walking as a management strategy for chronic LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: United States National Institutes of Health Clinical Trails registry (http://ClinicalTrials.gov/) No. NCT02284958 (27/10/2014).

A systematic review and meta-analysis of pain neuroscience education for chronic low back pain: Short-and long-term outcomes of pain and disability.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Pain neuroscience education (PNE) has shown promising ability in previous reviews to improve pain and disability in chronic low back pain (CLBP). This review aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of PNE on pain and disability in CLBP. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: A systematic search was performed using the databases of EBSCO, Medline, Cochrane and Web of Science. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software to pool outcomes using the random effects model, weighted mean differences (WMD), standard deviation, 95% confidence intervals and sample size. GRADEpro software was utilized to calculate overall strength of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 6,767 papers were found, eight were included (n = 615). Meta-analysis for short-term pain (n = 428) demonstrated a WMD of 0.73 (95%CI -0.14, 1.61) on a ten-point scale of PNE against no PNE (GRADE analysis low evidence). When PNE alongside physiotherapy interventions were grouped for pain (n = 212), a WMD of 1.32 was demonstrated (95% CI 1.08, 1.56, p < 0.00001; GRADE analysis moderate evidence). Short-term disability (RMDQ) meta-analysis demonstrated a WMD of 0.42 (95%CI 0.28, 0.56; p < 0.00001; n = 362; GRADE analysis moderate evidence); whereas the addition of PNE to physiotherapy interventions demonstrated a WMD of 3.94 (95% CI 3.37, 4.52; p < 0.00001; GRADE analysis moderate evidence. CONCLUSION: This review presents moderate evidence that the addition of PNE to usual physiotherapy intervention in patients with CLBP improves disability in the short term. However, this meta-analysis failed to show evidence of long-term improvement on pain or disability when adding PNE to usual physiotherapy. SIGNIFICANCE: This review demonstrates moderate level evidence that the use of pain neuroscience education alongside physiotherapy interventions probably improves disability and pain in the short term in chronic low back pain. These results provide greater support for the addition of pain neuroscience education in routine physiotherapy practice in chronic low back pain.

Physiotherapy as a first point of contact in general practice: a solution to a growing problem?

UNLABELLED: Aim To evaluate the clinical effectiveness, patient satisfaction and economic efficacy of a physiotherapy service providing musculoskeletal care, as an alternative to GP care. BACKGROUND: There is a growing demand on general practice resources. A novel '1st Line Physiotherapy Service' was evaluated in two GP practices (inner city practice, university practice). Physiotherapy, as a first point of contact, was provided as an alternative to GP care for patients with musculoskeletal complaints. Participants A convenience cohort sample of over 500 patients with a musculoskeletal complaint was assessed within the physiotherapy service. For the economic evaluation a cohort of 100 GP patients was retrospectively reviewed. METHOD: Clinical outcome measures were collected at assessment, one and six months following assessment. Patient satisfaction was collected at assessment. An economic evaluation was undertaken on the physiotherapy cohort of patients and compared to a retrospective cohort of patients (n=100) seen by a GP. This evaluation considered only the health care perspective (primary and secondary care). Societal issues such as absence from employment were not considered. RESULTS: There were no adverse events associated with the physiotherapy service. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction with the physiotherapy service. Patients managed within the 1st Line Physiotherapy Service demonstrated clinical improvements (EQ-5D-5L, Global Rating of Change) at the six-month point. There was a statistically significant difference in favour of the physiotherapy groups using a non-parametric bootstrap test; inner city practice, mean difference in costs=£538.01 (P =0.006; 95% CI; £865.678, £226.98), university practice mean difference in costs=£295.83 (P=0.044; 95% CI; £585.16, £83.69). CONCLUSION: The limitations of this pragmatic service evaluation are acknowledged. Nevertheless, the physiotherapy service appears to provide a safe and efficacious service. The service is well received by patients. There appear to be potential financial implications to the health economy. Physiotherapists, as a first point of contact for patients with musculoskeletal-related complaints, could contribute to the current challenges faced in primary care.

Clinical tests to diagnose lumbar spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: A systematic review.

The aim of this paper was to systematically review the diagnostic ability of clinical tests to detect lumbar spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. A systematic literature search of six databases, with no language restrictions, from 1950 to 2014 was concluded on February 1, 2014. Clinical tests were required to be compared against imaging reference standards and report, or allow computation, of common diagnostic values. The systematic search yielded a total of 5164 articles with 57 retained for full-text examination, from which 4 met the full inclusion criteria for the review. Study heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis of included studies. Fifteen different clinical tests were evaluated for their ability to diagnose lumbar spondylolisthesis and one test for its ability to diagnose lumbar spondylolysis. The one-legged hyperextension test demonstrated low to moderate sensitivity (50%-73%) and low specificity (17%-32%) to diagnose lumbar spondylolysis, while the lumbar spinous process palpation test was the optimal diagnostic test for lumbar spondylolisthesis; returning high specificity (87%-100%) and moderate to high sensitivity (60-88) values. Lumbar spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis are identifiable causes of LBP in athletes. There appears to be utility to lumbar spinous process palpation for the diagnosis of lumbar spondylolisthesis, however the one-legged hyperextension test has virtually no value in diagnosing patients with spondylolysis.

