Dataset Information

Consistent differences in lumbar spine alignment between low back pain subgroups and genders during clinical and functional activity sitting tests.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Subgroups of people with low back pain display differences in their lumbar alignment during tests from a clinical examination. However, it is unknown if subgroups display the same patterns during a functional activity test and if gender influences subgroup-related differences.

Objectives

Test if differences in lumbar alignment between two LBP subgroups are 1) present during a functional activity test of preferred sitting and 2) independent of gender.

Design

Cross-sectional.

Method

154 participants with chronic low back pain were classified based on the Movement System Impairment Classification System by a physical therapist. Participants performed a functional activity test of preferred sitting and clinical tests of maximum flexed and extended sitting. 3D marker co-ordinate data were collected. Sagittal plane lumbar alignment, indexed by lumbar curvature angle, was calculated. A three-way mixed effect analysis of variance was used to examine effects of test, subgroup, gender, subgroup × test, gender × test and subgroup × gender.

Results/findings

The lumbar rotation with extension subgroup [LCA = -8.0° (-9.5,-6.5)] displayed a more extended lumbar alignment than lumbar rotation [LCA = -5.9° (-7.4,-4.4)]. Women [LCA = -10.7° (-12.3,-9.2)] displayed a more extended lumbar alignment than men [LCA = -3.2° (-4.7,-1.7)]. There was a significant gender × test interaction (p = 0.01). The subgroup × test (p = 0.99) and subgroup × gender (p = 0.76) interactions were not significant.

Conclusions

LBP subgroup differences in lumbar alignment are present during preferred sitting. Gender-related differences in lumbar alignment are not driving subgroup differences. These findings highlight the need to use patient-specific clinical characteristics to guide treatment of a functional activity of preferred sitting limited due to low back pain.

SUBMITTER: Hooker QL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8918047 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consistent differences in lumbar spine alignment between low back pain subgroups and genders during clinical and functional activity sitting tests.

Hooker Quenten L QL Lanier Vanessa M VM van Dillen Linda R LR

Musculoskeletal science & practice 20210126

<h4>Background</h4>Subgroups of people with low back pain display differences in their lumbar alignment during tests from a clinical examination. However, it is unknown if subgroups display the same patterns during a functional activity test and if gender influences subgroup-related differences.<h4>Objectives</h4>Test if differences in lumbar alignment between two LBP subgroups are 1) present during a functional activity test of preferred sitting and 2) independent of gender.<h4>Design</h4>Cross ...[more]

PMID: 33548765

Similar Datasets

Project description:The ability to actively control movements of the lumbar spine (LMC) is believed to play an important role in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). However, because NSCLBP is a multifactorial problem and LMC a complex ability, different aspects of LMC are still debated including the influence of pain, the question whether LMC is a cause or consequence of NSCLBP or whether differences in LMC are due to population variance. The complexity of LMC is reflected in the large number of described tests, hence it is not possible to evaluate LMC by a single test. LMC ability should be understood as a latent construct. The structure of LMC and how to summarize results of different single LMC tests is unknown. The dataset provided in this article was used to analyse the structural validity of LMC in NSCLBP. 277 participants (age 42.4 years (± 15.8), 61% female) performed 15 different test movements. 21 experienced physiotherapists rated the performance of each test movement on a nominal scale (correct/incorrect including the direction of test movement). A test was rated as "incorrect" if movement in the lumbar spine occurred prematurely and/or excessively based on the visual observation of a trained physiotherapist. In addition to the judgement whether the test performance was correct/incorrect the direction of test movement and the presence of pain was noted. For statistical analysis, raw data was converted to a binary scale (correct/incorrect). Item response theory (IRT) is recommended to analyse the data because the underlying statistical model is reflective, the single LMC tests are binary scaled (correct/incorrect) and the underlying ability (LMC) measured on a continuous scale. First dimensionality and local independence were analysed, followed by selection of the best fitting IRT model. Finally, IRT modelling was used to describe the psychometric properties of each item and each battery of tests. The datasets provided in this article are useful for calibration and for group comparisons. Besides they support a better understanding of LMC. ***Link to publication of original article in "musculoskeletal science and practice"**.

