Measures of sleep disturbance are not routinely captured in trials for chronic low back pain: a systematic scoping review of 282 trials.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the extent to which sleep measures are reported in intervention trials for chronic low back pain. METHODS: A systematic scoping review was conducted. Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL were queried for trials published between January 2010 and December 2022 using keywords related to chronic low back pain. Two reviewers screened and reviewed abstracts and full texts for eligibility criteria and extracted data. Randomized intervention trials with the aim to treat pain or disability related to chronic low back pain in adults were included. Data were pooled and synthesized from trials that included a measure of sleep. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-two trials conducted in 40 different countries were included in the final review. Twenty-six trials (9.2%) assessed any sleep measure, and 13 (4.6%) collected a formal sleep disturbance measure at multiple time points. Three trials analyzed the mediating effects of sleep disturbance on pain. Reporting of sleep measures was no better in more recently published trials; trials published in 2010 (22%; n = 2/9) and 2022 (23%; n = 3/13) had the highest reporting rates. CONCLUSIONS: The poor adherence to guideline recommendations for capturing measures of sleep quality or disturbance limits clinicians' and researchers' understanding of how sleep may influence treatment effects for chronic low back pain. There is an opportunity to improve the understanding of the relationship between sleep and pain with improved collection and reporting of sleep disturbance measures. CITATION: Neilson BD, Dickerson C, Young JL, Shepherd MH, Rhon DI. Measures of sleep disturbance are not routinely captured in trials for chronic low back pain: a systematic scoping review of 282 trials. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(11):1961-1970.

Relationship Between Attitudes and Beliefs About Sleep, Sleep Disturbance, and Pain Interference in Patients With Spinal Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Sleep impairments are a strong predictor of pain, making sleep a potential interest when treating patients with spine pain. Typical beliefs about the importance of sleep in patients seeking care for spinal pain are unknown. The purpose of this study was to describe the beliefs and attitudes about sleep in patients seeking care for spinal pain and to examine the relationships between dysfunctional beliefs and attitudes about sleep (DBAS), disordered sleep, and pain interference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study included patients presenting to physical therapy with spine pain. Participants completed questionnaires including demographics, medical history, pain interference (pain, enjoyment, and general activity), DBAS-16, and sleep-related impairment (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System). Correlations were calculated between DBAS-16 scores and measures of sleep quality/quantity, and a generalized linear model was used to investigate the predictive ability of DBAS-16 scores on pain interference. RESULTS: The mean DBAS-16 score was 4.22 (SD=2.03), with 52.5% of participants having DBAS. There was a strong relationship between DBAS-16 and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System ( rs =0.7; P <0.001). For every point higher score on the DBAS-16, pain interference scores increased by approximately half a point (B=0.46; 95% CI 0.33, 0.59, 1.80; P <0.001). DISCUSSION: These results highlight a strong relationship between beliefs and attitudes about sleep and measures of sleep quality/quantity and a linear association with pain interference scores. These findings provide a rationale for targeting beliefs and attitudes about sleep when managing pain-related symptoms in patients seeking care for spine pain.

Effect of Lumbar Progressive Resistance Exercise on Lumbar Muscular Strength and Core Muscular Endurance in Soldiers.

OBJECTIVES: Low back pain is common, costly, and disabling for active duty military personnel and veterans. The evidence is unclear on which management approaches are most effective. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of lumbar extensor high-intensity progressive resistance exercise (HIPRE) training versus control on improving lumbar extension muscular strength and core muscular endurance in soldiers. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with active duty U.S. Army Soldiers (n = 582) in combat medic training at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. Soldiers were randomized by platoon to receive the experimental intervention (lumbar extensor HIPRE training, n = 298) or control intervention (core stabilization exercise training, n = 284) at one set, one time per week, for 11 weeks. Lumbar extension muscular strength and core muscular endurance were assessed before and after the intervention period. RESULTS: At 11-week follow-up, lumbar extension muscular strength was 9.7% greater (p = 0.001) for HIPRE compared with control. No improvements in core muscular endurance were observed for HIPRE or control. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar extensor HIPRE training is effective to improve isometric lumbar extension muscular strength in U.S. Army Soldiers. Research is needed to explore the clinical relevance of these gains.

Inter-rater reliability of ultrasound imaging of the trunk musculature among novice raters.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of ultrasound imaging for assessing trunk muscle morphologic characteristics at rest and while contracted among different pairs of novice raters. The secondary purpose was to compare 3 different measurement techniques for assessing lateral abdominal muscle thickness. METHODS: A single-group repeated measures reliability study was conducted on 21 healthy participants (mean ± SD, 21.5 ± 4.4 years; 5 female and 16 male) without low back pain. Ultrasound images of the transversus abdominis, internal oblique, rectus abdominis, and lumbar multifidus muscles were obtained by different pairs of novice raters in a counterbalanced order. All raters received a standardized training program before obtaining measurements. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (1, 3) point estimates ranged from 0.86 to 0.94; the standard error of the measurement ranged from 0.04 to 0.16 cm for the thickness values and 0.67 cm(2) for the cross-sectional area of the rectus abdominis muscle. There was no meaningful difference between the different measurement techniques used to analyze the lateral abdominal muscles. CONCLUSIONS: Good to excellent reliability was obtained for all measures by novice raters. Minimal differences in reliability were noted between the different measurement techniques to assess lateral abdominal muscle thickness.