PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Pfingsten

Publications and source records attributed to M Pfingsten.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

[Fear avoidance beliefs in patients with back pain. Psychometric properties of the German version of the FABQ].

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the quality criteria of a screening procedure used to identify fear-avoidance beliefs. METHODS: The translated version of the original FABQ was submitted to 302 patients with chronic back pain. Additionally, self-assessment protocols were used to document information on disease history, pain-specific parameters, extent of subjectively experienced impairment, and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Correlation statistical analysis confirmed the relevance of fear-avoidance beliefs for the impairment as experienced by the patients with back pain. The FABQ proved to be a better predictor of subjectively experienced impairment than pain intensity or affective/emotional orientation. CONCLUSIONS: Fear-avoidance beliefs represent significant cognitive factors for chronification of back pain. The results demonstrated the practicability, reliability, and validity of the questionnaire to assess fear-avoidance beliefs.

Avoidance Learning↗

[Psychometric properties of the pain drawing and the Ransford technique in patients with chronic low back pain].

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was the analysis of the psychometric properties of the Ransford technique which is a qualitative scoring method of the pain drawing. It has been suggested that this method could be used as a brief screening technique for psychological involvement in pain complaints. METHODS: 109 patients with chronic back pain filled in the pain drawing which was rated according to the technique described by Ransford and colleagues in 1976. As external criterium of validity we chose a differentiated expert rating of psychological interference. RESULTS: The Ransford technique showed moderate to good coefficients of reliability (re-test, inter and intra-rater). On the other hand, the Ransford technique demonstrated very low indices of validity in order to give a prognosis about psychological interference. Sensitivity and specificity of the Ransford technique demonstrated inadequate values, which furthermore were independent from cut-off points. CONCLUSION: The pain drawing and the Ransford technique are not sufficiently sensitive and therefore allow no screening for psychological interference in complaints of back pain.

Adult↗

[Development and evaluation of the multidimensional German pain questionnaire].

The German pain questionnaire (DSF) has been developed and validated by the Task force on "Standardization and Economy in Pain Management" of the German Chapter of the International Association for the Study of Pain (DGSS). The concept of the DSF is based on a bio (medical) - psycho - social pain model. The modular approach to pain assessment consists of:demographic data,pain variables (e. g. pain sites, temporal characteristics, duration, intensity),pain associated symptoms,affective and sensory qualities of pain (adjective list by Geissner, SESCopyright ),pain relieving and intensifying factors,previous pain treatment procedures,pain-related disability (Pain Disability Index by Tait et al.),depression test CES-D (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Test),comorbid conditions,social factors (educational level, occupation, retirement status, compensation and/or litigation status, disability for work),health related quality of life (SF-36Copyright ). Practicability and content validity were tested in some 3000 patients. Comparison with external criteria (e. g. medical and psychiatric-psychological diagnoses, physician-determined chronicity of pain) proved good content validity and excellent reliability of patients statements in the questionnaire. The great majority of patients stated that the DSF covered their pain history completely and in an orderly fashion. Difficulty to answer the questions was considered low. The German pain questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument for recording the multidimensional experience of pain. Data from such questionnaires are indispensable for follow-up studies and internal and external quality assessments. The DSF can be ordered from the German Society for the Study of Pain (www.dgss.org) and is a core instrument of the computer program "quality assurance in pain management" (QUAST) of this society.

Chronic Disease↗

[Functional restoration--it depends on an adequate mixture of treatment].

