Literature DB >> 2950602

Psychologic classification of low-back pain patients: a prognostic tool.

T W McNeill, G Sinkora, F Leavitt.   

Abstract

The Pain Drawing Test and Back Pain Classification Scale (BPCS) were examined for their degree of correspondence in measuring psychologic disturbance and for their value in predicting treatment outcome in four areas: medication need, work status, patients' rating of improvement, and change in pain over a 12-month period. Agreement between the two measures in identifying patients as "not psychologically disturbed" was good; agreement was far less for patients identified as "psychologically disturbed." At the same time, both measures predicted clinical outcome with an equal degree of accuracy across the measures of outcome, except for "return-to-work status" where significant group trends with the BPCS did not reach significance with the Pain Drawing Test. The strong correlation between the two measures in predicting clinically important indexes of improvement suggests that differences in diagnosing the psychologically disturbed does not represent error. The difference may arise because the two scales tap different aspects of psychologic disturbance. Both scales appear to be of clinical value in the early identification of probable treatment failures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 2950602     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198611000-00018

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


  10 in total

1.  [Clinical diagnosis and documentation of chronic-rheumatic pain syndromes the state of the art 1990.].

Authors:  H H Raspe; T Kohlmann
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 1.107

2.  Development and evaluation of a quality assessment instrument for occupational physicians.

Authors:  W E van der Weide; J H Verbeek; F J van Dijk; C T Hulshof
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.402

Review 3.  Disorders characterised by pain: a methodological review of population surveys.

Authors:  H Raspe; T Kohlmann
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  Factors influencing the cost of chronic low back injuries: An analysis of data from independent medical examinations.

Authors:  W A Earman; G B Andersson; F Leavitt; T W McNeill; I H Durudogan; J Reagan
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  1996-03

5.  Pain 5 years after instrumented and non-instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Thomas Andersen; Finn B Christensen; Ebbe S Hansen; Cody Bünger
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-05-20       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  Physiotherapy movement based classification approaches to low back pain: comparison of subgroups through review and developer/expert survey.

Authors:  Nicholas V Karayannis; Gwendolen A Jull; Paul W Hodges
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-02-20       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Anxiety and depression affect pain drawings in cervical degenerative disc disease.

Authors:  Anna MacDowall; Yohan Robinson; Martin Skeppholm; Claes Olerud
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 2.384

8.  Gut-Brain Axis Cross-Talk and Limbic Disorders as Biological Basis of Secondary TMAU.

Authors:  Luigi Donato; Simona Alibrandi; Concetta Scimone; Andrea Castagnetti; Giacomo Rao; Antonina Sidoti; Rosalia D'Angelo
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-01-31

9.  The association between pain diagram area, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain catastrophising.

Authors:  Bruce F Walker; Christine D Losco; Anthony Armson; Amanda Meyer; Norman J Stomski
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2014-01-20

10.  Use of pain drawing as an assessment tool of sciatica for patients with single level lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  Toshiya Tachibana; Keishi Maruo; Shinichi Inoue; Fumihiro Arizumi; Kazuki Kusuyama; Shinichi Yoshiya
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-08-09
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.