Literature DB >> 18165754

A consensus approach toward the standardization of back pain definitions for use in prevalence studies.

Clermont E Dionne1, Kate M Dunn, Peter R Croft, Alf L Nachemson, Rachelle Buchbinder, Bruce F Walker, Mary Wyatt, J David Cassidy, Michel Rossignol, Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, Jan Hartvigsen, Päivi Leino-Arjas, Ute Latza, Shmuel Reis, Maria Teresa Gil Del Real, Francisco M Kovacs, Birgitta Oberg, Christine Cedraschi, Lex M Bouter, Bart W Koes, H Susan J Picavet, Maurits W van Tulder, Kim Burton, Nadine E Foster, Gary J Macfarlane, Elaine Thomas, Martin Underwood, Gordon Waddell, Paul Shekelle, Ernest Volinn, Michael Von Korff.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries.
OBJECTIVE: To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies.
METHODS: Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76%). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article.
RESULTS: Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs.
CONCLUSION: These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18165754     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  205 in total

1.  Acute low back pain in high school adolescents in Southern Brazil: prevalence and associated factors.

Authors:  Antonio Carlos Onofrio; Marcelo Cozzensa da Silva; Marlos Rodrigues Domingues; Airton José Rombaldi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  How is recovery from low back pain measured? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Steven J Kamper; Tasha R Stanton; Christopher M Williams; Christopher G Maher; Julia M Hush
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Increased prevalence of low back pain among physiotherapy students compared to medical students.

Authors:  Asdrubal Falavigna; Alisson Roberto Teles; Thaís Mazzocchin; Gustavo Lisbôa de Braga; Fabrício Diniz Kleber; Felipe Barreto; Juliana Tosetto Santin; Daniel Barazzetti; Lucas Lazzaretti; Bruna Steiner; Natália Laste Beckenkamp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

Authors:  Jill A Hayden; Maria N Wilson; Richard D Riley; Ross Iles; Tamar Pincus; Rachel Ogilvie
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-25

5.  The Canadian minimum dataset for chronic low back pain research: a cross-cultural adaptation of the National Institutes of Health Task Force Research Standards.

Authors:  Anaïs Lacasse; Jean-Sébastien Roy; Alexandre J Parent; Nioushah Noushi; Chúk Odenigbo; Gabrielle Pagé; Nicolas Beaudet; Manon Choinière; Laura S Stone; Mark A Ware
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2017-03-10

6.  Pain characteristic differences between subacute and chronic back pain.

Authors:  Mona Lisa Chanda; Matthew D Alvin; Thomas J Schnitzer; A Vania Apkarian
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 5.820

Review 7.  Bone health and back pain: what do we know and where should we go?

Authors:  A M Briggs; L M Straker; J D Wark
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Foot posture, foot function and low back pain: the Framingham Foot Study.

Authors:  Hylton B Menz; Alyssa B Dufour; Jody L Riskowski; Howard J Hillstrom; Marian T Hannan
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 7.580

9.  The association between isoinertial trunk muscle performance and low back pain in male adolescents.

Authors:  Federico Balagué; Evelyne Bibbo; Christian Mélot; Marek Szpalski; Robert Gunzburg; Tony S Keller
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Low back pain and health-related quality of life in community-dwelling older adults.

Authors:  C Cedraschi; C Luthy; A F Allaz; F R Herrmann; C Ludwig
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.