Literature DB >> 2961080

1987 Volvo award in clinical sciences. A new clinical model for the treatment of low-back pain.

G Waddell1.   

Abstract

Because there is increasing concern about low-back disability and its current medical management, this analysis attempts to construct a new theoretic framework for treatment. Observations of natural history and epidemiology suggest that low-back pain should be a benign, self-limiting condition, that low back-disability as opposed to pain is a relatively recent Western epidemic, and that the role of medicine in that epidemic must be critically examined. The traditional medical model of disease is contrasted with a biopsychosocial model of illness to analyze success and failure in low-back disorders. Studies of the mathematical relationship between the elements of illness in chronic low-back pain suggest that the biopsychosocial concept can be used as an operational model that explains many clinical observations. This model is used to compare rest and active rehabilitation for low-back pain. Rest is the commonest treatment prescribed after analgesics but is based on a doubtful rationale, and there is little evidence of any lasting benefit. There is, however, little doubt about the harmful effects--especially of prolonged bed rest. Conversely, there is no evidence that activity is harmful and, contrary to common belief, it does not necessarily make the pain worse. Experimental studies clearly show that controlled exercises not only restore function, reduce distress and illness behavior, and promote return to work, but actually reduce pain. Clinical studies confirm the value of active rehabilitation in practice. To achieve the goal of treating patients rather than spines, we must approach low-back disability as an illness rather than low-back pain as a purely physical disease. We must distinguish pain as a purely the symptoms and signs of distress and illness behavior from those of physical disease, and nominal from substantive diagnoses. Management must change from a negative philosophy of rest for pain to more active restoration of function. Only a new model and understanding of illness by physicians and patients alike makes real change possible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 2961080     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198709000-00002

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


  228 in total

1.  Population based intervention to change back pain beliefs and disability: three part evaluation.

Authors:  R Buchbinder; D Jolley; M Wyatt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-06-23

2.  Effects of three different training modalities on the cross sectional area of the lumbar multifidus muscle in patients with chronic low back pain.

Authors:  L A Danneels; G G Vanderstraeten; D C Cambier; E E Witvrouw; J Bourgois; W Dankaerts; H J De Cuyper
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 13.800

Review 3.  Epidemic occupational pseudo-illness: the plague of acronyms.

Authors:  D S Bell
Journal:  Curr Rev Pain       Date:  2000

4.  Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis of a disability prevention model for back pain management: a six year follow up study.

Authors:  P Loisel; J Lemaire; S Poitras; M-J Durand; F Champagne; S Stock; B Diallo; C Tremblay
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.402

5.  Continuous quality improvement for patients with back pain.

Authors:  R A Deyo; M Schall; D M Berwick; T Nolan; P Carver
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  [Pain and anesthesiology : aspects of the development of modern pain therapy in the twentieth century].

Authors:  W Witte
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.041

7.  Routine primary care management of acute low back pain: adherence to clinical guidelines.

Authors:  Violeta González-Urzelai; Loreto Palacio-Elua; Josefina López-de-Munain
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-11-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  The 100 most cited spine articles.

Authors:  Michael R Murray; Tianyi Wang; Gregory D Schroeder; Wellington K Hsu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2011.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12-30       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Implementing the work disability prevention paradigm among therapists in Hong Kong: facilitators and barriers.

Authors:  Grace P Y Szeto; Andy S K Cheng; Edwin W C Lee; Eva Schonstein; Douglas P Gross
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2011-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.