Self-reported physical function is strongly related to pain behavior and pain interference and weakly related to physical capacity in people with chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion of self-reported and capacity-based measures may help to further elucidate the interactive link between how people think and move. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the relationship between self-reported factors of physical function and pain with objective physical capacity measures. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of 328 adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHOD: Spearman correlations assessed the relationship between pairs of measures. Multiple linear regression models assessed the association between self-reported measures of physical function and the grouping of physical capacity measures. Self-reported measures included Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Behavior, and Pain Interference; Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). Capacity measures included walking speed and endurance, lower extremity functional strength, lumbopelvic range of motion, and trunk endurance. RESULTS: PROMIS Physical Function was directly and weakly correlated with walking speed (ρ = 0.26, 2-min walk) and inversely and weakly correlated with lower extremity strength (ρ = -0.29, 5x sit-to-stand). RMDQ was not correlated with any of the capacity-based measures. PROMIS Physical Function was inversely and moderately correlated with Pain Interference (ρ = -0.48) and Pain Behavior (ρ = -0.43), PCS (ρ = -0.36), and FABQ (ρ = -0.31). The RMDQ was strongly correlated with PROMIS Physical Function (ρ = -0.56), Pain Behavior (ρ = 0.51) and Pain Interference (ρ = 0.49); and moderately correlated with PCS (ρ = 0.37) and FABQ (ρ = 0.33). PROMIS Physical Function and RMDQ were not correlated with CPAQ. Lower scores on PROMIS Physical Function were weakly associated with lower measures of lower extremity strength (-0.30, 95% CI: -0.51 to -0.09, p = 0.005). Higher scores on RMDQ were also weakly associated with lower measures of lower extremity strength (0.26, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.41, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A strong association emerged between self-reported limitations in physical function, pain behavior, and pain interference. A weak association emerged between self-reported physical function and lower extremity strength.

The Impact of Social Isolation on Pain Interference: A Longitudinal Study.

Background: Evidence suggests social interactions play an important role in pain perception. Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine whether social isolation (SI) in people with persistent pain determines pain interference (PI) and physical function over time. Methods: Patients seeking care at a tertiary pain management referral center were administered the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) SI, PI, physical function, depression, and average pain intensity item banks at their initial consultation and subsequent visits as part of their routine clinical care. We used a post hoc simulation of an experiment using propensity score matching (n = 4,950) and carried out a cross-lagged longitudinal analysis (n = 312) of retrospective observational data. Results: Cross-lagged longitudinal analysis showed that SI predicted PI at the next time point, above and beyond the effects of pain intensity and covariates, but not vice versa. Conclusions: These data support the importance of SI as a factor in pain-related appraisal and coping and demonstrate that a comprehensive assessment of the individuals' social context can provide a better understanding of the differential trajectories for a person living with pain. Our study provides evidence that the impact of pain is reduced in individuals who perceive a greater sense of inclusion from and engagement with others. This study enhances the understanding of how social factors affect pain and have implications for how the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions may be improved. Therapeutic interventions aimed at increasing social connection hold merit in reducing the impact of pain on engagement with activities.

Psychological Features and Their Relationship to Movement-Based Subgroups in People Living With Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the distribution of higher psychological risk features within movement-based subgroups for people with low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: Participants were recruited from physiotherapy clinics and community advertisements. Measures were collected at a university outpatient-based physiotherapy clinic. PARTICIPANTS: People (N=102) seeking treatment for LBP. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were subgrouped according to 3 classification schemes: Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment (MDT), Treatment-Based Classification (TBC), and O'Sullivan Classification (OSC). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaires were used to categorize low-, medium-, and high-risk features based on depression, anxiety, and stress (Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 Items); fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire); catastrophizing and coping (Pain-Related Self-Symptoms Scale); and self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). Psychological risk profiles were compared between movement-based subgroups within each scheme. RESULTS: Scores across all questionnaires revealed that most patients had low psychological risk profiles, but there were instances of higher (range, 1%-25%) risk profiles within questionnaire components. The small proportion of individuals with higher psychological risk scores were distributed between subgroups across TBC, MDT, and OSC schemes. CONCLUSIONS: Movement-based subgrouping alone cannot inform on individuals with higher psychological risk features.

Stagnant Physical Therapy Referral Rates Alongside Rising Opioid Prescription Rates in Patients With Low Back Pain in the United States 1997-2010.

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional observational study utilizing the National Ambulatory and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys between 1997 and 2010. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize national physical therapy (PT) referral trends during primary care provider (PCP) visits in the United States. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite guidelines recommending PT for the initial management of low back pain (LBP), national PT referral rates remain low. METHODS: Race, ethnicity, age, payer type, and PT referral rates were collected for patients aged 16 to 90 years who were visiting their PCPs. Associations among demographic variables and PT referral were determined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Between 1997 and 2010, we estimated 170 million visits for LBP leading to 17.1 million PT referrals. Average proportion of PCP visits associated with PT referrals remained stable at about 10.1% [odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.96-1.04)], despite our prior finding of increasing number of visits associated with opioid prescriptions in the same timeframe.Lower PT referral rates were observed among visits by patients who were insured by Medicaid (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33-0.69) and Medicare (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72). Furthermore, visits not associated with PT referrals were more likely to be associated with opioid prescriptions (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.22-2.35). CONCLUSION: Although therapies delivered by PTs are promoted as a first-line treatment for LBP, PT referral rates remain low. There also exist disparately lower referral rates in populations with more restrictive health plans and simultaneous opioid prescription. Our findings provide a broad overview to PT prescription trend and isolate concerning associations requiring further explorations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Pain interference and physical function demonstrate poor longitudinal association in people living with pain: a PROMIS investigation.

