Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Back”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,369 records · Page 76Linked to original sources
PubMed1993

Do smokers get more back pain?

Recently smoking has been increasingly implicated as a possible risk factor for low-back pain. One explanation for this finding is confounding by occupation. To investigate this possibility, the relationship between smoking and self-reported back pain was studied within 13 occupations. A relationship between smoking and back pain was observed only in occupations that require physical exertion. The relationship between smoking and other musculoskeletal pain also was explored. Pain in the extremities turned out to be related more clearly to smoking than to pain in the neck or the back. This suggests confounding or a general influence of smoking on pain. It is concluded that prevention of back pain could be a beneficial side-effect of anti-smoking campaigns. However, the prime target for prevention of low-back pain would have to be other factors.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Psychiatric illness and chronic low-back pain. The mind and the spine--which goes first?

Two hundred chronic low-back pain patients entering a functional restoration program were assessed for current and lifetime psychiatric syndromes using a structured psychiatric interview to make DSM-III-R diagnoses. Results showed that, even when the somewhat controversial category of somatoform pain disorder was excluded, 77% of patients met lifetime diagnostic criteria and 59% demonstrated current symptoms for at least one psychiatric diagnosis. The most common of these were major depression, substance abuse, and anxiety disorders. In addition, 51% met criteria for at least one personality disorder. All of the prevalence rates were significantly greater than the base rate for the general population. Finally, and most importantly, of these patients with a positive lifetime history for psychiatric syndromes, 54% of those with depression, 94% of those with substance abuse, and 95% of those with anxiety disorders had experienced these syndromes before the onset of their back pain. These are the first results to indicate that certain psychiatric syndromes appear to precede chronic low-back pain (substance abuse and anxiety disorders), whereas others (specifically, major depression) develop either before or after the onset of chronic low-back pain. Such findings substantially add to our understanding of causality and predisposition in the relationship between psychiatric disorders and chronic low-back pain. They also clearly reveal that clinicians should be aware of potentially high rates of emotional distress syndromes in chronic low-back pain and enlist mental health professionals to help maximize treatment outcomes.

Anxiety Disorders↗
PubMed1994

Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations.

STUDY DESIGN: This study describes recent United States trends and regional variations in the management of low back pain. OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated recent temporal trends and compared practices in different geographic regions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Controversy exists concerning the appropriate medical and surgical management of patients with low back pain. METHODS: National Hospital Discharge Survey data from 1979 through 1990 were analyzed. Case selection was based on previously developed algorithms intended to exclude nonmechanical causes of back pain. RESULTS: Over the period of study, nonsurgical hospitalizations for low back pain decreased dramatically. In contrast, low back operation rates, particularly for fusion surgery, increased substantially. In recent years, surgery and hospitalization rates were highest in the South and lowest in the West. CONCLUSIONS: Rapidly increasing surgical rates and wide geographic variations suggest the need for a more consistent approach to back problems.

Algorithms↗
PubMed1994

Pattern of performance in workers with low back pain during a comprehensive motor performance evaluation.

STUDY DESIGN: Tests of limb and back motor performance were administered to males with low back pain at the completion of a back-school program. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to determine the relationship between such motor performance and the propensity for abnormal illness behavior as indicated by the Waddell score. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies in similar subjects had revealed a nonbiologic pattern of lumbar strength and movement in back-school patients, and correlations between lumbar variables, Waddell score, and 'global' psychologic measures. This suggested that psychologic factors might affect motor performance in body segments unrelated to the low back in such patients. RESULTS: Mean performance of the group with a high Waddell score (indicating a propensity for abnormal illness behavior) was lower on all tests, including those that did not involve the low back, in comparison to the group with a low Waddell score (P < .01, sign test). CONCLUSION: For all members of this population of patients, motor performance on dynamometry of any body segment does not necessarily reflect the maximum physical capacity.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Physician views about treating low back pain. The results of a national survey.