In the last 50 years conventional treatments have not been able to slow down the expanding chronic low back pain problem. However, nowadays health care has changed according to a broad biopsychosocial model of health, the positive effect of activity on health and healing, emphasis on function rather than pain or impairment, and reliance upon clinical evidence. In search for new solutions "functional restoration" (FR) programs have been developed. They include multidisciplinary treatment of patients in groups, consisting of 6-8 h of treatment a day, lasting 3 to 6 weeks and usually integrating intense physical and ergonomic training, psychological (behavioral) therapy, patient education, and instruction in social- and work-related issues. FR programs have yet to demonstrate their effectiveness in several countries. Controlled studies in the USA were very positive regarding the return-to-work rate, whereas studies in Scandinavian countries did not demonstrate similar results. Possible reasons for the different results concerning back-to-work ratios might be that study design, patient population, content of the program, and other external factors are different and studies as well as effects are therefore not directly comparable. According to several well-controlled studies, the most probable reason for this different effect may be that social and security (health care) systems and cultures differ among countries and that patients with chronic low back pain respond differently to this combination. Sick absenteeism and inability to work may be influenced by many factors besides pain that cannot be addressed by intervention or prevention programs, e.g., job satisfaction, education level, and the compensation systems. It may be that the lower economic benefit during sick leave in the United States leads to favorable results from functional restoration programs. Concerning the prediction of success, several studies have shown that medical background, diagnosis and physical impairment as well as physical variables (mobility, strength) have limited predictive value. Return to work and pain reduction are much better predicted by length of absence from work, application for pension, and the patients' disability in daily-life activities. In the last five years another important variable of success has been identified: avoidance behavior has been suspected to be a major contributor to the initiation and maintenance of chronic low back pain. The perpetuation of avoidance behavior beyond normal healing time subsequently leads to negative consequences such as "disuse syndrome", which is associated with physical deconditioning, sick role behavior, psychosocial withdrawal and negative affect. Accordingly, fear-avoidance beliefs were strongly related to absenteeism from work due to back pain and were the best predictors of therapy outcome in 300 acute low back pain patients. In a prospective study on 87 patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) we demonstrated that fear-avoidance beliefs were the strongest predictors of return to work after a functional restoration treatment program. Although nonspecific mechanisms such as emotional disturbance, helplessness, pain anticipation, disability, and job circumstances could be identified as influencing the chronic pain process, we have to remember that long-lasting experience of pain is usually a very individual process in which several conditions may work together in a unique combination. Treatment procedures must consider this variability by focusing on general mechanisms, as well as on individual conditions and deficits. FR treatment strongly depends on behavioral principles that rule the whole therapeutic process: Adequate information is necessary to overcome unhelpful beliefs; information has to be related to the patients' daily experiences and their mental capability to understand them. Pacing, goal-setting, graded exposure with exercise quotas and permanent feedback as well as contingent motivation characterize the training procedures. Training procedures must incorporate the patients' daily activities early on. The patients' efficacy expectations are the most potent determinants of change in the training process. Exacerbation of pain is not taken as a failure of the therapeutic concept, but as a challenge to self-management. However, the important principle in managing chronic low back pain is "treating patients rather than spines."

Combined Modality Therapy↗

Fear-avoidance behavior and anticipation of pain in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: In a randomized controlled study, we investigated whether pain anticipation and fear-avoidance beliefs will lead to behavioral avoidance. PATIENTS: Fifty patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) performed a simple leg-flexion task. Before the test, members of a control group were informed that the movement would not result in any increase of pain, whereas experimental group participants were told that a slight increase of pain could occur. OUTCOME MEASURES: All patients completed the Fear-Avoidance-Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the Pain Disability Index (PDI). As dependent variables, different behavioral performance parameters were registered by a computerized protocol: number of flexion movements, mean range of motion, and mean work ratio. Furthermore, patients were asked about their pain intensity as well as their fear (at the moment) and finally were asked to judge the unpleasantness of the experiment (using visual analogue scales for each of the three variables). RESULTS: Inducing pain anticipation (by instruction) led to significantly lower levels of behavioral performance as well as increased pain intensity and fear during the test. Behavioral performance was significantly correlated with fear-avoidance beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm that pain anticipation and fear-avoidance beliefs significantly influence the behavior of patients with low back pain in that they motivate avoidance behavior. Therapists must be aware of the powerful effects of cognitive processes, which can give rise to fear of pain and, consequently, avoidance behavior.

Clinical Trial↗

[Treatment of chronic low back pain through intensive activation - an assessment of 10 years].

AIM OF THE STUDY: Treatment of chronic low back pain is a difficult problem and usually of low effectiveness. Aim of the study was to analyse the effectiveness of a multimodal treatment procedure. METHODS: From the basis of functional restoration concepts primarily established in the USA we conceptualized a treatment program which initially was funded by the German ministry of research. Over the years the regimen was modified in several respects (programs of different intensity). From 1990 to 2000 762 patients were treated in this way with one-year follow-up examination. RESULTS: Patients who were off work had significant differences in psychosocial and pain-related variables in comparison to those patients who were still working. Treatment procedures were in general very effective, although a modification of the program with less treatment (no work-hardening) failed in repeating the same effects. Pain intensity, disability, amount of depression and psychological distress improved significantly as well as work capability and use of the health care system. Nearly all results were seen to stabilize at the 12-month evaluation. DISCUSSION: Functional restoration programs for treatment of chronic low back pain have demonstrated effectiveness in several countries. By early use of these programs the high amount of costs due to back pain disability may be consequently reduced. Up to now in Germany these concepts are not well-known and insurance companies as well as the health system do not yet acknowledge them.

