Literature DB >> 9536816

On the course of low back pain in general practice: a one year follow up study.

H J van den Hoogen1, B W Koes, J T van Eijk, L M Bouter, W Devillé.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Knowledge on the clinical course of low back pain presented in general practice is poor. Preceding studies offer a fragmentary view only, whereas further knowledge is important to enable the assessment of the prognosis. The object of this study is to investigate the course of low back pain presented in general practice to enable the assessment of the prognosis.
METHODS: A one year follow up study on the clinical course of low back pain in consecutive cases receiving usual care in general practice. During a period of two years 15 general practitioners from Amsterdam and surrounding areas included consecutive patients with both chronic and recent onset low back pain. After the initial visit, each patient was monitored for a period of 12 months. The follow up consisted of monthly postal questionnaires on the course of the low back pain and the related disability.
RESULTS: A total of 443 of 605 patients identified were included in the follow up, which was fully completed by 269 patients. In general, patients with less serious low back pain participated less often or did not complete the follow up. At 12 weeks 35% and at the end of the follow up 10% of the population, respectively, still suffered from low back pain. Both the pain and the disability seemed to diminish quickly after the initial visit, and both seemed to stabilise at a lower level if the low back pain did not disappear completely. About three of four patients, whose pain disappeared before the end of the follow up, endured one or more relapses within a year. The median time to a relapse was about seven weeks, and its median duration about six weeks. Both the pain and the disability turned out to be less severe during relapses. The median time to recovery for patients whose low back pain developed more than seven weeks before the initial visit, was four weeks longer than for patients with more recently developed low back pain at the initial visit.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course of low back pain presented in general practice, for the most patients, clearly is less favourable than expected. It takes more than just a few weeks to recover, and relapses occur within a year in most cases. Fortunately, both the pain and the disability quickly diminish, even if the low back pain does not resolve within a few weeks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9536816      PMCID: PMC1752458          DOI: 10.1136/ard.57.1.13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis        ISSN: 0003-4967            Impact factor:   19.103


  22 in total

1.  The evolution of chronic back pain problems: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  H C Philips; L Grant
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  1991

2.  Graded chronic pain status: an epidemiologic evaluation.

Authors:  Michael Von Korff; Samuel F Dworkin; Linda Le Resche
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 6.961

3.  Measurement of pain.

Authors:  E C Huskisson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1974-11-09       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  The role of distraction in improving the space available in the lumbar stenotic canal and foramen.

Authors:  J D Schlegel; J Champine; M S Taylor; J T Watson; M Champine; R L Schleusener; K M Savory
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain.

Authors:  M Roland; R Morris
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Back pain in primary care. Outcomes at 1 year.

Authors:  M Von Korff; R A Deyo; D Cherkin; W Barlow
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Clinical course and prognostic factors in acute low back pain: an inception cohort study in primary care practice.

Authors:  J Coste; G Delecoeuillerie; A Cohen de Lara; J M Le Parc; J B Paolaggi
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-02-26

8.  The outcomes and costs of care for acute low back pain among patients seen by primary care practitioners, chiropractors, and orthopedic surgeons. The North Carolina Back Pain Project.

Authors:  T S Carey; J Garrett; A Jackman; C McLaughlin; J Fryer; D R Smucker
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-10-05       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Prognostic indicators in low back pain.

Authors:  P A Pedersen
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1981-04

10.  The prediction of chronicity in patients with an acute attack of low back pain in a general practice setting.

Authors:  L Klenerman; P D Slade; I M Stanley; B Pennie; J P Reilly; L E Atchison; J D Troup; M J Rose
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  33 in total

Review 1.  Practical aspects of functional capacity evaluations.

Authors:  Glenn S Pransky; Patrick G Dempsey
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2004-09

Review 2.  Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain.

Authors:  B W Koes; M W van Tulder; S Thomas
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-06-17

3.  Matching FCE activities and work demands: an explorative study.

Authors:  W Kuijer; S Brouwer; M F Reneman; P U Dijkstra; J W Groothoff; J M H Schellekens; J H B Geertzen
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2006-09

4.  Patterns of sick-leave and health outcomes in injured workers with back pain.

Authors:  Pierre Côté; Marjorie L Baldwin; William G Johnson; John W Frank; Richard J Butler
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Trunk muscles strength as a risk factor for nonspecific low back pain: a pilot study.

Authors:  Kang Hee Cho; Jae Won Beom; Tae Sung Lee; Jun Ho Lim; Tae Heon Lee; Ji Hyun Yuk
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2014-04-29

6.  Low back pain: an intermittent and remittent predicament of life.

Authors:  N M Hadler; T S Carey
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 19.103

7.  Insights in public health: perspectives on pain in the low back and neck: global burden, epidemiology, and management.

Authors:  Maria Vassilaki; Eric L Hurwitz
Journal:  Hawaii J Med Public Health       Date:  2014-04

Review 8.  Evaluating and managing acute low back pain in the primary care setting.

Authors:  S J Atlas; R A Deyo
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Predicting who develops chronic low back pain in primary care: a prospective study.

Authors:  E Thomas; A J Silman; P R Croft; A C Papageorgiou; M I Jayson; G J Macfarlane
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-06-19

10.  Ultrasound evidence of altered lumbar connective tissue structure in human subjects with chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Helene M Langevin; Debbie Stevens-Tuttle; James R Fox; Gary J Badger; Nicole A Bouffard; Martin H Krag; Junru Wu; Sharon M Henry
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.