A primary goal in managing pain is to reduce pain and increase physical function (PF). This goal is also tied to continuing payment for treatment services in many practice guidelines. Pain interference (PI) is often used as a proxy for measurement and reporting of PF in these guidelines. A common assumption is that reductions in PI will translate into improvement in PF over time. This assumption needs to be tested in a clinical environment. Consequently, we used the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) to describe the topology of the longitudinal relationship between PI in relation to PF. Longitudinal data of 389 people with chronic pain seeking health care demonstrated that PI partially explained the variance in PF at baseline (r = -0.50) and over 90 days of care (r = -0.65). The relationship between pain intensity and PF was not significant when PI was included as a mediator. A parallel process latent growth curve model analysis showed a weak, unidirectional relationship (ß = 0.18) between average PF scores and changes in PI over the course of 90 days of care, and no relationship between average PI scores and changes in PF across time. Although PI and PF seem moderately related when measured concurrently, they do not cluster closely together across time. The differential pathways between these 2 domains suggest that therapies that target both the consequences of pain on relevant aspects of persons' lives, and capability to perform physical activities are likely required for restoration of a vital life.

Fear of Movement Is Related to Trunk Stiffness in Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Psychological features have been related to trunk muscle activation patterns in low back pain (LBP). We hypothesised higher pain-related fear would relate to changes in trunk mechanical properties, such as higher trunk stiffness. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between trunk mechanical properties and psychological features in people with recurrent LBP. METHODS: The relationship between pain-related fear (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, TSK; Photograph Series of Daily Activities, PHODA-SeV; Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, FABQ; Pain Catastrophizing Scale, PCS) and trunk mechanical properties (estimated from the response of the trunk to a sudden sagittal plane forwards or backwards perturbation by unpredictable release of a load) was explored in a case-controlled study of 14 LBP participants. Regression analysis (r (2)) tested the linear relationships between pain-related fear and trunk mechanical properties (trunk stiffness and damping). Mechanical properties were also compared with t-tests between groups based on stratification according to high/low scores based on median values for each psychological measure. RESULTS: Fear of movement (TSK) was positively associated with trunk stiffness (but not damping) in response to a forward perturbation (r(2) = 0.33, P = 0.03), but not backward perturbation (r(2) = 0.22, P = 0.09). Other pain-related fear constructs (PHODA-SeV, FABQ, PCS) were not associated with trunk stiffness or damping. Trunk stiffness was greater for individuals with high kinesiophobia (TSK) for forward (P = 0.03) perturbations, and greater with forward perturbation for those with high fear avoidance scores (FABQ-W, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Fear of movement is positively (but weakly) associated with trunk stiffness. This provides preliminary support an interaction between biological and psychological features of LBP, suggesting this condition may be best understood if these domains are not considered in isolation.

Physiotherapy movement based classification approaches to low back pain: comparison of subgroups through review and developer/expert survey.

BACKGROUND: Several classification schemes, each with its own philosophy and categorizing method, subgroup low back pain (LBP) patients with the intent to guide treatment. Physiotherapy derived schemes usually have a movement impairment focus, but the extent to which other biological, psychological, and social factors of pain are encompassed requires exploration. Furthermore, within the prevailing 'biological' domain, the overlap of subgrouping strategies within the orthopaedic examination remains unexplored. The aim of this study was "to review and clarify through developer/expert survey, the theoretical basis and content of physical movement classification schemes, determine their relative reliability and similarities/differences, and to consider the extent of incorporation of the bio-psycho-social framework within the schemes". METHODS: A database search for relevant articles related to LBP and subgrouping or classification was conducted. Five dominant movement-based schemes were identified: Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment (MDT), Treatment Based Classification (TBC), Pathoanatomic Based Classification (PBC), Movement System Impairment Classification (MSI), and O'Sullivan Classification System (OCS) schemes. Data were extracted and a survey sent to the classification scheme developers/experts to clarify operational criteria, reliability, decision-making, and converging/diverging elements between schemes. Survey results were integrated into the review and approval obtained for accuracy. RESULTS: Considerable diversity exists between schemes in how movement informs subgrouping and in the consideration of broader neurosensory, cognitive, emotional, and behavioural dimensions of LBP. Despite differences in assessment philosophy, a common element lies in their objective to identify a movement pattern related to a pain reduction strategy. Two dominant movement paradigms emerge: (i) loading strategies (MDT, TBC, PBC) aimed at eliciting a phenomenon of centralisation of symptoms; and (ii) modified movement strategies (MSI, OCS) targeted towards documenting the movement impairments associated with the pain state. CONCLUSIONS: Schemes vary on: the extent to which loading strategies are pursued; the assessment of movement dysfunction; and advocated treatment approaches. A biomechanical assessment predominates in the majority of schemes (MDT, PBC, MSI), certain psychosocial aspects (fear-avoidance) are considered in the TBC scheme, certain neurophysiologic (central versus peripherally mediated pain states) and psychosocial (cognitive and behavioural) aspects are considered in the OCS scheme.