Adult↗

[Classification of chronic pain. Quantification and grading with the Mainz Pain Staging System].

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain is an individually variable experience, incorporating physical, psychological and social dimensions. Chronic pain occurs in a broad spectrum of severity; therefore, a grading procedure is of crucial importance in clinical research and in epidemiologic studies. The Mainz Pain Staging System is an interview-administered, multi-dimensional measure of chronic pain severity. The system suggests grading chronic pain in terms of 4 axes: time (persistence), spreading of pain site, medication use, and health care utilization. The whole scale consist of 10 items. The resulting score is used to classify the pain problem in three stages (I, II, III). Analysing the broader validity and parametric properties of the staging system is the purpose of the present study. METHODS: The staging system and psychosocial data were administered to 542 consecutive patients of different diagnoses who attended one of six pain clinics in the year 1995/96. In a time period of 3 months since first contact, treatment procedures were registered. Three months after first contact patients rated the effectiveness of treatment concerning reduction of pain intensity. RESULTS: According to the criteria of the staging system 25% of the sample belonged to each stage I and stage III, whereas 50% were classified to stage II. As a measure of validity, chronic pain status demonstrated significant correlation with psychological impairment, disability and time off work, whereas there was no correlation to pain intensity and persistence of pain. Surprisingly we found no difference in amount and quality of treatment between patients who were graded as severe pain patients (stage III) and the other stages. Furthermore, effectiveness of treatment also did not differ between the three stages. We made several proposals for optimizing the staging system. CONCLUSION: Given the high prevalence of recurrent and chronic pain as well as the broadness of severity, an important issue on further research is identification of factors which influence the chronification process. For this purpose improved measures of graded classification of pain status are needed.

English Abstract↗

Validation of the German version of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ).

Fearful avoidance of physical activities is a major factor in low back pain (LBP) and disability. In 1993 Waddell et al. developed the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) focusing on patients' beliefs about how physical activity and work affect LBP. The focus of our study was to analyse and validate the German version of the FABQ. Three-hundred and two consecutive LBP outpatients participating on a functional restoration programme filled in the FABQ. Factor analysis yielded three factors which accounted for nearly 65% of the total variance of the questionnaire. Whereas the factor 'physical activity' (8.9% of the variance) remained the same as in the English version, the second factor of the original version split into two: one related to, 'work as cause of pain' (43.4% of the variance) and the other to patients' assumptions of their probable return to work (11.8% of the variance). Both work-related subscales showed a good internal consistency (alpha = 0.89, resp. alpha = 0.94), whereas the consistency of the subscale 3 'physical activity' was only modest (alpha = 0.64). Test-re-test reliability score was fair to good for the whole scale (r = 0.87;n = 30). Regression analysis demonstrated that fear-avoidance beliefs account for the highest proportion of variance (35%) regarding disability in activities of daily living and work loss. Patients out of work demonstrated more fear-avoidance beliefs in comparison to those who were still working. It can be concluded that the German version of the FAQB is a reliable and valid instrument, but it shows a different factor structure from the original English version. The FABQ has been proven to identify patients with maladaptive beliefs which have to be focused on in proper treatment.

Adult↗

Cognitive-behavioral treatment in unselected rheumatoid arthritis outpatients.