Perceptions of low back pain in people with lower limb amputation: a focus group study.

PURPOSE: This study explored the perceptions of people with a lower limb amputation as to important factors contributing to their low back pain (LBP). METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted (three focus groups and two individual interviews), with 11 participants with lower limb amputation and on-going LBP. The discussions were analysed using the General Inductive Approach. RESULTS: Five major categories were identified with "uneven posture and compensatory movements" of the back perceived to be the main contributor to LBP. "Fatigue" during functional activities and "prosthesis-related factors" may affect the "uneven movements" of the back further leading to LBP. "Multiple pain conditions" (i.e. phantom limb pain, non-amputated limb pain) could influence the pain perceptions contributing to LBP. "Self-management strategies" in the form of maintaining optimal physical fitness and support from health care professionals helped to manage LBP symptoms, thereby assisted in preventing chronicity. CONCLUSION: The results suggest "uneven movements" of the back affected by "fatigue" and "prosthesis-related factors" may alter the mechanical loading of the spine during functional activities and contribute to LBP. While being physically active helped participants cope with their LBP, identifying and addressing "uneven movements" in the back during the performance of functional activities may be important to devise prevention strategies for LBP.

Neurological examination of the peripheral nervous system to diagnose lumbar spinal disc herniation with suspected radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Disc herniation is a common low back pain (LBP) disorder, and several clinical test procedures are routinely employed in its diagnosis. The neurological examination that assesses sensory neuron and motor responses has historically played a role in the differential diagnosis of disc herniation, particularly when radiculopathy is suspected; however, the diagnostic ability of this examination has not been explicitly investigated. PURPOSE: To review the scientific literature to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the neurological examination to detect lumbar disc herniation with suspected radiculopathy. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. METHODS: Six major electronic databases were searched with no date or language restrictions for relevant articles up until March 2011. All diagnostic studies investigating neurological impairments in LBP patients because of lumbar disc herniation were assessed for possible inclusion. Retrieved studies were individually evaluated and assessed for quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool, and where appropriate, a meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies that investigated three standard neurological examination components, sensory, motor, and reflexes, met the study criteria and were included. Eight distinct meta-analyses were performed that compared the findings of the neurological examination with the reference standard results from surgery, radiology (magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and myelography), and radiological findings at specific lumbar levels of disc herniation. Pooled data for sensory testing demonstrated low diagnostic sensitivity for surgically (0.40) and radiologically (0.32) confirmed disc herniation, and identification of a specific level of disc herniation (0.35), with moderate specificity achieved for all the three reference standards (0.59, 0.72, and 0.64, respectively). Motor testing for paresis demonstrated similarly low pooled diagnostic sensitivities (0.22 and 0.40) and moderate specificity values (0.79 and 0.62) for surgically and radiologically determined disc herniation, whereas motor testing for muscle atrophy resulted in a pooled sensitivity of 0.31 and the specificity was 0.76 for surgically determined disc herniation. For reflex testing, the pooled sensitivities for surgically and radiologically confirmed levels of disc herniation were 0.29 and 0.25, whereas the specificity values were 0.78 and 0.75, respectively. The pooled positive likelihood ratios for all neurological examination components ranged between 1.02 and 1.26. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that neurological testing procedures have limited overall diagnostic accuracy in detecting disc herniation with suspected radiculopathy. Pooled diagnostic accuracy values of the tests were poor, whereby all tests demonstrated low sensitivity, moderate specificity, and limited diagnostic accuracy independent of the disc herniation reference standard or the specific level of herniation. The lack of a standardized classification criterion for disc herniation, the variable psychometric properties of the testing procedures, and the complex pathoetiology of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy are suggested as possible reasons for these findings.

The ability of clinical tests to diagnose stress fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests to identify stress fractures in the lower limb. BACKGROUND: Stress fractures are a bone-related overuse injury primarily occurring in the lower limb and commonly affecting running athletes and military personnel. Physical examination procedures and clinical tests are suggested for diagnosing stress fractures; however, data on the diagnostic accuracy of these tests have not been investigated through a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in 8 electronic databases to identify diagnostic accuracy studies, published between January 1950 and June 2011, that evaluated clinical tests against a radiological diagnosis of lower-limb stress fracture. Retrieved articles were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool, and a meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. RESULTS: Nine articles investigating 2 clinical procedures, therapeutic ultrasound (n = 7) and tuning fork testing (n = 2), met the study inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was used to statistically analyze the data extracted from the ultrasound articles and demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55%, 73%), specificity of 63% (95% CI: 54%, 71%), positive likelihood ratio of 2.1 (95% CI: 1.1, 3.5), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1, 0.9). Tuning fork test data could not be pooled; however, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio ranged from 35% to 92%, 19% to 83%, 0.6 to 3.0, and 0.4 to 1.6, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review do not support the specific use of ultrasound or tuning forks as standalone diagnostic tests for lower-limb stress fractures. As the overall diagnostic accuracy of the tests investigated is not strong, based on the calculated likelihood ratios, it is recommended that radiological imaging should continue to be used for the confirmation and diagnosis of stress fractures of the lower limb. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnosis, level 1a-.J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42(9):760-771, Epub 19 July 2012. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.4000.

