Literature DB >> 6214028

Assessment of the progress of the back-pain patient 1981 Volvo Award in Clinical Science.

R Million, W Hall, K H Nilsen, R D Baker, M I Jayson.   

Abstract

Fifteen subjective variables reflecting the severity of back pain, the circumstances exacerbating symptoms, and the impact of the problem on life style were scored on Visual Analogue Scales. It was possible to combine the results from these assessments to provide a global subjective index. Repeated measurements by the same observer showed a high degree of reproducibility, but when performed by separate observers discrepancies arose in certain questions. By improving certain questions and standardizing their presentation to the patient, a considerable improvement in the correlation of results between observers was obtained. Objective assessments of spinal motion and straight leg raising and a global objective index showed a high degree of intraobserver reproducibility. This technique was applied to a study of relief of back pain by lumbar corsets when it was found that there was significantly greater relief of back pain by a corset with a lumbar support than one without a spinal support. We conclude that the emphasis in assessing the progress of the back-pain patient must be on the subjective parameters, and the technique developed offers a useful method for reliably assessing patients and following their progress.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 6214028     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198205000-00004

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


  35 in total

Review 1.  Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain. Part I: validation.

Authors:  U Müller; M S Duetz; C Roeder; C G Greenough
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-03-17       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain. Part II: scale construction.

Authors:  U Müller; C Roeder; L Dubs; M S Duetz; C G Greenough
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-03-17       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Differences among outcome measures in occupational low back pain.

Authors:  Sue A Ferguson; William S Marras; Deborah L Burr
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2005-09

4.  The pain disability questionnaire: relationship to one-year functional and psychosocial rehabilitation outcomes.

Authors:  Robert J Gatchel; Tom G Mayer; Brian R Theodore
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2006-03

5.  The effect of insoles on the incidence and severity of low back pain among workers whose job involves long-distance walking.

Authors:  S Shabat; T Gefen; M Nyska; Y Folman; R Gepstein
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  Assessment of functional capacity of the musculoskeletal system in the context of work, daily living, and sport: a systematic review.

Authors:  Haije Wind; Vincent Gouttebarge; P Paul F M Kuijer; Monique H W Frings-Dresen
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2005-06

7.  A critical review of questionnaires for assessing pain-related disability.

Authors:  R W Millard
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  1991-12

8.  Spinal Manipulation Vs Sham Manipulation for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jay K Ruddock; Hannah Sallis; Andy Ness; Rachel E Perry
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-05-25

9.  Results of lumbar discectomy: a study using 15 different evaluation methods.

Authors:  D S Korres; G Loupassis; K Stamos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Lumbar spine mobility in Marfan syndrome. A clinical and radiological study.

Authors:  A Malmivaara; M L Laitinen; A Savolainen; K Tallroth; A Zitting; I Kaitila
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.