Project description:BackgroundLumbar spine injuries in fast bowlers account for the greatest missed playing time in cricket. A range of extrinsic and intrinsic variables are hypothesised to be associated with low back pain and lumbar spine injury in fast bowlers, and an improved understanding of intrinsic variables is necessary as these may alter load tolerance and injury risk associated with fast bowling. This review critically evaluated studies reporting intrinsic variables associated with low back pain and lumbar spine injury in fast bowlers and identified areas for future investigation.MethodsOVID Medline, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases were last searched on 3 June 2022 to identify studies investigating intrinsic variables associated with low back pain and lumbar spine injury in cricket fast bowlers. Terms relevant to cricket fast bowling, and intrinsic variables associated with lumbar spine injury and low back pain in fast bowlers were searched. 1,503 abstracts were screened, and 118 full-text articles were appraised to determine whether they met inclusion criteria. Two authors independently screened search results and assessed risk of bias using a modified version of the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool.ResultsTwenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, no included studies demonstrated a low risk of bias, two studies were identified as moderate risk, and twenty-three studies were identified as high risk. Conflicting results were reported amongst studies investigating associations of fast bowling kinematics and kinetics, trunk and lumbar anatomical features, anthropometric traits, age, and neuromuscular characteristics with low back pain and lumbar spine injury.ConclusionInconsistencies in results may be related to differences in study design, injury definitions, participant characteristics, measurement parameters, and statistical analyses. Low back pain and lumbar spine injury occurrence in fast bowlers remain high, and this may be due to an absence of low bias studies that have informed recommendations for their prevention. Future research should employ clearly defined injury outcomes, analyse continuous datasets, utilise models that better represent lumbar kinematics and kinetics during fast bowling, and better quantify previous injury, lumbar anatomical features and lumbar maturation.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ERKZ2 .

Project description:BACKGROUND:Clinical practice guidelines suggest that magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine (LS-MRI) is unneeded during the first 6 weeks of acute, uncomplicated low-back pain. Unneeded LS-MRIs do not improve patient outcomes, lead to unnecessary surgeries and procedures, and cost the US healthcare system about $300 million dollars per year. However, why primary care providers (PCPs) order unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE:To characterize and explain the factors contributing to PCPs ordering unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain. DESIGN:Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS:Veterans Affairs PCPs identified from administrative data as having high or low rates of guideline-concordant LS-MRI ordering in 2016. APPROACH:Providers were interviewed about their use of LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain and factors contributing to their decision-making. Directed content analysis of transcripts was conducted to identify and compare environmental-, patient-, and provider-level factors contributing to unneeded LS-MRI. KEY RESULTS:Fifty-five PCPs participated (8.6% response rate). Both low (n = 33) and high (n = 22) guideline-concordant providers reported that LS-MRIs were required for specialty care referrals, but they differed in how other environmental factors (stringency of radiology utilization review, management of patient travel burden, and time constraints) contributed to LS-MRI ordering patterns. Low- and high-guideline-concordant providers reported similar patient factors (beliefs in value of imaging and pressure on providers). However, provider groups differed in how provider-level factors (guideline familiarity and agreement, the extent to which they acquiesced to patients, and belief in the value of LS-MRI) contributed to LS-MRI ordering patterns. CONCLUSIONS:Results describe how diverse environmental, patient, and provider factors contribute to unneeded LS-MRI for acute, uncomplicated low-back pain. Prior research using a single intervention to reduce unneeded LS-MRI has been ineffective. Results suggest that multifaceted de-implementation strategies may be required to reduce unneeded LS-MRI.