Acute low back pain information online: an evaluation of quality, content accuracy and readability of related websites.

The internet is increasingly being used as a source of health information by the general public. Numerous websites exist that provide advice and information on the diagnosis and management of acute low back pain (ALBP), however, the accuracy and utility of this information has yet to be established. The aim of this study was to establish the quality, content and readability of online information relating to the treatment and management of ALBP. The internet was systematically searched using Google search engines from six major English-speaking countries. In addition, relevant national and international low back pain-related professional organisations were also searched. A total of 22 relevant websites was identified. The accuracy of the content of the ALBP information was established using a 13 point guide developed from international guidelines. Website quality was evaluated using the HONcode, and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade level (FKGL) was used to establish readability. The majority of websites lacked accurate information, resulting in an overall mean content accuracy score of 6.3/17. Only 3 websites had a high content accuracy score (>14/17) along with an acceptable readability score (FKGL 6-8) with the majority of websites providing information which exceeded the recommended level for the average person to comprehend. The most accurately reported category was, "Education and reassurance" (98%) while information regarding "manipulation" (50%), "massage" (9%) and "exercise" (0%) were amongst the lowest scoring categories. These results demonstrate the need for more accurate and readable internet-based ALBP information specifically centred on evidence-based guidelines.

Clinical tests to diagnose lumbar segmental instability: a systematic review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests used to diagnose patients with structural lumbar segmental instability (LSI). BACKGROUND: Patients with structural LSI represent an important, identifiable subgrouping of individuals with low back pain. Numerous clinical tests have been proposed to diagnose structural LSI; however, data on the diagnostic accuracy of these tests have not yet been evaluated through a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in 6 electronic databases for diagnostic accuracy studies, published between January 1950 and March 2010, that evaluated clinical tests against radiological diagnosis of structural LSI. The diagnostic accuracy of the clinical tests from the retrieved articles was independently evaluated, reviewed, and quality scored using the QUADAS tool. RESULTS: Four articles and a total of 11 clinical tests used in the diagnosis of structural LSI met the study inclusion criteria. The majority of tests had high specificity but low sensitivity, with positive likelihood ratios ranging from very small to moderate. QUADAS scores ranged from 16 to 25 out of a possible 26. The passive lumbar extension test was the most accurate clinical test, with high sensitivity (84%), specificity (90%), and a positive likelihood ratio of 8.8 (95% CI: 4.5, 17.3), indicating that this clinical test may be useful in the differential diagnosis of structural LSI. CONCLUSION: This systematic review found that the majority of clinical tests routinely employed to diagnose structural LSI demonstrated only limited ability to do so. The results do, however, indicate that the passive lumbar extension test may be useful in orthopaedic clinical practice to diagnose structural LSI. Additional research is required to further validate its use for diagnosing structural LSI in all populations of those with low back pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnosis, level 2a.

Utility of the RT3 triaxial accelerometer in free living: an investigation of adherence and data loss.

There is strong evidence for the protective effects of physical activity on chronic health problems. Activity monitors can objectively measure free living occupational and leisure time physical activity. Utility is an important consideration when determining the most appropriate monitor for specific populations and environments. Hours of activity data collected, the reasons for activity hours not being recorded, and how these two factors might change over time when using an activity monitor in free living are rarely reported. This study investigated user perceptions, adherence to minimal wear time and loss of data when using the RT3 activity monitor in 21 healthy adults, in a variety of occupations, over three (7 day) repeated weeks of measurement in free living. An activity diary verified each day of monitoring and a utility questionnaire explored participant perceptions on the usability of the RT3. The RT3 was worn for an average of 14 h daily with 90% of participants having complete data sets. In total 6535.8 and 6092.5h of activity data were collected from the activity diary and the RT3 respectively. An estimated 443.3h (6.7%) of activity data were not recorded by the RT3. Data loss was primarily due to battery malfunction (45.2%). Non-adherence to wear time accounted for 169.5h (38.2%) of data loss, of which 14 h were due to occupational factors. The RT3 demonstrates good utility for free living activity measurement, however, technical issues and strategies to manage participant adherence require consideration with longitudinal and repeated measures studies.