OBJECTIVE: This trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy of an adjunctive cognitive-behavioral treatment compared with rheumatological treatment alone in unselected rheumatoid arthritis outpatients. DESIGN: A prospective randomized control design was used. Change in medication during treatment was controlled by matching therapy- and control-group subjects according to this change in medication, sex, age, duration of disease, and functional class. SETTING: A rheumatological outpatient clinic, University of Goettingen, Germany. PATIENTS: Fifty-five consecutive outpatients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (age 52.7 years, 74.5% female, duration of disease 9.4 years) finished the study. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects received routine care by the rheumatologists and routine medical treatment. Cognitive-behavioral treatment subjects (n = 19) received adjunctive standardized cognitive-behavioral group treatment with 12 weekly sessions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included disease activity variables, pain variables (pain intensity, affective pain), psychological symptoms, and coping. RESULTS: Subjects mostly demonstrated an increasing disease activity during treatment; change in medication during treatment was necessary in some patients. In the cognitive-behavioral treatment group the course of rheumatoid arthritis seemed less progressive than in the control group. The core effects of cognitive-behavioral treatment pertain more to improved coping, emotional stabilization, and reduced impairment than to reduced pain intensity. Passive, emotion-focused coping, helplessness, depression, anxiety, affective pain, and fluctuation of pain are reduced, "Acceptance of Illness" is improved. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive-behavioral therapy has proven an effective adjunct to standard treatment of rheumatoid arthritis outpatients. These effects were shown in an unselected sample with increasing disease activity and with comparable changes in medication during treatment. We recommend cognitive-behavioral treatment as an desirable adjunct to standard medical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

[Backache--diagnosis, therapy and prognosis].

Back pain is a common disease causing tremendous costs for treatment, rehabilitation, pension payments and work-loss. The reasons of back pain vary considerably and often remain doubtful. The effectiveness of current treatment concepts has not yet been proven significantly. In accordance with the literature, in chronic pain only multimodal concepts of treatment seem to be successful as far as they take care about somatic, psycho-social, and sport physiological aspects.

Back Pain↗

[Fear-avoidance-beliefs in patients with backpain].

INTRODUCTION: In recent years most industrialized nations have been confronted with a dramatic increase in cases dealing with back pain which, because of the associated costs, has put a strain on health care systems. Because of the tremendous costs caused by patients with chronic illnesses, there is a common interest in identifying determinants responsible for the pain becoming chronic. According to the fear-avoidance model, chronic back pain is the cause of specific patient beliefs according to their perception and appraisal of back pain and their assumptions about the connection between pain and work activities. These fear-avoidance beliefs are assumed as the main cognitive factors of adapting to chronic invalidism. In this study a German version of a self-reporting instrument that assesses fear-avoidance beliefs (FABQ, Waddell et al. 1993) is presented. METHODS: A translated version of the "Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire" was given to 87 patients with back pain, who took part in a multimodal treatment program in an outpatient pain unit. The questionnaire was administered at different times in the therapeutic process. We examined the factor structure of the questionnaire and conducted the first examinations concerning its psychometric properties. RESULTS: The results of our data set concerning different aspects of reliability and validity conform the good psychometric properties of the questionnaire. The factor analysis revealed a three-factor solution, which accounted for nearly 60% of the variance. The first factor made up 34% of the variance. The six corresponding items dealt with "back pain caused by work". The second factor made up 13% of the variance. The content of the 5 items is focused on the patients' view about his/her probable return to work. Beliefs about physical activity in back pain (factor 3, 5 items) accounted for 12% of the variance. Correlation analysis demonstrated that all three factors are of independent value, which showed satisfactory reliability. Furthermore, we analyzed the prognostic value of the three factor dimensions. Patients completed multidisciplinary treatment according to the concept of "functional restoration". At the end of treatment, factor 1 (causation by work) was not diminished, but both other factors showed significant reductions. In a discriminant factor analysis, back-to-work could be significantly predicted by factor 3 (beliefs about physical activity) and factor 2 (patients' prognosis about their probable return to work at the beginning of treatment). Furthermore, length of time off work and age accounted for an additive classification rate of 77%. The FABfactor 1 (causation by work) was of no predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that primary target points for further investigation include an analysis of the patients' beliefs about their pain, with special emphasis on fear-avoidance beliefs. It is also necessary to analyze the behavioral assumptions of the fear-avoidance model in an experimental design. Furthermore, our results concerning the psychometric properties of the questionnaire should be proved in a far larger sample of back pain patients.

English Abstract↗

[The importance of bodily complaints in patients with chronic back pain].