STUDY DESIGN: Physicians were surveyed regarding their beliefs about treatment efficacy for patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To document physician beliefs about the efficacy of specific treatments and the extent to which these beliefs correspond to current knowledge. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little is known about physician beliefs regarding the efficacy of specific back pain treatments. METHODS: A national random sample of 2897 physicians were mailed questionnaires that asked about 1) the treatments they would order for hypothetical patients with low back pain and 2) the treatments they believed were effective for back pain. Responses were compared with guidelines suggested by the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. RESULTS: Almost 1200 physicians responded. More than 80% of these physicians believed physical therapy is effective, but this consensus was lacking for other treatments. Fewer than half of the physicians believed that spinal manipulation is effective for acute or chronic back pain or that epidural steroid injections, traction, and corsets are effective for acute back pain. Bed rest and narcotic analgesics were recommended by substantial minorities of physicians for patients with chronic pain. The Quebec Task Force found little scientific support for the effectiveness of most of the treatments found to be in common use. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of consensus among physicians could be attributable to the absence of clear evidence-based clinical guidelines, ignorance or rejection of existing scientific evidence, excessive commitment to a particular mode of therapy, or a tendency to discount the efficacy of competing treatments.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Physician office visits for low back pain. Frequency, clinical evaluation, and treatment patterns from a U.S. national survey.

STUDY DESIGN: This study is an analysis of national survey data from 5 sample years. OBJECTIVES: The authors characterized the frequency of office visits for low back pain, the content of ambulatory care, and how these vary by physician specialty. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Few recent data are available regarding ambulatory care for low back pain or how case mix and patient management vary by physician specialty. METHODS: Data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey were grouped into three time periods (1980-81, 1985, 1989-90). Frequency of visits for low back pain, referral status, tests, and treatments were tabulated by physician specialty. RESULTS: There were almost 15 million office visits for "mechanical" low back pain in 1990, ranking this problem fifth as a reason for all physician visits. Low back pain accounted for 2.8 percent of office visits in all three time periods. Nonspecific diagnostic labels were most common, and 56 percent of visits were to primary care physicians. Specialty variations were observed in caseload, diagnostic mix, and management. CONCLUSIONS: Back pain remains a major reason for all physician office visits. This study describes visit, referral, and management patterns among specialties providing the most care.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1995

Care-seeking among individuals with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a stratified, random telephone survey of adults in North Carolina. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of chronic low back pain and the extent to which treatment is sought for this condition. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Chronic low back pain is a major problem. Previous studies often have combined acute and chronic back pain. METHODS: Telephone interviews regarding back pain were conducted with 4437 North Carolina adults during 1992. RESULTS: Chronic back pain affects 3.9% of the North Carolina population. Thirty-four percent considered themselves permanently disabled and 52% assessed their overall health as fair or poor. The median number of bed-disability days per year was three. Seventy-three percent saw a health care provider. Of those who sought care, 91% saw a medical doctor, 29% saw a physical therapist, and 25% saw a chiropractor. Use of technology was extensive: 37% received a computed tomography scan, 25% received a magnetic resonance imaging scan, and 10.4% underwent surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic back pain is common, and the level of care-seeking and costs of care among those afflicted are extremely high.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Effect of intensive training on the isokinetic strength and structure of lumbar muscles in patients with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: This study investigated the effects of the intensive physical rehabilitation program on the trunk and knee extensor muscles in patients with chronic low back pain. At baseline and after 3 months, strength was measured and muscle biopsies were taken. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of strength exercises on the structure of back muscles. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Rehabilitation designed for chronic low back pain patients improves trunk muscle strength, mobility of the spine, and the patients' functional capacity. The effects of such programs on the structure of back muscles have not been reported previously. METHODS: Thirty patients with chronic low back pain volunteered to participate in the study. Biopsies were taken from the multifidus and vastus lateralis muscles. The sizes of Types 1 and 2 muscle fibers were measured. The peak-torques of isokinetic trunk and knee extension were determined at two different angular velocities. RESULTS: Strength increased by 19-22% (P < 0.05) in trunk extension and by 7-11% (P < 0.05) in knee extension. Type 1 fibers maintained their pre-exercise size. The size of Type 2 muscle fibers in men increased by 11% (P < 0.05) in the multifidus and by 8% (P < 0.05) in the vastus lateralis. In women, the corresponding increases were 11% (P = 0.16) and 11% (P < 0.05). The correlation between the size of Type 2 muscle fibers in the multifidus and the strength of trunk extension improved, especially in men at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that training with maximal or submaximal effort may reverse the selective atrophy of Type 2 fibers in the multifidus muscles in men. Intensive training also can significantly increase the trunk extension strength in women, but women may need a longer training period than men to achieve significant structural changes in their back muscles.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Psychosocial predictors of outcome in acute and subchronic low back trouble.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective survey of patients seeking primary care for low back pain. Clinical and psychosocial data, available at presentation, were explored for predictors of outcome at 1 year. OBJECTIVES: To determine the relative value of clinical and psychosocial variables for early identification of patients with a poor prognosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current treatment strategies for low back pain have failed to stem the rising levels of disability. Psychosocial factors have been shown to be important determinants of response to therapy in chronic patients, but the contribution from similar data in acute or subchronic patients has not been comprehensively investigated. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-two patients with low back pain, presenting to primary care, underwent a structured clinical interview and completed a battery of psychosocial instruments. Follow-up was done by mail at 1 year; outcome was measured using a back pain disability questionnaire. Predictive relationships were sought between the data at presentation and disability at follow-up. RESULTS: Most patients showed improved disability and pain scores, although more than half had persisting symptoms. Eighteen percent showed significant psychological distress at presentation. Multiple regression analysis showed the level of persisting disability to depend principally on measures in the psychosocial domain; for acute cases outcome is also dependent on the absence or presence of a previous history of low back trouble. Discriminant models successfully allocated typically 76% of cases to recovered/not-recovered groups, largely on the basis of psychosocial factors evident at presentation. CONCLUSIONS: Early identification of psychosocial problems is important in understanding, and hopefully preventing, the progression to chronicity in low back trouble.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1995

Measurement of muscle strength of the trunk and the lower extremities in subjects with history of low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Isokinetically measured muscle strength of the trunk and lower extremities was analyzed. OBJECTIVES: The causes of the weak trunk muscle strength of subjects with low back pain were studied. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although it is a commonly accepted conclusion that subjects with low back pain have weaker trunk muscles than the normal population, there are no reports concerning muscle strength of the lower extremities in subjects with low back pain. METHODS: Ninety-eight male volunteers were divided into control groups and groups with low back pain. The total trunk strength and total knee strength were defined as the sum of the peak torques of trunk extension, flexion and rotation, and of bilateral knee extension and flexion, respectively. RESULTS: The total trunk and knee strength in the group with low back pain (281 +/- 170 and 301 +/- 132 Nm) were significantly lower than in the control group (543 +/- 124 and 441 +/- 123 Nm). The total trunk and knee strength were linearly correlated in both groups (r = 0.67 and 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: In the group with low back pain, the muscles of the trunk and the lower extremities were similarly affected; this can be attributed to generalized muscular weakness or psychologic factors, such as fear of injury.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1995

Outcome of unoperated discogram-positive low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: No previous discography study has addressed the nonoperative outcome of low back pain. OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to retrospectively analyze the outcome of patients with documented single-level discogenic pain who were considered candidates for surgery but did not receive it. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The natural history of "discogenic" low back pain is unknown, and its treatment is controversial. Although positive discography is viewed as a valid diagnostic technique, the results of fusion surgery are often disappointing. METHOD: Twenty-five individuals (16 women, 9 men) underwent comprehensive evaluation (examination, radiography, objective disability determination). Study criteria included incapacitating low back pain, single-level + morphologic + provocative discogram, no surgery, and a minimum follow-up period of 3 years. RESULTS: Average age of patients at discography was 43 years and at study was 48 years; level of involvement in 10 patients was L4-L5 and in 15 patients were L5-S1. The mean follow-up period was 4.9 years (range, 3.3-7.0 years). The condition of 17 (68%) patients improved, two (8%) stayed the same, and six (24%) worsened. Improved patients had a shorter history of low back pain (3.5 yr vs. 11.0 yr) and older age at onset (45 versus 33 yrs.) Psychiatric disease was present in 66.7% (4 of 6) patients whose conditions worsened. Eighty percent (12 of 15) of patients receiving workers' compensation improved. There was no correlation between disc level, gender, smoking, and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Discogenic low back pain improved in patients without psychiatric disease. Older age at onset and shorter duration of low back pain were favorable indicators. These results are comparable with or better than those reported for surgical treatment of this condition.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Formal education and back-related disability. In search of an explanation.

