Sustainability of a Motor Control Exercise Intervention: Analysis of Long-Term Effects in a Low Back Pain Study.

Development of chronic pain after a low back pain episode is associated with increased pain sensitivity, altered pain processing mechanisms and the influence of psychosocial factors. Although there is some evidence that multimodal therapy (such as behavioral or motor control therapy) may be an important therapeutic strategy, its long-term effect on pain reduction and psychosocial load is still unclear. Prospective longitudinal designs providing information about the extent of such possible long-term effects are missing. This study aims to investigate the long-term effects of a homebased uni- and multidisciplinary motor control exercise program on low back pain intensity, disability and psychosocial variables. 14 months after completion of a multicenter study comparing uni- and multidisciplinary exercise interventions, a sample of one study center (n = 154) was assessed once more. Participants filled in questionnaires regarding their low back pain symptoms (characteristic pain intensity and related disability), stress and vital exhaustion (short version of the Maastricht Vital Exhaustion Questionnaire), anxiety and depression experiences (the Hospital and Anxiety Depression Scale), and pain-related cognitions (the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire). Repeated measures mixed ANCOVAs were calculated to determine the long-term effects of the interventions on characteristic pain intensity and disability as well as on the psychosocial variables. Fifty four percent of the sub-sample responded to the questionnaires (n = 84). Longitudinal analyses revealed a significant long-term effect of the exercise intervention on pain disability. The multidisciplinary group missed statistical significance yet showed a medium sized long-term effect. The groups did not differ in their changes of the psychosocial variables of interest. There was evidence of long-term effects of the interventions on pain-related disability, but there was no effect on the other variables of interest. This may be partially explained by participant's low comorbidities at baseline. Results are important regarding costless homebased alternatives for back pain patients and prevention tasks. Furthermore, this study closes the gap of missing long-term effect analysis in this field.

Stress and Self-Efficacy as Long-Term Predictors for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.

PURPOSE: Psychosocial variables are known risk factors for the development and chronification of low back pain (LBP). Psychosocial stress is one of these risk factors. Therefore, this study aims to identify the most important types of stress predicting LBP. Self-efficacy was included as a potential protective factor related to both, stress and pain. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study assessed n = 1071 subjects with low back pain over 2 years. Psychosocial stress was evaluated in a broad manner using instruments assessing perceived stress, stress experiences in work and social contexts, vital exhaustion and life-event stress. Further, self-efficacy and pain (characteristic pain intensity and disability) were assessed. Using least absolute shrinkage selection operator regression, important predictors of characteristic pain intensity and pain-related disability at 1-year and 2-years follow-up were analyzed. RESULTS: The final sample for the statistic procedure consisted of 588 subjects (age: 39.2 (±13.4) years; baseline pain intensity: 27.8 (±18.4); disability: 14.3 (±17.9)). In the 1-year follow-up, the stress types "tendency to worry", "social isolation", "work discontent" as well as vital exhaustion and negative life events were identified as risk factors for both pain intensity and pain-related disability. Within the 2-years follow-up, Lasso models identified the stress types "tendency to worry", "social isolation", "social conflicts", and "perceived long-term stress" as potential risk factors for both pain intensity and disability. Furthermore, "self-efficacy" ("internality", "self-concept") and "social externality" play a role in reducing pain-related disability. CONCLUSION: Stress experiences in social and work-related contexts were identified as important risk factors for LBP 1 or 2 years in the future, even in subjects with low initial pain levels. Self-efficacy turned out to be a protective factor for pain development, especially in the long-term follow-up. Results suggest a differentiation of stress types in addressing psychosocial factors in research, prevention and therapy approaches.

Personalized Treatment Suggestions: The Validity and Applicability of the Risk-Prevention-Index Social in Low Back Pain Exercise Treatments.

Background: The back pain screening tool Risk-Prevention-Index Social (RPI-S) identifies the individual psychosocial risk for low back pain chronification and supports the allocation of patients at risk in additional multidisciplinary treatments. The study objectives were to evaluate (1) the prognostic validity of the RPI-S for a 6-month time frame and (2) the clinical benefit of the RPI-S. Methods: In a multicenter single-blind 3-armed randomized controlled trial, n = 660 persons (age 18-65 years) were randomly assigned to a twelve-week uni- or multidisciplinary exercise intervention or control group. Psychosocial risk was assessed by the RPI-S domain social environment (RPI-SSE) and the outcome pain by the Chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire (baseline M1, 12-weeks M4, 24-weeks M5). Prognostic validity was quantified by the root mean squared error (RMSE) within the control group. The clinical benefit of RPI-SSE was calculated by repeated measures ANOVA in intervention groups. Results: A subsample of n = 274 participants (mean = 38.0 years, SD 13.1) was analyzed, of which 30% were classified at risk in their psychosocial profile. The half-year prognostic validity was good (RMSE for disability of 9.04 at M4 and of 9.73 at M5; RMSE for pain intensity of 12.45 at M4 and of 14.49 at M5). People at risk showed significantly stronger reduction in pain disability and intensity at M4/M5, if participating in a multidisciplinary exercise treatment. Subjects at no risk showed a smaller reduction in pain disability in both interventions and no group differences for pain intensity. Regarding disability due to pain, around 41% of the sample would gain an unfitted treatment without the back pain screening. Conclusion: The RPI-SSE prognostic validity demonstrated good applicability and a clinical benefit confirmed by a clear advantage of an individualized treatment possibility.

The Feasibility and Effectiveness of a New Practical Multidisciplinary Treatment for Low-Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Low-back pain is a major health problem exacerbated by the fact that most treatments are not suitable for self-management in everyday life. Particularly, interdisciplinary programs consist of intensive therapy lasting several weeks. Additionally, therapy components are rarely coordinated regarding reinforcing effects, which would improve complaints in persons with higher pain. This study assesses the effectiveness of a self-management program, firstly for persons suffering from higher pain and secondly compared to regular routines. Study objectives were treated in a single-blind multicenter controlled trial. A total of n = 439 volunteers (age 18-65 years) were randomly assigned to a twelve-week multidisciplinary sensorimotor training (3-weeks-center- and 9-weeks-homebased) or control group. The primary outcome pain (Chronic-Pain-Grade) as well as mental health were assessed by questionnaires at baseline and follow-up (3/6/12/24 weeks, M2-M5). For statistical analysis, multiple linear regression models were used. N = 291 (age 39.7 ± 12.7 years, female = 61.1%, 77% CPG = 1) completed training (M1/M4/M5), showing a significantly stronger reduction of mental health complaints (anxiety, vital exhaustion) in people with higher than those with lower pain in multidisciplinary treatment. Compared to regular routines, the self-management-multidisciplinary treatment led to a clinically relevant reduction of pain-disability and significant mental health improvements. Low-cost exercise programs may provide enormous relief for therapeutic processes, rehabilitation aftercare, and thus, cost savings for the health system.

Diagnosis of psychosocial risk factors in prevention of low back pain in athletes (MiSpEx).

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common pain syndrome in athletes, responsible for 28% of missed training days/year. Psychosocial factors contribute to chronic pain development. This study aims to investigate the transferability of psychosocial screening tools developed in the general population to athletes and to define athlete-specific thresholds. METHODS: Data from a prospective multicentre study on LBP were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up (n=52 athletes, n=289 recreational athletes and n=246 non-athletes). Pain was assessed using the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire. The psychosocial Risk Stratification Index (RSI) was used to obtain prognostic information regarding the risk of chronic LBP (CLBP). Individual psychosocial risk profile was gained with the Risk Prevention Index - Social (RPI-S). Differences between groups were calculated using general linear models and planned contrasts. Discrimination thresholds for athletes were defined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Athletes and recreational athletes showed significantly lower psychosocial risk profiles and prognostic risk for CLBP than non-athletes. ROC curves suggested discrimination thresholds for athletes were different compared with non-athletes. Both screenings demonstrated very good sensitivity (RSI=100%; RPI-S: 75%-100%) and specificity (RSI: 76%-93%; RPI-S: 71%-93%). RSI revealed two risk classes for pain intensity (area under the curve (AUC) 0.92(95% CI 0.85 to 1.0)) and pain disability (AUC 0.88(95% CI 0.71 to 1.0)). CONCLUSIONS: Both screening tools can be used for athletes. Athlete-specific thresholds will improve physicians' decision making and allow stratified treatment and prevention.

Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network).

INTRODUCTION: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. OBJECTIVES: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). METHODS: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. RESULTS: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. CONCLUSION: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.

Medicine in spine exercise (MiSpEx) for nonspecific low back pain patients: study protocol for a multicentre, single-blind randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Arising from the relevance of sensorimotor training in the therapy of nonspecific low back pain patients and from the value of individualized therapy, the present trial aims to test the feasibility and efficacy of individualized sensorimotor training interventions in patients suffering from nonspecific low back pain. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A multicentre, single-blind two-armed randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of a 12-week (3 weeks supervised centre-based and 9 weeks home-based) individualized sensorimotor exercise program is performed. The control group stays inactive during this period. Outcomes are pain, and pain-associated function as well as motor function in adults with nonspecific low back pain. Each participant is scheduled to five measurement dates: baseline (M1), following centre-based training (M2), following home-based training (M3) and at two follow-up time points 6 months (M4) and 12 months (M5) after M1. All investigations and the assessment of the primary and secondary outcomes are performed in a standardized order: questionnaires - clinical examination - biomechanics (motor function). Subsequent statistical procedures are executed after the examination of underlying assumptions for parametric or rather non-parametric testing. DISCUSSION: The results and practical relevance of the study will be of clinical and practical relevance not only for researchers and policy makers but also for the general population suffering from nonspecific low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Identification number DRKS00010129. German Clinical Trial registered on 3 March 2016.

Hypervigilance or avoidance of trigger related cues in migraineurs? - a case-control study using the emotional stroop task.

BACKGROUND: "Negative affect" is one of the major migraine triggers. The aim of the study was to assess attentional biases for negative affective stimuli that might be related to migraine triggers in migraine patients with either few or frequent migraine and healthy controls. METHODS: Thirty-three subjects with frequent migraine (FM) or with less frequent episodic migraine, and 20 healthy controls conducted two emotional Stroop tasks in the interictal period. In task 1, general affective words and in task 2, pictures of affective faces (angry, neutral, happy) were used. For each task we calculated two emotional Stroop indices. Groups were compared using one-way ANOVAs. RESULTS: The expected attentional bias in migraine patients was not found. However, in task 2 the controls showed a significant attentional bias to negative faces, whereas the FM group showed indices near zero. Thus, the FM group responded faster to negative than to positive stimuli. The difference between the groups was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in the FM group may reflect a learned avoidance mechanism away from affective migraine triggers.

[The trauma of miscarriage--factors influencing the experience of anxiety after early pregnancy loss]. / Trauma Fehlgeburt--Einflussfaktoren auf das Angsterleben nach dem frühen Verlust eines Kindes.

The experience of miscarriage results in tremendous emotional disturbance for many affected women. Depression, anxiety, (pathological) grief, and posttraumatic stress symptoms are commonly experienced reactions. Several factors influence the level of emotional distress, like age, previous experience of miscarriage, or social support. In this work, we investigated the level of emotional distress after miscarriage using a novel methodological approach. Through the world wide web, N = 500 texts of women who reported freely on their miscarriage were accessed and analyzed using the Dresden Anxiety Dictionary, a German computerized version of the Gottschalk-Gleser speech analysis. The women were 28 years old on average. The texts were written, on average, about 28 days after the miscarriage. Women's pregnancy had lasted between 2 and 40 weeks (M = 12). The scores pertaining to death anxiety and mutilation anxiety were higher than the norm. More than 20 % of the women reported an increased level of anxiety. Variables that influenced the level of anxiety were age, time since miscarriage, duration of pregnancy, previous miscarriage, and social support. The results underscore the need for treatment, at least for sub-groups of affected women who have a higher risk for a complicated course of coping with miscarriage.