UNLABELLED: Pain perception is a complex psychosomatic phenomenon and is influenced by different psychological variables. Apart from their pain perception, chronic pain patients also suffer from different bodily complaints. The clinical significance of this finding is not yet clear. Bodily complaints in chronic pain patients may represent (a) a bodily expression of depressive symptoms, (b) a sign of chronicity, and (c) the expression of a heightened bodily awareness in the sense of hypochondriasis. METHODS: A psychometric study was done with 83 patients with chronic low-back pain. The patients were interviewed and tested psychometrically. We administered a German scale to measure bodily complaints (BL), an inventory to measure the extent of depressive symptoms (DS) and two subscales of an personality inventory (bodily complaints and hypochondriasis). In addition, patients were evaluated according to three stages of chronification ("Mainz Pain Staging System"). Ten anamnestic variables from four dimensions (temporal aspects, spatial aspects, medication usage behavior and patient's health care history) are added to yield a total chronification stage with three stages ranging from acute to chronic pain. RESULTS: Results indicate that bodily complaints have to be interpreted as signs of depressive disorder and chronicity. Signs of bodily 'awareness' or 'somatic anxiety'- in the sense of hypochondriasis - could not be found. Hypochondriasis does not seem to play a significant role in chronification of low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: From a cognitive-behavioral perspective the results support the hypothesis that psychological disturbance in chronic pain is a cause of long-standing pain perception and the result of the chronification process.

English Abstract↗

Prediction of success from a multidisciplinary treatment program for chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: The study included 90 disabled patients with chronic low back pain recruited from a pain clinic who were admitted to an 8-week program of functional restoration and behavioral support. Initial evaluations included a medical examination, rating of the physical impairment, a personal interview, a visual analogue scale to record pain intensity, an assessment of limitations for daily activities, a pain disability index, a depression and psychovegetative scale, and a scale to evaluate general living standards. The physical assessment included different flexibility measurements, measurement of power and endurance through standardized exercises, and measurements of isokinetic trunk and lifting strength and general endurance. The measurements were repeated at the end of the 8-week program and thereafter an intervals of 6 and 12 months. Final analyses were carried out on 82 patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether objective or subjective signs most influence the outcome of rehabilitation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In recent years, several studies have shown that active and intensive multimodal treatment of chronic low back pain is successful. Until now there has been lack of information about which patients will respond to the therapy and what is the most effective part of treatment. METHODS: Prognostic factors (return to work, pain intensity, self-assessment of treatment success by patients) were tested by studying variance and regression analyses for their ability to predict treatment outcome. RESULTS: Certain factors were identified that had a significant impact on determining the probability of a patient's return to work and the reduction of pain intensity. These factors included self-evaluation for predicting a return to work, the length of absence from work, application for pension, and a decrease is disability after treatment. Overall satisfaction with treatment was best determined by the number of medical consultations before treatment, the extent of disability, previous measures taken for coping with the disease, and reduction of disability during treatment. Medical background, medical diagnosis, and physical impairment had no predictive value. Physical variables (i.e., mobility, strength, endurance, and physical performance) also demonstrated only limited predictive value. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated that the most important variable in determining a successful treatment of chronic low back pain is the reduction of subjective feelings of disability in patients.

Adult↗

[Multidisciplinary treatment program on chronic low back pain, part 4. Prognosis of treatment outcome and final conclusions].

PROBLEM: Studies using a multimodal approach in order to prognose therapeutic success in patients suffering from back pain were seen to have highly diverse results. However, in spite of various independent health care systems, a common interest prevails in identifying determinants of therapeutic success in order to improve therapy. METHODS: Ninety disabled patients with chronic low back pain were admitted to an 8-week out-patient program of functional restoration and behavioral support. The program consisted of a pre-program (education, stretching and calisthenic exercises 4 h a day, three times a week for 3 weeks) and an intensive treatment period (physical exercises, back school education, cognitive behavioral group therapy, relaxation training, occupational therapy, socioeconomic and vocational counseling) which took place for 5 weeks, 7 h a day as an outpatient program. The program's philosophy encourages active effort on the patients' part in order to improve their functional status within a therapeutic environment. This reinforces behavior conducive to getting well, enhances the patients' sense of self-control over their pain and the resulting disability. The main therapeutic target was to facilitate the patients' return to work. Apart from medical examination and personal interview, the patients' physical impairment, pain descriptions, and psychological distress were also measured. This included variables such as depression, psychovegetative complaints, quality of life and workplace satisfaction, disability, and coping with disease. Measurements were repeated at the end of the 8-week program, and following 6 and 12 month intervals. The reliability of prognostic factors in predicting treatment outcome (return to work, reduction of pain intensity, self-assessment of success by the patients) was tested by analyses of variance and discriminant function analyses. RESULTS: Patients' return to the workplace could be predicted in 85% of cases based on whether an application for pension had been made, on the length of duration of work disability, and on "fixed" assumptions on the part of the patient concerning his work situation. Pre-treatment somatic findings (for example, diagnosis, degree of physical impairment, and functional debilities), together with depressive and psychovegetative reactions, were shown to have no connection with the patient's ability to return to the workplace. Similar findings were demonstrated for the prediction of pain reduction and patient satisfaction with treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Predicting successful treatment is hardly possible without analyzing individual circumstances, focusing on sociodemographic variables, workplace-related conditions, and aspects of individual motivation. With regard to objective therapeutic success, subjective perceptions proved highly influential. Treatment proved successful only when the patient's perception of functional disability was minimized. Hence, individual perceptions and experiences were more important than physical capabilities.

