RESUMEN
Background: Acute low back pain has a high prevalence, and when persisting into chronicity, it results in enormous socio-economic consequences. Sensory preferences may be key factors in predicting central sensitization as the main mechanism of nociplastic pain and chronicity. Objectives: Build a model to predict central sensitization symptoms using sensory profiles based on the PROGRESS framework. Methods: A Prognostic Model Research study was carried out to predict central sensitization symptoms at 12 weeks, using baseline sensory profiles, based on 114 patients with acute low back pain. Independent variables were sensory profiles, state and trait anxiety, age, duration, pain severity, depressive symptoms, and pain catastrophizing. Results: This model, based on continuous data, significantly predicts central sensitization symptoms at 12 weeks. It contains two significantly contributing variables: sensory profile Sensory Sensitive (unstandardized B-value = 0.42; p = 0.01) and trait anxiety (unstandardized B-value = 0.53; p ≤ 0.001). The model has a predictive value of R2 = 0.38. Conclusions: This model significantly predicts central sensitization symptoms based on sensory profile Sensory Sensitive and trait anxiety. This model may be a useful tool to intervene in a bottom-up and top-down approaches to prevent chronicity in clinical practice, including individual sensory preferences and behavioral responses to sensory stimulation in rehabilitation strategies.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Acute lower back pain can lead to neuroplastic changes in the central nervous system, and symptoms of central sensitization after 12 weeks. While sensory sensitivity has been shown to predict symptoms of central sensitization, trait sensory profiles may be prognostic in the persistence of central sensitization symptoms in low back pain over time. OBJECTIVE: To examine sensory profiles as prognostic symptoms of central sensitization in people with acute low back pain. METHODS: A longitudinal type 2 prognostic factor research study was performed according to the PROGRESS framework. Baseline and 12-week follow-up measures were taken using the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile and the Central Sensitization Inventory measures. Study participants were consecutively included from primary care physiotherapy practices. Univariable, and multivariable regression analyses were performed to adjust sensory profiles based on previous history of low back pain, baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores, level of pain, disability, age, and duration of low back pain. RESULTS: After adjustment, the sensory profiles of Low Registration B = 0.44, 95%CI (0.18, 0.70), Sensation Seeking B = 0.38, 95%CI (0.19, 0.57), Sensory Sensitive B = 0.49, 95%CI (0.25, 0.74), Sensation Avoiding B = 0.40, 95% CI (0.15, 0.65) was significantly associated with the persistence of central sensitization symptoms (N = 103). CONCLUSION: Sensory profiles may predict symptoms of central sensitization after 12 weeks in people with acute low back pain.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sensory profiles (SPs) may be useful in classifying patients based on sensory sensitivity and behavioral responses to stimuli to develop personalized treatments for nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP). The Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (AASP) identifies four sensitivity and behavioral response-related quadrants: Sensory Sensitive, Sensation Avoiding, Low Registration, and Sensation Seeking. It is an appropriate questionnaire for evaluating SPs; however, it has not been validated in CLBP. OBJECTIVES: To assess the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, agreement, and construct validity of the AASP in a CLBP population with nociplastic pain in primary care physiotherapy. DESIGN: Two evaluations were performed at a 2-week interval in this non-experimental cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with CLBP. METHODS: Questionnaires were used to compare outcomes with the AASP. Reliability was evaluated by assessing internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was evaluated in response to the a priori hypothesis. RESULTS: Ninety patients with CLBP were included. Internal consistency was excellent for all SPs (Cronbach's alpha, 0.91-0.92). Test-retest reliability Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC (3,2)) 0.82-0.87, for the SPs (95% CI 0.74-0.91, p< .001). Construct validity correlated positively with Low Registration, Sensory Sensitive, and Sensation Avoiding and negatively with Sensation Seeking. CONCLUSION: The AASP is suitable for evaluating SPs in primary care CLBP patients.