Project description:ImportancePrevious studies, using mostly cross-sectional data, provide conflicting evidence of an association between lumbar spine radiographic changes and the severity of back pain-related disability. Such conflicting evidence may be associated with widely unnecessary diagnostic imaging of the lumbar spine.ObjectiveTo examine both cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between lumbar spine radiographic changes and the severity of back pain-related disability among middle-aged, community-dwelling women.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based prospective cohort study used data from the Chingford 1000 Women Study. Analyses included data collected from year 6 (1994-1996; physical activity was measured), year 9 (1997-1999; treated as baseline), and year 15 (2003-2005), with a total length of follow-up for longitudinal analyses of 6 years. Data were analyzed from April 17 to November 3, 2020.ExposuresPrimary exposure was lumbar spine radiographic changes, defined using the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade. Secondary exposures were defined using presence of osteophytes and disc space narrowing. The composite score combined the number of lumbar spine segments with definite changes detected on radiographic images (ie, radiographic changes) (K-L grade ≥2, which means at least definite osteophyte and possible narrowing of disc space are present; osteophyte and disc space narrowing grade ≥1, which means at least mild or definite changes are present).Main outcomes and measuresSelf-reported back pain-related disability measured in years 9 and 15 assessed by the St Thomas disability questionnaire.ResultsAmong 650 women (mean [SD] age, 61.3 [5.9] years) in cross-sectional analyses and 443 women (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [6.0] years) in longitudinal analyses, there was no evidence to support an association between higher number of lumbar segments with radiographic changes (K-L grade, osteophytes, and disc space narrowing) and more severe back pain-related disability (eg, cross-sectional analyses using the K-L grade; 1 segment vs 0 segment: adjusted odds ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.76-1.96]). No interactions were found of an association between lumbar spine radiographic changes and the severity of back pain-specific disability with age, body mass index, or smoking status.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort of middle-aged, community-dwelling women, there was no evidence to support an association between a higher number of lumbar segments with radiographic changes (K-L grade, osteophytes, and disc space narrowing) and more severe back pain-related disability cross-sectionally or over time. These findings provide further evidence against routinely using diagnostic imaging of the lumbar spine.

Project description:Rationale and objectivesThe use of natural language processing (NLP) in radiology provides an opportunity to assist clinicians with phenotyping patients. However, the performance and generalizability of NLP across healthcare systems is uncertain. We assessed the performance within and generalizability across four healthcare systems of different NLP representational methods, coupled with elastic-net logistic regression to classify lower back pain-related findings from lumbar spine imaging reports.Materials and methodsWe used a dataset of 871 X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging reports sampled from a prospective study across four healthcare systems between October 2013 and September 2016. We annotated each report for 26 findings potentially related to lower back pain. Our framework applied four different NLP methods to convert text into feature sets (representations). For each representation, our framework used an elastic-net logistic regression model for each finding (i.e., 26 binary or "one-vs.-rest" classification models). For performance evaluation, we split data into training (80%, 697/871) and testing (20%, 174/871). In the training set, we used cross validation to identify the optimal hyperparameter value and then retrained on the full training set. We then assessed performance based on area under the curve (AUC) for the test set. We repeated this process 25 times with each repeat using a different random train/test split of the data, so that we could estimate 95% confidence intervals, and assess significant difference in performance between representations. For generalizability evaluation, we trained models on data from three healthcare systems with cross validation and then tested on the fourth. We repeated this process for each system, then calculated mean and standard deviation (SD) of AUC across the systems.ResultsFor individual representations, n-grams had the best average performance across all 26 findings (AUC: 0.960). For generalizability, document embeddings had the most consistent average performance across systems (SD: 0.010). Out of these 26 findings, we considered eight as potentially clinically important (any stenosis, central stenosis, lateral stenosis, foraminal stenosis, disc extrusion, nerve root displacement compression, endplate edema, and listhesis grade 2) since they have a relatively greater association with a history of lower back pain compared to the remaining 18 classes. We found a similar pattern for these eight in which n-grams and document embeddings had the best average performance (AUC: 0.954) and generalizability (SD: 0.007), respectively.ConclusionBased on performance assessment, we found that n-grams is the preferred method if classifier development and deployment occur at the same system. However, for deployment at multiple systems outside of the development system, or potentially if physician behavior changes within a system, one should consider document embeddings since embeddings appear to have the most consistent performance across systems.

Dataset Information

Consistent differences in lumbar spine alignment between low back pain subgroups and genders during clinical and functional activity sitting tests.

Background

Objectives

Design

Method

Results/findings

Conclusions

Publications

Consistent differences in lumbar spine alignment between low back pain subgroups and genders during clinical and functional activity sitting tests.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets