Extravertebral low back pain: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common reasons for consultation in general practice. Currently, LBP is categorised into specific and non-specific causes. However, extravertebral causes, such as abdominal aortic aneurysm or pancreatitis, are not being considered. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed across MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library, complemented by a handsearch. Studies conducted between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2020, where LBP was the main symptom, were included. RESULTS: The literature search identified 6040 studies, from which duplicates were removed, leaving 4105 studies for title and abstract screening. Subsequently, 265 publications were selected for inclusion, with an additional 197 publications identified through the handsearch. The majority of the studies were case reports and case series, predominantly originating from specialised care settings. A clear distinction between vertebral or rare causes of LBP was not always possible. A range of diseases were identified as potential extravertebral causes of LBP, encompassing gynaecological, urological, vascular, systemic, and gastrointestinal diseases. Notably, guidelines exhibited inconsistencies in addressing extravertebral causes. DISCUSSION: Prior to this review, there has been no systematic investigation into extravertebral causes of LBP. Although these causes are rare, the absence of robust and reliable epidemiological data hinders a comprehensive understanding, as well as the lack of standardised protocols, which contributes to a lack of accurate description of indicative symptoms. While there are certain disease-specific characteristics, such as non-mechanical or cyclical LBP, and atypical accompanying symptoms like fever, abdominal pain, or leg swelling, that may suggest extravertebral causes, it is important to recognise that these features are not universally present in every patient. CONCLUSION: The differential diagnosis of extravertebral LBP is extensive with relatively low prevalence rates dependent on the clinical setting. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for extravertebral aetiologies, especially in patients presenting with atypical accompanying symptoms.

Rehabilitation of back pain in the pediatric population: a mixed studies systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of children and adolescents experience back pain. However, a comprehensive systematic review on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate benefits and harms of rehabilitation interventions for non-specific low back pain (LBP) or thoracic spine pain in the pediatric population. METHODS: Seven bibliographic electronic databases were searched from inception to June 16, 2023. Moreover, reference lists of relevant studies and systematic reviews, three targeted websites, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched. Paired reviewers independently conducted screening, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data related to study characteristics, methodology, subjects, and results. Certainty of evidence was evaluated based on the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We screened 8461 citations and 307 full-text articles. Ten quantitative studies (i.e., 8 RCTs, 2 non-randomized clinical trials) and one qualitative study were included. With very low to moderate certainty evidence, in adolescents with LBP, spinal manipulation (1-2 sessions/week over 12 weeks, 1 RCT) plus exercise may be associated with a greater likelihood of experiencing clinically important pain reduction versus exercise alone; and group-based exercise over 8 weeks (2 RCTs and 1 non-randomized trial) may reduce pain intensity. The qualitative study found information provided via education/advice and compliance of treatment were related to effective treatment. No economic studies or studies examining thoracic spine pain were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal manipulation and group-based exercise may be beneficial in reducing LBP intensity in adolescents. Education should be provided as part of a care program. The overall evidence is sparse. Methodologically rigorous studies are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42019135009 (PROSPERO).

Which patients with chronic low back pain respond favorably to multidisciplinary rehabilitation? A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify prognostic variables at baseline associated with being responding favorably to multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: A responder analysis was conducted based on data from a randomized controlled trial with 26-week follow-up including 165 patients with CLBP treated at a Danish multidisciplinary rehabilitation center. Patients were dichotomized into responders and non-responders based on the outcome of a minimal clinically important difference of six points on the Oswestry Disability Index. The associations between prognostic variables and responders were analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients completed the study, of which 42% were classified as responders. Sex and employment status were statistically significant, with a decreased odds ratio (OR) of being a responder found for males compared to females (OR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.02-0.48) and for being on temporary or permanent social benefits (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.10-0.75) compared to being self-supporting or receiving retirement benefits. Statistically significant interaction (OR = 8.84, 95% CI = 1.11-70.12) was found between males and being on temporary or permanent social benefits. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CLBP, female patients as well as patients who were self-supporting or receiving retirement benefits were significantly more likely than male patients or patients on temporary or permanent social benefits to be a responder to multidisciplinary rehabilitation.

The effect of long-term alendronic acid treatment on Modic changes in the lumbar spine: a gender and age-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) affects a significant proportion of the adult population. Potent anti-resorptive drugs such as intravenous zoledronic acid have been demonstrated to reduce Modic changes (MCs) upon magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine and concomitantly decrease associated LBP. It is uncertain whether oral alendronic acid has a similar effect. METHODS: 82 subjects were recruited in this case-control study. Treatment subjects (n = 41) received oral alendronic acid treatment for at least 1-year and were matched by gender and age (± 2) to control subjects (n = 41) not receiving any anti-osteoporotic medication. The prevalence, type, and extent of MCs were quantified upon T1 and T2-weighted MRIs of the lumbosacral spine. RESULTS: Treatment subjects received oral alendronic acid for 124.0 ± 62.1 weeks at the time of MRI assessment and exhibited a lower prevalence of MCs over the lumbosacral spine (18/41 vs. 30/41, p < 0.001) as compared to control subjects. Amongst both groups, type 2 MCs were predominant. Quantification of type 2 MCs in treatment subjects revealed a significant reduction in area (113 ± 106 mm2 vs. 231 ± 144 mm2, p < 0.01) and volume (453 ± 427 mm3 vs. 925 ± 575 mm3, p < 0.01) affected by type 2 MCs in comparison to matched controls. CONCLUSION: Oral alendronic acid may be useful in the treatment of MC-associated LBP in patients with concomitant osteoporosis.

Associations between pain intensity, pain sensitivity, demographics, psychological factors, disability, physical activity, pain phenotype and COVID-19 history in low back pain: An observational study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Knowledge of the factors affecting pain intensity and pain sensitivity can inform treatment targets and strategies aimed at personalizing the intervention, conceivably increasing its positive impact on patients. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between demographic factors (sex and age), body mass index (BMI), psychological factors (anxiety and depression, kinesiophobia and catastrophizing), self-reported physical activity, pain phenotype (symptoms of central sensitization, and nociceptive or neuropathic pain), history of COVID-19 and pain intensity and sensitivity in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional secondary analysis with 83 participants with chronic non-specific LBP recruited from the community between August 2021 and April 2022. BMI, pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale), pain sensitivity at the lower back and at a distant point [pressure pain threshold], catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale), kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), pain phenotype (Central Sensitization Inventory and PainDetect Questionnaire), physical activity (International Physical Activity Questionnaire), and disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) were assessed. Multiple linear regression analyses with pain intensity and sensitivity as the dependent variables were used. RESULTS: The model for pain intensity explained 34% of its variance (Adjusted R2 = -0.343, p < 0.001), with depression and anxiety (p = 0.008) and disability (p = 0.035) reaching statistical significance. The model for pain sensitivity at the lower back, also explained 34% of its variance (Adjusted R2 = 0.344, p < 0.001) at the lower back with sex, BMI, and kinesiophobia reaching statistical significance (p < 0.05) and 15% of the variance at a distant body site (Adjusted R2 = 0.148, p = 0.018) with sex and BMI reaching statistical significance (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: This study found that different factors are associated with pain intensity and pain sensitivity in individuals with LBP. Increased pain intensity was associated with higher levels of anxiety and depression and disability and increased pain sensitivity was associated with being a female, higher kinesiophobia, and lower BMI.

Evaluation of deep oscillation therapy for the treatment of lumbar pain syndrome using motion capture systems: A systematic review.

Low back pain is a painful disorder that prevents normal mobilization, increases muscle tension and whose first-line treatment is usually non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, together with non-invasive manual therapies, such as deep oscillation therapy. This systematic review aims to investigate and examine the scientific evidence of the effectiveness of deep oscillation therapy in reducing pain and clinical symptomatology in patients with low back pain, through the use of motion capture technology. To carry out this systematic review, the guidelines of the PRISMA guide were followed. A literature search was performed from 2013 to March 2022 in the PubMed, Elsevier, Science Director, Cochrane Library, and Springer Link databases to collect information on low back pain, deep oscillation, and motion capture. The risk of bias of the articles was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Finally, they were included 16 articles and 5 clinical trials which met the eligibility criteria. These articles discussed the effectiveness of deep oscillation therapy in reducing pain, eliminating inflammation, and increasing lumbar range of motion, as well as analyzing the use of motion capture systems in the analysis, diagnosis, and evaluation of a patient with low back pain before, during and after medical treatment. There is no strong scientific evidence that demonstrates the high effectiveness of deep oscillation therapy in patients with low back pain, using motion capture systems. This review outlines the background for future research directed at the use of deep oscillation therapy as a treatment for other types of musculoskeletal injuries.

Importance of heat therapy in the treatment of pain in the daily clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain includes a wide variety of causes and conditions. Despite the heterogeneity of MSK pain, it is possible to identify some common clinical features and treatments. Heat therapy (HT) is one of the most common and could be a suitable non-pharmacological approach. OBJECTIVE: To obtain a European overview on the use of non-pharmacological approaches and the role of heat therapy in the treatment of MSK pain. METHODS: Through a two-cycle Delphi-like method, an international board of experts reached a consensus on 13 questions for a survey to healthcare professionals who provide direct patient care. Between November 2021 and January 2022, the resulting web survey was distributed to professionals with the collaboration of ten European scientific societies and associations. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed on collected data. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-two answers were validated. Most of the respondents had extensive professional experience. Participants were widely distributed throughout Europe. HT is administered to about 50% of patients, with a higher percentage administered to those affected by low back pain (92%) and neck pain (84%). The choice of exogenous HT is based on both personal clinical experience and scientific evidence. HT is primarily chosen due to its relaxation effect, high safety profile and enhancement of tissue perfusion. The use of HT is recommended by 86.5% of respondents. CONCLUSION: Experts indicate that exogenous HT represents a valid therapeutic choice and is widely used in Europe. Patients should be informed about the use of heat therapy as a valuable self-management therapy option.

Effects of pilates exercises on radiographic lumbo-pelvic alignment and range of motion in non-specific low back pain patients.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of Pilates exercises on lumbo-pelvic alignment in non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients. METHODS: Twenty-two patients (Male:7; Female:15) with NSLBP aged 20-65 years were recruited and classified based on a modified O'Sullivan's classification system into flexion pattern (FP) or active extension pattern (EP) groups. Oswestry Disability index (ODI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) as well as radiographic lumbar global range of motion (ROM) and lumbo-pelvic alignment were measured Pre- and immediately post-intervention and at 6- and 12-month. The intervention included supervised six-weeks Pilates program with 60 min per session and up to two sessions per week. RESULTS: Lumbar lordosis, sacral slope and sacral inclination were found to be significantly different between the FP and EP groups based on the O'Sullivan's classification system. However, despite the significant changes in RMDQ (p = 0.001), no significant changes were found for any of the alignment parameters (p > 0.05) post intervention for both groups. For lumbar global ROM, a statistically significant change was observed for the EP group (p = 0.028) but not for the FP group (p = 0.249). No significant correlations were identified between any of the self-reported outcomes, radiographic alignment and ROM parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Patients self-perceived long-term functional improvements based on responding to questionnaires after Pilates exercises were not reflected in significant changes in lumbo-pelvic alignment or lumbar ROM. This may be due to the current cohort demonstrating within normal ranges due to the lesser severity of their condition, but further research is needed for clarification.

A dose response analysis of exercise prescription variables for lateral abdominal muscle thickness and activation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Various exercise programs are used to treat lateral abdominal muscle (LAM) impairments in people with low back pain. Factors comprising these programs include exercise type, session time, frequency, and program duration. However, specific clinical guidance about optimal exercise prescription is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To perform a dose-response analysis on exercise prescription variables for LAM thickness and activation as measured by ultrasound imaging. DESIGN: Systematic review METHOD: Databases were searched from their inception for studies examining the association between exercise interventions and LAM thickness/activation measured by ultrasound imaging in healthy individuals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Brigg's Institute critical appraisal tools. For each muscle, subgroup analyses were performed to determine the dose response of exercise prescription variables for LAM thickness and activation. Where there was insufficient data for subgroup analyses, data was narratively synthesised. RESULTS: Fourteen studies comprising 395 participants were included. Statistical and narrative synthesis revealed specific local abdominal exercises, programs from four weeks duration, three sessions per week and sessions of ≥30 min were associated with greatest improvements to LAM thickness. Only the variables exercise type, program duration and session frequency showed a significant between groups difference for the subgroup analysis. The main limitation was inability to perform subgroup analyses for all variables across all muscles measured at rest and during contraction, due to non-reporting of data. CONCLUSION: This review provides preliminary guidance to practitioners on how the LAM respond to different exercise dosages. Future research should trial these findings.

Comparison of aquatic physiotherapy and therapeutic exercise in patients with chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate and compare the effectiveness of aquatic physiotherapy and therapeutic exercise in the physical and functional performance of patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: Twenty-six participants were randomized into 3 groups, namely an aquatic physiotherapy group (AG), a therapeutic exercise group (EG), and a control group (CG). The pain, disability, and quality of life were compared before and after the exercise protocols for 2 months, twice a week, on alternate days, for 60 min. For statistical analyses, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to test the difference between the groups; the Wilcoxon test and the effect size were used for before-and-after comparisons. RESULTS: Twenty participants completed the study. There was a significant difference improvement in pain between the AG and the EG (p = 0.004), between the EG and the CG (p = 0.05), and in social role functioning between the groups (p = 0.02). No differences were observed in the other analyzed variables between the groups. Compared to the pre-treatment state, there were significant improvements in the AG in terms of pain (p = 0.02), functionality (p = 0.03), and general health status (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The AG group showed significant and clinical improvement in pain, disability, and quality of life. Improvements related to social aspects were found in the EG compared to the CG. The water provides a safe environment that facilitates the onset of exercise, so aquatic physiotherapy could be considered the first recommendation for patients with low back pain.

The relationship between the psoas major muscle morphology characteristics with disability index and pain in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) is a common disorder in people of active ages and significantly affects their quality of life. Different structures in the lumbar area can cause LBP. The lumbar muscle disorders, including the psoas major (PM) muscles, have an essential role in LBP. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) has been introduced as a safe and useful instrument for investigating the morphological properties of skeletal muscle. In general, PM morphology changes may be one reason for the pain and disability experienced in CNLBP patients. Thus, this study aimed to assess the relationship among the PM's Cross-sectional area (CSA), medial-lateral (ML), and anterior-posterior (AP) diameters, with disability index and pain score in patients with CNLBP. METHOD: One hundred twenty patients with CNLBP (60 men and 60 women) participated in this cross-sectional study. Axial MRIs were obtained from L3/L4 and L4/L5 disc levels. Then, patients filled out Rolland Morris Disability Questionnaires, demographic data forms, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Image J software was used to analyze the images. Using Linear Regression and the Pearson test, the correlation between muscle CSA and diameters, as well as data obtained from questionnaires and NPRS, was analyzed. RESULTS: Results from the statistical analysis showed no statistically significant relationship among morphological characteristics of the psoas major muscle in L3/L4 and L4/L5 disc levels with disability index and pain score (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant relationship between the PM morphological characteristics and disability index and pain score. Therefore, muscle CSA and diameters are insufficient to determine the cause of CNLBP.

Investigating scapula positioning in individuals with non-specific lower back pain: A preliminary study.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) is an economic and physically disabling burden on individuals and society. With 70% of cases classed as non-specific, there is a need for further research into the causes and consequences associated. The involvement of postural balance in musculoskeletal conditions is gaining increasing interest in research and health practice. However, there is a lack of literature surrounding LBP and posture in distal segments of the body. OBJECTIVE: The current study investigated scapula positioning in those with non-specific LBP. METHODS: Scapula angle of rotation, scapula protraction, and scapula elevation were assessed in nine participants with chronic non-specific LBP and compared with that of nine asymptomatic controls (aged 18-60 years). The degree of pelvic tilt was assessed across both groups as a secondary outcome measure. RESULTS: No difference was identified between the two sample groups for scapula angle of rotation (p = 0.707), protraction (p = 0.755), or elevation (p = 0.691). Anterior pelvic tilt was greater in those with LBP (p = 0.046), supporting previous literature. CONCLUSION: The findings for the scapula position are novel, given that research in this field is limited. It is concluded that there is no change in scapula positioning in those with non-specific LBP, but there is an increased anterior pelvic tilt.

The effect of pelvic clock exercises on pain reduction and lumbopelvic proprioception in middle-aged women with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP).

INTRODUCTION: Low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most common causes of disability in adults. There are many non-invasive interventions to improve this condition, of which the use of exercise therapy is one of the most widely used. But there is contradictory evidence regarding the effectiveness of different types of exercise methods. Therefore, the current research aimed to investigate the effect of pelvic clock exercises on pain reduction and lumbopelvic proprioception in women with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental study with a controlled pre-test-post-test design. The study population included middle-aged women with CNSLBP with an age range of 35-50 years. A total of 30 eligible middle-aged women with CNSLBP were selected using purposive and convenience sampling. The pelvic clock exercise was carried out by the researcher in a gym for eight 45- min sessions each week (three sessions each week). A visual analog scale (VAS) and goniometer were used to measure pain and lumbopelvic proprioception, respectively. However, the control group only participated in the pre-test and post-test stages. For intra-group and inter-group comparisons, paired t-test and independent t-test were used at P < 0.05, respectively. RESULTS: The results showed that eight-week pelvic clock exercises had an effect on decreased pain and increase lumbopelvic proprioception in middle-aged women with CNSLBP, but no effect was observed in the control group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: According to the results of the present study, pelvic clock exercises should be used as a new and practical method to reduce pain and improve lumbopelvic proprioception in middle-aged women with CNSLBP.

The usage of a modified straight-leg raise neurodynamic test and hamstring flexibility for diagnosis of non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of this research study was to compare mean modified straight-leg raise test (mSLR) and hamstring muscle length (HL) between chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) and healthy subjects to understand the possibility of neuropathic causes in LBP population as it may impact the diagnosis and treatment of LBP. Another purpose was to compare mean mSLR between those with lumbar nerve root impingement and those without as determine by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: The design of the study is cross sectional and included 32 subjects with ages ranging from 18-50 years old. Clinical exam objective measures were collected such as patient questionnaires, somatosensory tests, HL range of motion, and a mSLR test, and were compared to the findings from a structural lumbar spine MRI. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in mean HL angulation and mSLR angulation between LBP and healthy subjects (p>0.05). There was no significant difference in mean HL by impingement by versus no impingement (38.3±15.6 versus 44.8±9.4, p = 0.08, Cohen's d = 0.50). On the other hand, there was a significant difference in mean mSLR angulation by impingement (57.6.3±8.7 versus 63.8±11.6, p = 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: The mSLR test was found to be associated with lumbar nerve root compression, regardless of the existence of radiating leg symptoms, and showed no association solely with the report of LBP. The findings highlight the diagnostic dilemma facing clinicians in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP with uncorrelated neuroanatomical image findings. Clinically, it may be necessary to reevaluate the common practice of exclusively using the mSLR test for patients with leg symptoms. This study may impact the way chronic LBP and neuropathic symptoms are diagnosed, potentially improving treatment methods, reducing persistent symptoms, and ultimately improving disabling effects.

Chiropractic spinal manipulation and likelihood of tramadol prescription in adults with radicular low back pain: a retrospective cohort study using US data.