English Abstract↗

Effectiveness of a multimodal treatment program for chronic low-back pain.

In recent years, multidisciplinary pain programs were seen to successfully treat patients by basing treatment on a combination of physical exercise and psychological interventions. However, in spite of their effectiveness, it still remains to be clarified exactly which features of these programs were responsible for patient improvement. Cognitive-behavioral models posit that improvement is due, in part, to changes in patient coping strategies. Nonetheless, as reflected by the conflicting opinions present in the literature, it is questionable whether a so-called 'cognitive shift' is an accurate indicator for return to work of disabled patients. Ninety patients with chronic low back pain took part in a multidisciplinary treatment program. Therapeutic environment reinforces wellness behavior and enhances the patients' sense of control over their pain and resulting disability. The main therapeutic target point was to facilitate return to work. Ways of coping were measured by a well studied coping inventory in the German language (FEKB). Factor analysis revealed three factors: 'catastrophizing', 'search for information' and 'cognitive control'. In addition, assessment included measurements of pain intensity, depression, disability, flexibility of the lumbar spine, and different performance parameters. All of them were measured prior to and at the end of treatment, and following intervals of 6 and 12 months after discharge from program. Measurements showed significant changes over time, but more importantly, nearly all results were seen to stabilize at the 6- and 12-month evaluation following treatment. The coping strategies demonstrated little or poor change. In addition, coping measures and change in coping behavior showed poor prognostic relevance. But other psycho-social parameters like self-evaluation of potential return-to-work, application for pension, the length of pre-absence from work, and a decrease in subjective disability following treatment were effective indicators for 'back-to-work'. Other objective parameters, such as medical history, physical impairment and general physical variables were seen to have little predictive value in determining a return to work. The results suggest that the primary target point for further investigation is the analysis of the patients' beliefs about their pain. Our results indicate that future research must be attentive to the complex interactions between environmental factors and the coping demands posed by the specific nature of pain problems.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

[Multidisciplinary treatment program on chronic low back pain, part 3. Psychosocial aspects].