STUDY DESIGN: The present study is a 2-year prospective study with repeated measurements. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of education with back-related disability along with four sets of variables that might explain this relationship: clinical, behavioral, and environmental factors; occupational variables; health care use; and interactions between stressful events and coping strategies. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although education has been found to be associated with back-related disability in previous reports, this relationship remains to be explained. Examination of this association may yield a better understanding of the causes and natural history of disability resulting from back pain. METHODS: Subjects were 1213 enrollees of a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) who consulted a primary care physician for back pain in 1989-1990, completed a baseline telephone interview, and had a follow-up evaluation after 1 and 2 years, using a modified version of the Roland-Morris Scale to measure disability. RESULTS: Subjects who completed 13 years or more of schooling had less disability and a greater decline in their disability over time than those who completed less schooling. Occupational characteristics and somatization were among the strongest explanatory factors. Cigarette smoking contributed to the explanation of the cross-sectional association. CONCLUSIONS: Education is associated cross-sectionally and longitudinally with disability resulting from back pain. A wide range of variables may mediate the education-back-related disability association, including a propensity to report diffuse physical symptoms (somatization), lifestyle (e.g., cigarette smoking), and occupational factors.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Absence resulting from low back trouble can be reduced by psychosocial intervention at the work place.

STUDY DESIGN: A 1-year prospective study in industry, assessing effects of an educational pamphlet on various psychosocial parameters and absenteeism resulting from low back trouble. OBJECTIVES: To determine the value of distributing an educational psychosocial pamphlet to reduce absenteeism resulting from back trouble. The pamphlet was designed to alter avoidance behaviors by encouraging a positive, active approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Attempts to control back-pain disability have failed. Fear of pain and activity seemingly leads to avoidance behaviors than contribute to chronicity and work loss. Avoidance behaviors are mediated by attitudes and beliefs; such attitudes and beliefs are a reasonable target for educational interventions designed to change "inappropriate" behaviors (e.g., extended absenteeism). Health education pamphlets are advocated widely but tested rarely. METHODS: Three factories participated in the study. Psychosocial data were collected by questionnaires; absence data were extracted from company records. A psychosocial pamphlet was distributed in one factory; the control subjects received either a nonspecific pamphlet or no intervention. The pamphlet emphasized a positive approach to low back trouble (reduction of negative beliefs and attitudes). RESULTS: In the company whose employees received pamphlets, a significant reduction occurred for the number of spells with extended absence and the number of days of absence (70% and 60%, respectively) compared with extrapolated values. A concomitant positive shift in beliefs concerning the locus of pain control and the inevitable consequences of low back trouble was found. CONCLUSION: A simple industrial intervention using a psychosocial pamphlet, which was designed to reduce avoidance behaviors by fostering positive beliefs and attitudes, successfully reduced extended absence resulting from low back trouble.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed1996

Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. A histologic and enzymatic analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar surgery was studied by muscle histology and serum creatine phosphokinase MM isoenzyme activity. OBJECTIVES: To investigate intraoperative factors influencing the magnitude of back muscle injury after posterior lumbar surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The authors previously have reported iatrogenic back muscle injury in an animal model and in humans. Serious injury of the back muscle has been shown by short-term and long-term follow-up evaluation. METHODS: The retraction pressure was monitored, and the retraction pressure-time products were calculated in 24 patients. Early histologic changes of multifidus muscle, which were taken at completion of surgery, and serum creatine phosphokinase MM isoenzyme activity changes were examined. RESULTS: The magnitude of back muscle injury was significant as the pressure-time product increased. Creatine phosphokinase MM isoenzyme activity increased after surgery and reached a plateau 1 day after surgery, followed by recovery to the normal value 1 week after surgery. Creatine phosphokinase MM isoenzyme activity tended to be high in cases with multilevel exposure and with high pressure-time product. CONCLUSIONS: Back muscle injury occurs in all patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery, and these injuries are related to the retraction pressure, time, and extent of exposure.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Nonorganic signs of significance in low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Medical records and imaging studies including one or more interviews and physical examinations by the author were reviewed in 878 people remaining out of work for 13 weeks or more because of occupational low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prognostic value of nonorganic signs, including those validated by Waddell et al and two others previously undescribed, limitation of shoulder motion with production of low back pain, and low back pain resulting from movement limited to the cervical spines. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Review of all records of people evaluated by the author over a 3-year period (1990-1993) provided the material for this study. All available medical, insurance, and legal records were reviewed, including reports or examination results of radiographic films, or both. In the majority, more sophisticated investigation had been performed with complete reports of the studies themselves being available to the author. METHODS: A complete history and physical examination were accomplished by the author on each individual, including evaluation of each of the test results for nonorganicity. Medical records, including radiographic films, magnetic resonance imaging, computerized axial tomography, myelography, bone scan, electromyography, etc., were collated. Statistical analysis of results followed. RESULTS: The finding of limitation of shoulder motion resulting in low back pain indicated a worse prognosis for return to work than that of positive Waddell signs alone, 69.6% versus 52.9%. If cervical motion additionally produced low back pain, the outlook was poorer (no return to work in 73.1%). CONCLUSION: When present with a triad of the signs validated by Waddell, the new signs significantly increase the predictability of failure to return to work by workers with compensable low back pain.

