OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability at a global scale. The development and chronicity of LBP are influenced by multiple factors, and among them is catastrophizing. We are unaware of the impact that catastrophizing may have on pain and disability in our population. We also lack the tools that allow us to determine in which cases catastrophizing should be assessed. The primary objective is to compare the disability and pain intensity values at baseline in low back pain patients with high and low catastrophizing. The secondary objectives are to analyse the correlation between variables and determine disability variance, and develop a prediction model to identify patients with high catastrophizing. METHOD: This is a retrospective study. We included the baseline data of patients with LBP. A PCS score ≥ 23 was classified as "high catastrophizing." RESULTS: A total 121 medical sheets were analysed. Patients with high catastrophizing showed greater disability, with no differences in pain intensity. The PCS value explained 20% of the variance of disability, and pain was 1%. A cut-off point of 11 in the RMQ allowed us to identify patients with high and low catastrophizing, with an accuracy of 76.67%. CONCLUSION: LBP patients with high catastrophizing reported greater disability than those with low catastrophizing, with no differences as to pain intensity. The PCS was the most relevant variable to explain variability in the RMQ. The RMQ allowed us to identify patients with high and low catastrophizing.
OBJECTIVE:Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability at a global scale. The development and chronicity of LBP are influenced by multiple factors, and among them is catastrophizing. We are unaware of the impact that catastrophizing may have on pain and disability in our population. We also lack the tools that allow us to determine in which cases catastrophizing should be assessed. The primary objective is to compare the disability and pain intensity values at baseline in low back painpatients with high and low catastrophizing. The secondary objectives are to analyse the correlation between variables and determine disability variance, and develop a prediction model to identify patients with high catastrophizing. METHOD: This is a retrospective study. We included the baseline data of patients with LBP. A PCS score ≥ 23 was classified as "high catastrophizing." RESULTS: A total 121 medical sheets were analysed. Patients with high catastrophizing showed greater disability, with no differences in pain intensity. The PCS value explained 20% of the variance of disability, and pain was 1%. A cut-off point of 11 in the RMQ allowed us to identify patients with high and low catastrophizing, with an accuracy of 76.67%. CONCLUSION: LBP patients with high catastrophizing reported greater disability than those with low catastrophizing, with no differences as to pain intensity. The PCS was the most relevant variable to explain variability in the RMQ. The RMQ allowed us to identify patients with high and low catastrophizing.