PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Michiel F Reneman

Publications and source records attributed to Michiel F Reneman.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Safe lifting in patients with chronic low back pain: comparing FCE lifting task and Niosh lifting guideline.

INTRODUCTION: Both the floor-to-waist lifting task of the Isernhagen Work Systems Functional Capacity Evaluation (IWS FCE) and recommended weight limit (RWL) of the NIOSH produce safe lifting weights and are used world-wide nowadays. It is unknown whether they produce similar safe lifting weights. Aim of this study was to compare FCE performance on the floor-to-waist lifting task and RWL of the NIOSH lifting guideline for this task, in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Ninety-two patients performed the FCE lifting task. RWL was calculated for this task. Performance was compared with RWL. A lifting index was calculated by dividing performance by RWL. Differences between groups with a lifting index < or =1, 1-3, and >3 were calculated for pain intensity, scores on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and work status. RESULTS: Men lifted on average 32.5 kg (SD 15.4) and women 18.8 kg (SD 7.8). RWL for this task was 12.8 kg. Mean difference between performance and RWL was 15.0 kg (SD 14.7; range -8.8 to 59.2). The Roland Morris Disability score of patients with a lifting index < or =1 was significantly lower than patients with a lifting index 1-3 and >3. No difference in pain intensity and work status was found between groups. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that performance on the FCE floor-to-waist lifting task and RWL of the NIOSH for this task produce different safe lifting weights in individual patients with CLBP, which may result in contradictory recommendations about need for rehabilitation and return to work.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Symptom increase following a functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain: an explorative study of safety.

INTRODUCTION: This study was performed to study intensity and duration of symptom increase following an FCE and to explore safety of an FCE. METHODS: Included were 92 patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), mean age 38.5 years, mean self-reported disability 12.5 (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire). All patients underwent an FCE. Symptom increase was measured with a 2-item questionnaire. Operational definition for safety: no formal complaint filed and symptom increase to occur only temporarily. RESULTS: No formal complaints were filed (n=92). In total, 54 patients returned the questionnaire (59%; 'responders'). Of the responders, 76% reported increased symptom intensity after an FCE, ranging from 'little increase' to 'severe increase'. Symptoms of all responders returned to pre-FCE level. Duration of symptom increase of the responders ranged from 1 day to 3 weeks. Symptom increase resided to pre-FCE level within 1 week in 93% of the responders. Symptom increase was weakly related to self-reported disability (r=0.38, p<0.05). Except for gender, differences between responders and non-responders were non-significant. CONCLUSION: A temporary increase in symptom intensity following an FCE is common. Within the operational definitions of safety used in this study, assessment of functional capacity of patients with CLBP appears safe.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A comparison of two lifting assessment approaches in patients with chronic low back pain.

UNLABELLED: The Progressive Isoinertial Lifting Evaluation (PILE) and the lifting test of the WorkWell Systems Functional Capacity Evaluation (WWS) are well known as lifting performance tests. The objective of this study was to study whether the PILE and the WWS can be used interchangeably in patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) and to explore whether psychosocial variables can explain possible differences. METHODS: 53 Patients (32 men and 21 women) with CLBP were tested twice in a counter balanced design. Pearson Correlation Coefficient of r > 0.75 and non-significant differences on two-tailed t tests were considered as good comparability. RESULTS: Pearson Correlation Coefficient was 0.75 (p < 0.01). Lifting performance on the WWS was a mean of 6.0 kg higher compared to the PILE (p < 0.01). The difference between the PILE and the WWS was unrelated to psychological variables. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that the PILE and the WWS cannot be used interchangeably. Psychosocial variables cannot explain the differences between both tests.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed2005

Testing lifting capacity: validity of determining effort level by means of observation.