Absenteeism↗
PubMed1996

Discriminatory power of tests applied in back pain during pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN: A longitudinal, prospective, observational cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To assess the relationship between clinical back status and reported pain locations during and after pregnancy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Back pain during pregnancy is a frequent clinical occurrence, even during the early stages of pregnancy. The cause is unclear. There are few data describing the results of a general physical examination of the back during pregnancy and there are no data on serial examinations. Such data could provide information about what structures cause the pain, which might have implications for the choice of treatment. METHODS: A cohort of 200 consecutive women attending an antenatal clinic was observed throughout the pregnancy terms, and repeated measurements of back pain and its possible determinants were taken using questionnaires and physical examinations in a standardized way, including a series of tests of configuration, mobility, and pain provocation. RESULTS: Pain provocation tests were better at discriminating among women who reported back pain from women who reported no back pain from tests of configuration or mobility. The discriminatory power of the tests was better in the lower part of the spine than in the upper part. The best discrimination was achieved by combining some of the tests. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that not one but several pain-releasing structures may be involved. These are probably the various pelvic ligaments, which may form a functional unit. These findings may have therapeutic implications.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Drug therapy for back pain. Which drugs help which patients?

STUDY DESIGN: A brief review of current literature and issues on drug therapy for low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To identify current knowledge and future research needs related to drug therapy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Drug therapy is one of many possible treatment choices for symptom relief in patients with low back pain. The variety of drugs used suggests that there is no uniquely successful form of drug therapy. One reason for uncertainty and slow progress in this area is the limited quality of many clinical trials for back pain, with inadequate description of patients and outcomes being common deficits. METHODS: A selective review of randomized trials and systematic literature syntheses on drug therapy is given. RESULTS: Despite limitations, there is good evidence to support the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for acute low back pain and fair evidence for the use of muscle relaxants. There is greater controversy about the use of corticosteroids, which have been administered orally, intramuscularly, and epidurally. There is conflicting evidence regarding epidural injection of corticosteroids, but one meta-analysis suggests they may provide a small symptomatic improvement for patients with radiculopathy. Trials of systemic steroids and antidepressant drugs for managing chronic pain are inconclusive. The only randomized trial of local anesthetic injection into trigger points suggested that this treatment was equivalent to that of saline injection, needling without injection, or vapo-coolant spray alone. CONCLUSION: It seems reasonable to recommend acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for patients with acute back pain, with efforts to minimize costs and complications. Muscle relaxants and narcotic analgesics may be appropriate for some patients, but selection criteria are unclear, and these drugs should be prescribed for fixed periods. Drug treatment for chronic low back pain is less clear, and a current controversy centers on the use of chronic narcotic analgesics for such patients. Future research should include evaluating combinations of medications, combinations of medication and physical therapy, systemic corticosteroid therapy, trigger point injections, and narcotic use for patients with chronic pain. Spinal stenosis is common in the older population, and more drug trials are needed for this condition.

Adrenal Cortex Hormones↗
PubMed1996

An agenda for primary care research on low back pain.

In October 1995, an International Forum for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain was held in Seattle, Washington. The Forum focused on the broad range of decisions that patients and their primary care providers make concerning how to best manage low back pain. In addition to providing a venue for summarizing the current state of knowledge about these issues, a major goal of the Forum was to draft an agenda for future primary care research on low back pain. Previous efforts to delineate priority areas for research in this field have emphasized the concerns of basic scientists, pain specialists, and surgeons while ignoring the major concerns of patients and providers in the primary care setting, where the majority of patients with back pain are seen. This article describes the group consensus process used to draft an agenda, presents the items included, and contrasts this primary care agenda with agendas for back pain research developed primarily by specialists. This agenda identifies for the first time the clinical and methodologic issues that primary care experts on back pain consider to be of highest priority. Hopefully, it will help focus future primary care research and encourage funding agencies to give priority to the issues identified.

Humans↗