PROBLEM: The majority of authors agree today that psychosocial factors have more influence on a successful treatment of chronic back pain than other variables, in particular medical findings. Therefore treatments aim to integrate psychotherapeutic intervention in order to lessen emotional impairment, to change behavioral patterns (which advocate rest and the avoidance of physical activity), and to change cognitive attitudes and fears concerning exercise and work ability. Nevertheless, the interplay of cognitive measures and disability in treatment programs still remains an unclear issue. METHODS: Ninety disabled patients with chronic low back pain were admitted to an 8-week outpatient program of functional restoration and behavioral support. The program consisted of a pre-program (education, stretching and calisthenic exercises) and an intensive treatment period (physical exercises, back school education, cognitive behavioral group therapy, relaxation training, occupational therapy, vocational counseling), which took place for 5 weeks, 7 h a day, as an outpatient program. The targets of the psychological interventions were (a) to change maladaptive behavior (inactivity, social withdrawal) and increase the patient's activity level at home, (b) to alter maladaptive cognitions (somatization, catastrophizing, passive expectations concerning treatment) and to improve their own positive coping skills, (c) to identify and stop operant conditioned behavior, and (d) to prevent depressive symptoms and strengthen the level of emotional control. The program's philosophy encouraged the patients' active efforts to improve their functional status within a therapeutic environment that reinforced positive behavior traits conductive to getting well. The main therapeutic target was to facilitate a return to work. Apart from a medical examination and a personal interview, the patients' physical impairment, pain descriptions, and psychological distress (according to different criteria for evaluation) were also measured. This included variables such as depression, psychovegetative complaints, quality of life and workplace satisfaction, disability, and coping with disease. Measurements were repeated at the end of the 8-week program, and following 6- and 12-month intervals. RESULTS: In comparison with the initial values, a statistically significant improvement became evident in reducing pain, disability, depression, and psychovegetative signs (P < 0.001). Nearly all results remained stable at the 6- and 12-months examinations. Apart from these results, coping measurements demonstrated little improvement in the three factorial coping dimensions. By use of regression analyses, a differentiated description of psychosocial connections became apparent in three different ways of coping (catastrophizing, searching for information, cognitive control) and parameters of disability. Disability levels corresponded poorly with pain descriptions, physical impairment and coping dimensions. This result indicates that disability should be viewed as a separate component in assessing the patients' description of low back pain. CONCLUSION: An analysis of coping dimensions demonstrated that current cognitive measures might be too general to explain low back disability adequately. In addition, the results indicate that the use of the 'catastrophizing' factor as a separate variable is questionable, since it may simply be a symptom of depression. The relevance of coping as a sensitive parameter for change is also addressed. It is suggested that an alteration in coping strategies may be an important treatment effect, but is subject to individual prerequisites to maximize treatment response. Thus, future research must focus on the complex interactions between personality variables, environmental factors, and the coping demands posed by the specific nature of pain problems. A more lengthy evaluation of so-called 'fear-avoidance beliefs' in combination with 'disability' and coping dimensions could possibly lead to further treatment on the development of chronicity in chronic low back pain patients.

English Abstract↗

[Multidisciplinary treatment program for chronic low back pain, part 2. Somatic aspects].

PROBLEM: There is a great need to expand current knowledge of the various functional capacity measurements used in the rehabilitation of chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients. The literature on these patients reports that mobility, endurance, trunk strength and lifting capacity decrease during the process of chronicity. Chronically disabled patients appear to have lower functional capacity than asymptomatic persons. METHODS: Our study group consisted of 90 disabled CLBP patients (44 female, 46 male; average age 42 years) who underwent a multidisciplinary 8-week daily treatment program of functional restoration with behavioral support (instruction, endurance training, strength exercises, behavioral and treatment to facilitate return to work therapy). Initially these patients where compared with 107 asymptomatic persons (44 female, 63 male, average age 41 years). The patients were investigated before and after treatment, and at intervals of 6 and 12 months. The reliability of the functional measurements was evaluated by interrater comparison. Physical assessment included a medical examination (mainly diagnosis of radicular or nonradicular pain), changes in the lumbar spine revealed by X-ray studies according to Herron and Turner, rating of physical impairment according to Waddell, flexibility, length of hamstrings muscles (SLR), test of power and endurance of trunk movement by standardized exercises according to the Swiss group of Spring and isokinetic measurements (LIDO Back), tests of lifting capacity (LIDO Lift), and (in part) of general endurance on a cycle ergometer (CASE 15 Marquette). RESULTS: Physical findings showed that mobility was reduced substantially in patients suffering from back pain due to reduced SLR (shortened hamstrings) and decreased spinal mobility. Patients also demonstrated significant reductions in their ability to perform lifting tasks in comparison to healthy individuals. The results of trunk flexion showed no significant differences between patients and the control group, whereas the ability to perform trunk extension was much better in the control group. In principle we found the same results with isokinetic measurements as in the exercises without machines. Cardiovascular endurance was also much better in the control group than it was in the back pain patients. At the end of the treatment program all physical deficits were improved significantly. In many cases performance was comparable with that of the control group. With time, however, training effects gradually decreased. The success of treatment (return to work, absence from work, pain reduction, use of medical care) was independent of the functional status of the patients before and after treatment. CONCLUSION: Study results showed that physical capacity in disabled patients with low back pain is substantially reduced in comparison to persons who do not suffer from back pain. The only exception was in trunk flexor strength and endurance, in which measurements did not differ between the patients and the control group. However, even CLBP- patients with long-term pain and severe physical illness can successfully improve their physical condition by participating in an active treatment program. Back extensor muscle training has to be included in physical therapy. Because of loss of condition during the time after treatment, regular monitoring of patients and their home training programs is necessary. Overall, treatment of CLBP has to include physical training and psychosocial treatment to achieve satisfactory results.

English Abstract↗