[Doctors' feelings when facing chronic pain patients: Countertransference between symptom and treatment]. / Le vécu du médecin face au patient douloureux chronique. Entre symptôme et traitement : le contre-transfert.

Doctors, when facing patients suffering from chronic pain, are driven to the limits of their clinical practice, which essentially is based on a diagnostic interpretation of the patient's signs and symptoms, leading to the appropriate therapeutic intervention. A doctor's awareness of his own experience of helpless distress facing these patients is bound to occur and to make him address the issues of transference between him and his patient. Listening to the patient's narrative is essential. This has a reassuring and therapeutic role for the patient in pain. Above all, it enables the doctor to evaluate the patient's intensity of distress and need for security and to recognize that he must let the patient express his feelings, without necessarily responding immediately.

La confrontation du médecin aux patients douloureux chroniques mène celui-ci aux limites de sa pratique clinique, surtout lorsqu'elle est essentiellement basée sur une interprétation diagnostique des symptômes et des signes, menant à l'acte thérapeutique qui lui est lié. La confrontation du médecin à son propre vécu de détresse impuissante ne manque pas de se poser avec les patients douloureux chroniques. Elle l'amène à se préoccuper des enjeux et des notions du transfert et du contre-transfert entre lui et son patient. L'écoute de la narrativité du patient est essentielle. Elle a un rôle rassurant et thérapeutique pour le patient douloureux. Elle permet de repérer avant tout l'intensité de la détresse et du besoin de sécurité de ce patient et la nécessité de laisser celui-ci les exprimer, sans vouloir pour autant y répondre immédiatement.

Study of the information delivery by general practitioners and rheumatologists to patients with acute low back pain.

Providing information to patients regarding appropriate management of LBP is a crucial component of primary care and treatment of low back pain (LBP). Limited knowledge is available, however, about the information delivered by physicians to patients with low back pain. Hence, this study aimed at evaluating (1) the self-reported practices of French physicians concerning information about patients with acute LBP (2) the consistency of these practices with the COST B13 guidelines, and (3) the effects of the delivery of a leaflet summarizing the COST B13 recommendations on the management of patient information, using the following study design: 528 French physicians [319 general practitioners (GP) and 209 rheumatologists (RH)] were asked to provide demographic information, responses to a Fear Avoidance Beliefs questionnaire adapted for physicians and responses to a questionnaire investigating the consistency of their practice with the COST B13 guidelines. Half of the participants (163 GP and 105 RH) were randomized to receive a summary of the COST B13 guidelines concerning information delivery to patient with low back pain and half (156 GP and 104 RH) were not given this information. The mean age of physicians was 52.1±7.6 years, 25.2% were females, 75% work in private practice, 63.1% reported to treat 10-50 patients with LBP per month and 18.2%<10 per month. The majority of the physicians (71.0%) reported personal LBP episode (7.1% with a duration superior to 3 months). Among the 18.4% (97) of the physicians that knew the COST B13 guidelines, 85.6% (83/97) reported that they totally or partially applied these recommendations in their practice. The average work (0-24) and physical activity (0-24) FABQ scores were 21.2±8.4 and 10.1±6.0, respectively. The consistency scores (11 questions scored 0 to 6, total score was standardized from 0 to 100) were significantly higher in the RH group (75.6±11.6) than in GP group (67.2±12.6; p<0.001). The delivery of a summary of the COST B13 guidelines significantly improved the consistency score (p=0.018). However, a multivariate analysis indicated that only GP consistency was improved by recommendations' delivery.The results indicated that GP were less consistent with the European COST B13 guidelines on the information of patients with acute LBP than RH. Interestingly, delivery of a summary of these guidelines to GP improved their consistency score, but not that of the RH. This suggests that GP information campaign can modify the message that they deliver to LBP, and subsequently could change patient's beliefs on LBP.

Development and validation of a questionnaire assessing volitional competencies to enhance the performance of physical activities in chronic low back pain patients.

BACKGROUND: Motivation has long been emphasized as the most important determinant of action. However, there is a substantial gap between people's goals and their attainment. Patients may be motivated and yet unable to take action if their volitional competencies are insufficient. One of the important tasks of volition is goal-maintenance. Research has stressed the importance of a volitional tool, the implementation intentions. Implementation intentions indicate where, when, and how the action leading to the goal will be performed. Forming implementation intentions favours the execution of goal-directed efforts, and reinforces the relationship between intentions and behaviours. Results from various studies clearly suggest that volitional competencies and implementation intentions could play a role in low back pain (LBP) patients. However, there is at present no questionnaire allowing assessing the capacity of implementation intentions of physical activities in LBP patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will develop such a questionnaire, using a 3-step approach. A first qualitative step to build categories and generate items; 30 patients suffering chronic LBP will be invited to participate in semi-structured interviews; verbatim and derived items will then be submitted to a panel of experts, using a Delphi method; a second quantitative step to examine the properties of items, and determine the factorial structure of the questionnaire; 100 patients suffering chronic LBP will be recruited to respond to this phase; and third, preliminary psychometric analyses (item-scale correlations, construct validity, reliability); 180 chronic LBP patients will be recruited for this phase of the study. The relationships between implementation intentions and variables affecting physical activity on chronic LBP patients, i.e. pain, physical capacities, fear-avoidance beliefs, kinesiophobia, work status, and level of physical activity will be considered. DISCUSSION: Developing a questionnaire to assess implementation intentions would allow investigating the role of these intentions in the transition from acute to chronic LBP. The results of this study should contribute to the understanding of the psychological processes at stake in the development of chronic LBP, and in particular to the identification of factors eventually favouring patients' participation in and adherence to active physical treatments.

Criteria for inclusion in programs of functional restoration for chronic low back pain: Pragmatic Study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic low back pain (cLBP) may benefit from multimodal functional restoration programs (FRPs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze characteristics of individuals with cLBP who were referred or not to an FRP. Because cLBP is a bio-psycho-social disorder, medical and social parameters were analysed. METHODS: This was an observational cross-sectional study performed in 2017 in 6 tertiary centres in France. Consecutive individuals with cLBP visiting a rheumatologist or physical medicine and rehabilitation physician were included. Individuals referred or not to an FRP were compared by demographic characteristics, duration of sick leave over the past year, self-reported physical activity>1h/week, pain (numeric rating scale 0-10), anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and kinesiophobia (Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed, estimating odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included 147 individuals with cLBP. The mean (SD) age was 49 (12) years and 88 (60%) were women; 58 (38%) were referred to an FRP. On multivariate analysis, referral to an FRP was associated with reduced pain level (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91-0.99, for each 1-point increase in pain score), self-reported lack of physical activity (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98) and longer sick leave (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05, for 30 more days of sick leave). CONCLUSION: In this multicentric observational study, referral to an FRP was linked to pain, self-reported physical activity and sick leave but not medical characteristics assessed. These findings confirm the bio-psycho-social approach of FRPs for cLBP.

Information and low back pain management: a systematic review.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic search of three electronic databases was done to identify randomized controlled trials on the effect of written or audiovisual information in low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether information is an effective preventive action and/or therapy for low back pain and which type of information is most effective. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Information is commonly used in the primary care of low back pain and mostly delivered by booklets. METHODS: A systematic computer-aided search of the Medline, PsyclInfo, and Embase database. A rating system was used to assess the strength of the evidence, based on the methodologic quality of the randomized controlled trials, the relevance of the outcome measures, and the consistency of the results. RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials were selected, including seven trials of high methodologic quality, as well as one parallel group controlled survey and one longitudinal study. Only three of the seven high-quality studies showed favorable results for information. There is strong evidence that a booklet increases knowledge and moderate evidence that physician-related cues increase the confidence in a booklet and adherence to exercises. There is limited evidence that a biopsychosocial booklet is more efficient than a biomedical booklet to shift patient's beliefs about physical activity, pain, and consequences of low back trouble. There is strong evidence that booklets are not efficient on absenteeism and conflicting evidence that they are efficient on healthcare use. There is no evidence that e-mail discussion or video programs alone are effective to reduce low back pain, disability, and healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS: Information based on a biopsychosocial model is recommended in primary care to shift patient beliefs on low back pain. Nevertheless, information delivery alone is not sufficient to prevent absenteeism and reduce healthcare costs.

Bed rest or normal activity for patients with acute low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The management of common low back pain has two principal objectives: to relieve acute pain and to attempt prevention of transition to chronicity. Several studies have shown the ineffectiveness of prolonged periods of bed rest. OBJECTIVE: To compare 4 days of bed rest with continued normal daily activity in acute low back pain, taking into account the type of work (physical or sedentary labor). METHODS: This open, comparative multicenter study enrolled 281 ambulatory patients, ages 18 to 65 years, with low back pain (onset < 72 hours). The subjects did not have pain radiating below the buttocks and did not have work-related injuries. They were randomized into two treatment groups: one instructed to continue normal activity (insofar as the pain allowed), and the other prescribed 4 days of bed rest. After inclusion, patients were seen at three visits: on day 6 or 7, after 1 month, and after 3 months. RESULTS: On day 6 or 7, pain intensity was similar for both groups, as was the overall judgment of the treatment by patients and physicians. At 1 and 3 months, the groups again had equivalent intensity of back pain, functional disability, and vertebral stiffness. A higher proportion of patients in the bed rest group than in the normal activity group had an initial sick leave (86% vs 52%; P < 0.0001). This difference was greater for the patients whose work was sedentary. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with acute low back pain, normal activity is at least equivalent to bed rest. The findings of this study indicate that prescriptions for bed rest, and thus for sick leaves, should be limited when the physical demands of the job are similar to those for daily life activities.

A pilot study on the recovery from paresis after lumbar disc herniation.

BACKGROUND: Although the existence of a motor defect in discogenic sciatica is a sign of severity, the literature does not provide evidence for an immediate requirement for surgery. OBJECTIVE: To assess the course of sciatica with discogenic paresis and to determine possible prognostic factors for recovery or improvement. STUDY DESIGN: This open prospective multicenter study included patients with discogenic sciatica with paresis that had been developing for less than 1 month and was rated < or =3 on a 5-grade scale. Pain, the strength of 11 muscles, return to work, and analgesic intake were assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months. Recovery and improvement were defined by pain not exceeding 20 mm or < or =50% of the initial pain score and a score of either 5 (recovery) or 4 (improvement) for the weakest muscle at inclusion. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were enrolled; 39 (58%) patients were treated surgically and 28 (42%) medically. Surgically treated patients differed from medically treated patients by a higher rate of extruded herniation, a higher number of paretic muscles (6.3 vs. 5; P = 0.051), and a longer course of sciatica (31.4 vs. 17.3 days; P = 0.034). At 6 months, 7 (10.4%) patients were lost to follow-up; 32 (53.3%) had improved, including 18 (30%) recovered, 33 (85%) back to work and having a professional activity, and 22 (39%) still taking analgesics. The only significant difference between recovered and not recovered patients was mean age at inclusion (43 vs. 51 years, P = 0.034). There were no significant differences between improved and not improved patients. Moreover, the outcome was not different in the two treatment groups: there were 17 (53%) improvements in surgically treated patients, including 8 (25%) recoveries, and 14 (56%) improvements in medically treated patients, including 8 (40%) recoveries. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed no difference between surgical or medical management for recovery or improvement in patients with discogenic paresis. These results need confirmation by a randomized study.