Literature DB >> 16638248

Predicting persistent disabling low back pain in general practice: a prospective cohort study.

Gareth T Jones1, Ruth E Johnson, Nicola J Wiles, Carol Chaddock, Richard G Potter, Chris Roberts, Deborah P M Symmons, Gary J Macfarlane.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients may adopt active and/or passive coping strategies in response to pain. However, it is not known whether these strategies may also precede the onset of chronic symptoms and, if so, whether they are independent predictors of prognosis. AIM: To examine, in patients with low back pain in general practice, the prognostic value of active and passive coping styles, in the context of baseline levels of pain, disability and pain duration. DESIGN OF STUDY: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Nine general practices in north west England.
METHOD: Patients consulting their GP with a new episode of low back pain were recruited to the study. Information on coping styles, pain severity, disability, duration, and a brief history of other chronic pain symptoms was recorded using a self-completion postal questionnaire. Participants were then sent a follow-up questionnaire, 3 months after their initial consultation, to assess the occurrence of low back pain. The primary outcome was persistent disabling low back pain, that is, low back pain at 3-month follow-up self-rated as >or=20 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale, and >or=5 on the Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 974 patients took part in the baseline survey, of whom 922 (95%) completed a follow-up questionnaire; 363 individuals (39%) reported persistent disabling pain at follow-up. Persons who reported high levels of passive coping experienced a threefold increase in the risk of persistent disabling low back pain (relative risk [RR] = 3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.3 to 4.0). In contrast, active coping was associated with neither an increase nor a decrease in the risk of a poor prognosis. After adjusting for baseline pain severity, disability, and other measures of pain and pain history, persons who reported a high passive coping score were still at 50% increased risk of a poor outcome (RR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1 to 2.0).
CONCLUSION: Patients who report passive coping strategies experience a significant increase in the risk of persistent symptoms. Further, this risk persists after controlling for initial pain severity and disability. The identification of this low back pain subgroup may help target future treatments to those at greatest risk of a poor outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16638248      PMCID: PMC1837841     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  30 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of psychological factors as predictors of chronicity/disability in prospective cohorts of low back pain.

Authors:  Tamar Pincus; A Kim Burton; Steve Vogel; Andy P Field
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Risk factors for new-onset low back pain amongst cohorts of newly employed workers.

Authors:  E F Harkness; G J Macfarlane; E S Nahit; A J Silman; J McBeth
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2003-04-16       Impact factor: 7.580

3.  Prognosis and quality of life in patients with acute low back pain: insights from a comprehensive inception cohort study.

Authors:  Joël Coste; Gérard Lefrançois; Francis Guillemin; Jacques Pouchot
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2004-04-15

4.  Predictors of low back pain in British schoolchildren: a population-based prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Gareth T Jones; Kath D Watson; Alan J Silman; Deborah P M Symmons; Gary J Macfarlane
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 7.124

5.  Coping, pain, and disability in osteoarthritis: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  M P Steultjens; J Dekker; J W Bijlsma
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.666

Review 6.  A review of psychological risk factors in back and neck pain.

Authors:  S J Linton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  A population-based study of factors associated with combinations of active and passive coping with neck and low back pain.

Authors:  Linda Carroll; Annalyn C Mercado; J David Cassidy; Pierre Cĵté
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  A prospective study of primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain: the identification of predictive factors for chronicity.

Authors:  R G Potter; J M Jones; A P Boardman
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Cognitive impairments, psychological dysfunction, and coping styles in patients with chronic whiplash syndrome.

Authors:  Fieke K Bosma; Roy P C Kessels
Journal:  Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol       Date:  2002-03

10.  Early identification of patients at risk of developing a persistent back problem: the predictive validity of the Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire.

Authors:  Steven J Linton; Katja Boersma
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.442

View more
  24 in total

1.  Back pain-- reducing long-term problems.

Authors:  Paul Hepple; Ann R R Robertson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Initial pain and disability characteristics can assist the prediction of the centralization phenomenon on initial assessment of patients with low back pain.

Authors:  Alon Rabin; Yaniv Shmushkevich; Leonid Kalichman
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2018-11-05

3.  Attachment and adjustment in adolescents and young adults with a history of pediatric functional abdominal pain.

Authors:  Kelsey T Laird; Kristopher J Preacher; Lynn S Walker
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.442

Review 4.  Overlapping Chronic Pain Conditions: Implications for Diagnosis and Classification.

Authors:  William Maixner; Roger B Fillingim; David A Williams; Shad B Smith; Gary D Slade
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 5.820

5.  Prediction of an unfavourable course of low back pain in general practice: comparison of four instruments.

Authors:  Petra Jellema; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Henriëtte E van der Horst; Wim A B Stalman; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  The phenotypic and genetic signatures of common musculoskeletal pain conditions.

Authors:  Luda Diatchenko; Roger B Fillingim; Shad B Smith; William Maixner
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 20.543

7.  Acute low back pain and primary care: how to define recovery and chronification?

Authors:  Wolf E Mehling; Viranjini Gopisetty; Michael Acree; Alice Pressman; Tim Carey; Harley Goldberg; Frederick M Hecht; Andrew L Avins
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Distinctiveness of psychological obstacles to recovery in low back pain patients in primary care.

Authors:  Nadine E Foster; Elaine Thomas; Annette Bishop; Kate M Dunn; Chris J Main
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 7.926

9.  Acute Low Back Pain: Differential Somatosensory Function and Gene Expression Compared With Healthy No-Pain Controls.

Authors:  Angela R Starkweather; Divya Ramesh; Debra E Lyon; Umaporn Siangphoe; Xioayan Deng; Jamie Sturgill; Amy Heineman; R K Elswick; Susan G Dorsey; Joel Greenspan
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.442

10.  Assessing a risk tailored intervention to prevent disabling low back pain--protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Jean-François Chenot; Michael Pfingsten; Ruth Anja Fahland; Gabriele Lindena; Ulf Marnitz; Klaus Pfeifer; Thomas Kohlmann
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-01-05       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.