OBJECTIVES: Patients receiving chiropractic spinal manipulation (CSM) for low back pain (LBP) are less likely to receive any opioid prescription for subsequent pain management. However, the likelihood of specifically being prescribed tramadol, a less potent opioid, has not been explored. We hypothesised that adults receiving CSM for newly diagnosed radicular LBP would be less likely to receive a tramadol prescription over 1-year follow-up, compared with those receiving usual medical care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: US medical records-based dataset including >115 million patients attending academic health centres (TriNetX, Inc), queried 9 November 2023. PARTICIPANTS: Opioid-naive adults aged 18-50 with a new diagnosis of radicular LBP were included. Patients with serious pathology and tramadol use contraindications were excluded. Variables associated with tramadol prescription were controlled via propensity matching. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were divided into two cohorts dependent on treatment received on the index date of radicular LBP diagnosis (CSM or usual medical care). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk ratio (RR) for tramadol prescription (primary); markers of usual medical care utilisation (secondary). RESULTS: After propensity matching, there were 1171 patients per cohort (mean age 35 years). Tramadol prescription was significantly lower in the CSM cohort compared with the usual medical care cohort, with an RR (95% CI) of 0.32 (0.18 to 0.57; p<0.0001). A cumulative incidence graph demonstrated that the reduced incidence of tramadol prescription in the CSM cohort relative to the usual medical care cohort was maintained throughout 1-year follow-up. Utilisation of NSAIDs, physical therapy evaluation and lumbar imaging was similar between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that US adults initially receiving CSM for radicular LBP had a reduced likelihood of receiving a tramadol prescription over 1-year follow-up. These findings should be corroborated by a prospective study to minimise residual confounding.

Bacterial growth in patients with low back pain and Modic changes: protocol of a multicentre, case-control biopsy study.

INTRODUCTION: Bacterial infection and Modic changes (MCs) as causes of low back pain (LBP) are debated. Results diverged between two randomised controlled trials examining the effect of amoxicillin with and without clavulanic acid versus placebo on patients with chronic LBP (cLBP) and MCs. Previous biopsy studies have been criticised with regard to methods, few patients and controls, and insufficient measures to minimise perioperative contamination. In this study, we minimise contamination risk, include a control group and optimise statistical power. The main aim is to compare bacterial growth between patients with and without MCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre, case-control study examines disc and vertebral body biopsies of patients with cLBP. Cases have MCs at the level of tissue sampling, controls do not. Previously operated patients are included as a subgroup. Tissue is sampled before antibiotic prophylaxis with separate instruments. We will apply microbiological methods and histology on biopsies, and predefine criteria for significant bacterial growth, possible contamination and no growth. Microbiologists, surgeons and pathologist are blinded to allocation of case or control. Primary analysis assesses significant growth in MC1 versus controls and MC2 versus controls separately. Bacterial disc growth in previously operated patients, patients with large MCs and growth from the vertebral body in the fusion group are all considered exploratory analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway (REC South East, reference number 2015/697) has approved the study. Study participation requires written informed consent. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03406624). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, scientific conferences and patient fora. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03406624.

Cryoneurolysis versus radiofrequency ablation outcome on pain experience in chronic low back pain (COPE): a single-blinded randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: A comparison of cryoneurolysis or radio frequency (RF) with placebo in patients with facetogenic chronic low back pain (LBP) for patient global impression of change (PGIC), pain intensity, function and quality of life, with 1-year follow-up. DESIGN: Single-centre, single-blinded placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Single-centre study. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion from March 2020 to September 2022: consenting adults over 18 years of age, LBP>3 months, average Numeric Rating Scale LBP≥4 average last 14 days and a positive response to a diagnostic medial branch block (>50% pain reduction after 60 min). INTERVENTIONS: 120 patients were block randomised 1:1:1 to cryoneurolysis, RF or placebo of the medial branch nerves. Physical therapy was added after 4 weeks for all groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was PGIC 4 weeks after the intervention. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS), quality of life (Short Form 36, EQ-5D-5L), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), depression (Major Depression Inventory) and catastrophising (Pain Catastrophising Scale). Outcomes were measured at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in PGIC at 4 weeks between cryoneurolysis and placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2; 95% CI 0.75 to 5.33, p=0.17) and RF and placebo (RR 1.6; 95% CI 0.57 to 4.49, p=0.37), except PGIC for cryoneurolysis at 6-month follow-up (RR 5.1; 95% CI 1.20 to 22.03, p=0.03). No statistically significant differences were found in secondary follow-up endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Denervation of the medial branch nerve by either cryoneurolysis or RF compared with placebo did not demonstrate significant improvement in PGIC, pain intensity, function and quality of life in patients with facetogenic chronic LBP at short-term or long-term follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04786145.

