Measuring limitations in activities of daily living: a population-based validation of a short questionnaire.

PURPOSE: A newly developed questionnaire assessing limitations in activity of daily living (LADL-Q) that should improve assessment of LADL is tested in a large population-based validation study. METHODS: This survey was paper-based. Overall, 16,634 individuals who were representative of the working population in the German-speaking part of Switzerland participated in the study. Item analysis was used the final version of the LADL-Q to four items per subscale that correspond to potential problems in three body regions (back and neck, upper extremities, lower extremities). Analysis included tests for reliability, internal consistency, dimensionality and convergent validity. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability coefficients after 2 weeks ranged from 0.82 to 0.99 (Mdn = 0.87), with no item having a coefficient below 0.60. The median item-total coefficients ranged between moderate and good. Correlation coefficients between LADL-Q subscales and three validated clinical instruments (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, shoulder pain disability index, Oswestry) ranged from 0.63 to 0.81. In structural equation modeling the three subscales were significantly related with two important outcomes in occupational rehabilitation: self-reported general health and daily task performance. CONCLUSION: The new LADL-Q is a brief, reliable and valid tool for assessment of LADL in studies on musculoskeletal health.

The course of chronic and recurrent low back pain in the general population.

Using latent class analysis (LCA), a previous study on patients attending primary care identified four courses of low back pain (LBP) over the subsequent 6 months. To date, no studies have used longitudinal pain recordings to examine the "natural" course of recurrent and chronic LBP in a population-based sample of individuals. This study examines the course of LBP in the general population and elaborates on the stability and criterion-related validity of the clusters derived. A random sample of 400 individuals reporting LBP in a population-based study was asked to complete a comprehensive questionnaire at the start and end of the year's survey, and 52 weekly pain diaries in between. The latter were analyzed using LCA. 305 individuals returned more than 50% of the diaries. Four clusters were identified (severe persistent, moderate persistent, mild persistent, and fluctuating). The clusters differed significantly with regards to pain and disability. Assessment of cluster stability showed that a considerable proportion of patients in the "fluctuating" group changed their classification over time. Three of the four clusters describing the typical course of pain matched the clusters described previously for patients in primary care. Due to the population-based design, this study achieves, for the first time, a close insight into the "natural" course of chronic and recurrent low back pain, including individuals that did not necessarily visit the general practitioner. The findings will help to understand better the nature of this pain in the general population.

Beliefs about back pain predict the recovery rate over 52 consecutive weeks.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the course of low-back pain over 52 weeks following current pain at baseline. Initial beliefs about the inevitability of the pain's negative consequences and fear avoidance beliefs were examined as potential risk factors for persistent low-back pain. METHODS: On a weekly basis over a period of one year, 264 participants reported both the intensity and frequency of their low-back pain and the degree to which it impaired their work performance. In a multilevel regression analysis, predictor variables included initial low-back pain intensity, age, gender, body mass index, anxiety/depression, participation in sport, heavy workload, time (1-52 weeks), and scores on the "back beliefs" and "fear-avoidance beliefs" questionnaires. RESULTS: The group mean values for both the intensity and frequency of weekly low-back pain, and the impairment of work performance due to such pain showed a recovery within the first 12 weeks. In a multilevel regression of 9497 weekly measurements, greater weekly low-back pain and impairment were predicted by higher levels of work-related fear avoidance beliefs. A significant interaction between time and the scores on both the work-related fear-avoidance and back beliefs questionnaires indicated faster recovery and pain relief over time in those who reported less fear-avoidance and fewer negative beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Negative beliefs about the inevitability of adverse consequences of low-back pain and work-related, fear-avoidance beliefs are independent risk factors for poor recovery from low-back pain.

The association between beliefs about low back pain and work presenteeism.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of beliefs about low back pain (LBP) on reduced productivity at work ("presenteeism") caused by LBP. METHODS: Two thousand five hundred seven individuals completed the Back Beliefs Questionnaire, the Fear Avoidance Beliefs questionnaire (FABQ), and questions about LBP-related work-absence, reduced work-productivity, pain, comorbidity, and demographics. RESULTS: Six hundred seventy (25%) individuals were of working age, employed and reported current LBP. Univariate models showed beliefs were more "negative" in individuals with work-absence and reduced productivity (P = 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, controlling for confounders, "FABQwork" was a unique predictor of both absenteeism and presenteeism (each, P = 0.0001), though with small effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Negative beliefs about LBP are associated with both work absence and reduced work-productivity. Further investigations should examine their potential as a target for educational interventions when considering initiatives to reduce the socioeconomic costs of LBP.