OBJECTIVES: A locomotive syndrome (LS) risk test for evaluation of physical ability is recently proposed. The objective of this study is to evaluate the utility of this test by examining physical ability, neuropathic pain, nociceptive pain, shoulder complaints, and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 523 subjects (240 males, 283 females; mean age: 63.3 years) at a health checkup. Data collected using visual analog scales (VAS) for shoulder pain, low back pain, sciatica, and knee pain, neuropathic pain, shoulder complaint, body mass index (BMI), osteoporosis, and SF-36 were compared among three LS risk stages. RESULTS: Subjects in LS risk stage 1 (24%) had significantly more osteoporosis, slower gait speed, weaker muscle strength and higher VAS, with no difference in age and BMI compared to those with no LS risk (50%). Subjects in stage 2 (26%) had significantly poorer results for all items. Shoulder complaint, neuropathic pain and QOL differed significantly among all three groups and worsened with decline in mobility on the LS risk test. CONCLUSIONS: LS risk test is easy and useful screening tool for evaluation of mobility and for screening for pain and complaint associated with activity of daily living and QOL.
OBJECTIVES: A locomotive syndrome (LS) risk test for evaluation of physical ability is recently proposed. The objective of this study is to evaluate the utility of this test by examining physical ability, neuropathic pain, nociceptive pain, shoulder complaints, and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 523 subjects (240 males, 283 females; mean age: 63.3 years) at a health checkup. Data collected using visual analog scales (VAS) for shoulder pain, low back pain, sciatica, and knee pain, neuropathic pain, shoulder complaint, body mass index (BMI), osteoporosis, and SF-36 were compared among three LS risk stages. RESULTS: Subjects in LS risk stage 1 (24%) had significantly more osteoporosis, slower gait speed, weaker muscle strength and higher VAS, with no difference in age and BMI compared to those with no LS risk (50%). Subjects in stage 2 (26%) had significantly poorer results for all items. Shoulder complaint, neuropathic pain and QOL differed significantly among all three groups and worsened with decline in mobility on the LS risk test. CONCLUSIONS: LS risk test is easy and useful screening tool for evaluation of mobility and for screening for pain and complaint associated with activity of daily living and QOL.
Entities:
Keywords:
Locomotive syndrome risk test; neuropathic and nociceptive pain; physical ability; quality of life; shoulder complaints