STUDY DESIGN: Video observation study. OBJECTIVES: To establish the validity of determining effort level by visual observation of a lifting test. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Determining effort level during a lifting test is critical for interpretation of test performance, yet the validity of these determinations has not been established in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODS: Fifteen healthy subjects and 16 patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain performed a standardized lifting test as outlined in the Isernhagen Work System Functional Capacity Evaluation. The lifts were videotaped and independently observed by 9 trained observers, who rated effort levels using an Isernhagen Work System categorical scale and a Borg Category Ratio scale. External effort indexes were established to control for effort at group level. Validity of the observer ratings was analyzed by means of a sensitivity and specificity analysis and correlations between performances and observer ratings. Interrater reliability was analyzed by means of intraclass correlation coefficients and Cohen kappa. RESULTS: External indexes differ significantly between patients with chronic low back pain and healthy subjects, indicating that at group level, patients did not perform maximally. Submaximal performances were correctly rated in 85% to 90% (healthy subjects) and in 100% (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) of the cases. "Maximal" performances were correctly rated in 46% to 53% (healthy subjects) and in 5% to 7% (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) of the cases. Correlations between performances and observer ratings were r = 0.90 to r = 0.92 (healthy subjects) and r = 0.82 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain). Reliability: intraclass correlation coefficient, r = 0.76 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) to r = 0.87 (healthy), Kappa K = 0.50 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) to r = 0.58 (healthy subjects). CONCLUSIONS: Effort level can be determined validly by means of visual observation.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Relationship between kinesiophobia and performance in a functional capacity evaluation.

Fear of movement and (re)injury (kinesiophobia) has been postulated to play an important role in the performance in a Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE). This study was performed to analyze the relationship between kinesiophobia and performance in an FCE. Kinesiophobia and FCE performance of 54 male and 10 female patients (mean age 38.0) suffering chronic low back pain (mean length of episode 9.9 months, 93% off work) were assessed. Kinesiophobia was assessed using the Dutch Version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (scale 17-68). A lifting task and an FCE were operationalizations of avoidance. FCE results were transformed into a single measure using the classification of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (FCE-DOT, scale 1-5). Correlations between the variables were calculated. The results are: kinesiophobia mean 41.6 (SD 7.3), lifting mean 29.5 kg (SD 11.6), FCE-DOT mean 3.6 (SD 0.6). Correlations between kinesiophobia and lifting was r = 0.01 (p = 0.93) and between kinesiophobia and FCE-DOT was rho = -0.04 (p = 0.75). The results indicate that the patients were substantially kinesiophobic, yet they were able to lift a mean of 29.5 kg and were physically able to perform moderate to heavy work. The strength of the correlations was very low. The relationship between kinesiophobia and avoidance, operationalized as lifting and an FCE, could not be confirmed in this study.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Concurrent validity of questionnaire and performance-based disability measurements in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

This study aimed to investigate the concurrent validity of two approaches to disability measurement in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CLBP). It was hypothesized that if both are measuring the same construct, the instruments would lead to similar disability results and would correlate strongly (r > 0.75). The study compared the results of self-reported and performance-based measures of disability in 64 consecutive patients with CLBP. Participants mean age was 38.0 years, the mean duration of the current episode of back pain 9.9 months, and 90% were off work due to CLBP. The self-report measures used were: the Roland Disability Questionnaire (Roland); the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (Oswestry); and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (Quebec). Performance was measured using the Isernhagen Work Systems Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE). The mean scores from the self-report measure are as follows: Roland 13.5 (scale 0-24), Oswestry 28.2 (scale 0-100), Quebec 37.8 (scale 0-100) consistent with moderate to severe disability. In contrast the results from the performance-based measures suggested that the subjects should be able to work at a physical intensity level of moderate to heavy. Little to moderate correlation was observed between the self-report and performance-based measures (Spearman rank correlations: Roland-FCE (-0.20), p > 0.05; Oswestry-FCE (-0.52), p < 0.01; Quebec-FCE (-0.50), p < 0.01). Results are interpreted to suggest that both performance-based and self-report measures of disability should be used in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of the disability in patients with CLBP.

Adult↗