Implementation of an integrated primary care prevention and management program for chronic low back pain (LBP): patient-reported outcomes and predictors of pain interference after six months.

BACKGROUND: Integrated primary care programs for patients living with chronic pain which are accessible, interdisciplinary, and patient-centered are needed for preventing chronicity and improving outcomes. Evaluation of the implementation and impact of such programs supports further development of primary care chronic pain management. This study examined patient-reported outcomes among individuals with low back pain (LBP) receiving care in a novel interdisciplinary primary care program. METHODS: Patients were referred by primary care physicians in four regions of Quebec, Canada, and eligible patients received an evidence-based interdisciplinary pain management program over a six-month period. Patients were screened for risk of chronicity. Patient-reported outcome measures of pain interference and intensity, physical function, depression, and anxiety were evaluated at regular intervals over the six-month follow-up. A multilevel regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between patient characteristics at baseline, including risk of chronicity, and change in pain outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-four individuals (mean age 55.4y, 63% female) completed the program. The majority (≥ 60%) experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in pain intensity and interference at six months. Patients with moderate (71%) or high risk (81%) of chronicity showed greater improvement in pain interference than those with low risk (51%). Significant predictors of improvement in pain interference included a higher risk of chronicity, younger age, female sex, and lower baseline disability. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this novel LBP program will inform wider implementation considerations by identifying key components for further effectiveness, sustainability, and scale-up of the program.

Physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches in patients with chronic low-back pain: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a major cause of disability and healthcare expenditure worldwide. Its prevalence is increasing globally from somatic and psychosocial factors. While non-pharmacological management, and in particular physiotherapy, has been recommended as a first-line treatment for cLBP, it is not clear what type of physiotherapeutic approach is the most effective in terms of pain reduction and function improvement. This analysis is rendered more difficult by the vast number of available therapies and a lack of a widely accepted classification that can effectively highlight the differences in the outcomes of different management options. This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. In January 2024, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. All the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy of physiotherapy programs in patients with cLBP were accessed. Studies reporting on non-specific or mechanical cLPB were included. Data concerning the Visual Analogic Scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Data from 12,773 patients were collected. The mean symptom duration was 61.2 ± 51.0 months and the mean follow-up was 4.3 ± 5.9 months. The mean age was 44.5 ± 9.4 years. The mean BMI was 25.8 ± 2.9 kg/m2. The Adapted Physical Exercise group evidenced the lowest pain score, followed by Multidisciplinary and Adapted Training Exercise/Complementary Medicine. The Adapted Physical Exercise group evidenced the lowest RMQ score followed by Therapeutic Exercises and Multidisciplinary. The Multidisciplinary group evidenced the lowest ODI score, followed by Adapted Physical Exercise and Physical Agent modalities. Within the considered physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches to manage nonspecific and/or mechanic cLBP, adapted physical exercise, physical agent modalities, and a multidisciplinary approach might represent the most effective strategy to reduce pain and disability.

Efficacy of neuromobilization in the treatment of low back pain: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability. Neuromobilization (NM) as a physical therapy technique, offers some degree of symptom improvement. However, some studies have shown that NM can significantly reduce the symptoms of LBP, while others have failed to find similar positive effects. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of NM for LBP. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted across five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science) from their inception to December 2023. Study main measures assessed pain, disability, and straight leg raise angle to determine the degree of improvement in patients. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. The findings indicated that NM interventions in patients with LBP were more effective than control groups in improving Visual Analog Scale scores (mean difference = 0.62, 95% CI (0.03, 1.21)) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (mean difference = 7.54, 95% CI (4.98, 10.10)). There was no significant difference in straight leg raise results (mean difference = 0.18, 95% CI (-0.08, 0.44)). CONCLUSIONS: NM demonstrated effectiveness in improving Visual Analog Scale and Oswestry Disability Index outcomes in patients with LBP, but straight leg raise outcomes are still uncertain and until more high-quality studies are included, the effectiveness of NM for SLR remains unknown.