Guide to the percentage "impairment" of the back, neck and pelvis.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Back Injuries↗
SEARCH · PubMed Health
Results for “Back”
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
[Chronic back pain: more than pain in the back. Findings of a regional survey among insurees of a workers pension insurance fund].
BACKGROUND: Surveys with a main focus on back pain tend to isolate the complaint from possibly concomitant pains, other symptoms and disorders. Severe chronic back pain is assumed here to imply more than pain in the back. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We report results from a two stage survey conducted in 1998 - 2000. The initial postal questionnaire addressed all 10,000 actively employed blue collar workers from a regional pension fund (Landesversicherungsanstalt Schleswig-Holstein) aged 40 - 54 and residing in or around Luebeck/Germany (68 % males). Subjects reporting severe and disabling back pain were invited to a socio-medical examination. The response and participation rates were 58 % and 65 % respectively. Non-response and non-participation seem to result in minor though opposite, effects. RESULTS: The prevalence of current back pain (back pain of any severity within the past 7 days) is high (68 %; including 16 % with severe, disabling back pain) despite the preponderance of males and a probable healthy worker effect. 82 % of subjects participating in the second round reported recurrent or persisting back pain on the day of examination, in the majority with a chronic fluctuating and overall deteriorating course pattern. 18 % reported no current back pain and hence gave prospective (and additionally retrospective) evidence of an episodic-intermittent course of the disorder. The former group showed significantly more pains, bodily complaints, dysfunctional cognitions, emotional distress and concomitant disorders. 35 % of them indicated back pain as their dominant health problem; 49 % identified back pain and another disorder as dominant, and 16 % reported other prominent health problems. More than 70 % of "other" disorders originated from the musculoskeletal system often involving the extremities. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: Back pain is very common among blue collar workers. Severe disabling back pain is usually associated with numerous other pains, bodily complaints, disorders, and indicators of psychological distress ("amplified back pain"). However, even amplified back pain is not always the sole or dominant health problem. Assessing the degree of "amplification" seems helpful in splitting a previously homogeneous group of severely affected back pain sufferers-with possible prognostic and therapeutic consequences.
Adult↗
The Saskatchewan health and back pain survey. The prevalence of low back pain and related disability in Saskatchewan adults.
STUDY DESIGN: Population-based, cross-sectional, mailed survey. OBJECTIVES: To determine the lifetime, 6-month period, and point prevalence of low back pain and its related disability among Saskatchewan adults and to investigate the presence and strength of selective response bias. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There have been many reports of the prevalence of low back pain in different populations, and the estimates vary widely depending on case definition. However, most studies fail to differentiate between trivial and disabling back pain, which raises the issue of the usefulness of these estimates. No studies have yet documented the prevalence of graded low back pain severity and its related disability in a North American, general, population-based survey. METHODS: The Saskatchewan Health and Back Pain Survey was mailed to a probability sample of 2184 Saskatchewan adults between 20 and 69 years of age. Fifty-five percent of the eligible population responded to the survey. Respondents were compared with nonrespondents, and the presence of selective response bias by back pain status was investigated by wave analysis. The point and lifetime prevalence of low back pain was determined by simple questions, and the 6-month period prevalence of low back pain was determined by the Chronic Pain Questionnaire. All estimates were age standardized to the Saskatchewan population. RESULTS: The authors estimate that at the time of the survey 28.4% (95% confidence interval, 25.6-31.1) of the Saskatchewan adult population were experiencing low back pain, and 84.1% (95% confidence interval, 81.9-86.3) had experienced it during their lifetime. Overall, 48.9% (95% confidence interval, 45.9-52.0) of the population had experienced low intensity/low-disability low back pain in the previous 6 months, 12.3% (95% confidence interval, 10.3-14.4) had experienced high-intensity/low-disability low back pain, and an additional 10.7% (95% confidence interval, 8.8-12.5) had experienced high-disability low back pain in the previous 6 months. There was little variation in the estimates over age groups, but women experienced more high-disability back pain than men. There was no evidence of selective response bias by low back pain status in the survey. CONCLUSION: Low-intensity/low-disability low back pain is a common problem in the general population. Approximately 11% of the adult population studied had been disabled by low back pain in the previous 6 months.
Adult↗
Functional changes in back muscle activity correlate with pain intensity and prediction of low back pain during pregnancy.
OBJECTIVE: To assess low back pain (LBP) intensity and subjective disability during pregnancy and compare the pain scores with lumbar motion patterns. DESIGN: A prospective study of pregnant back pain sufferers and healthy controls. SETTING: Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. PARTICIPANTS: Study group consisted of 32 pregnant women with LBP; control group consisted of 21 healthy pregnant women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Back pain intensity was assessed by visual analog scale (VAS), and subjective disability index was measured by Oswestry Low Back Disability Questionnaire, at 20 and 36 weeks of pregnancy. Back muscle activities were recorded by surface electromyography, and movement sensors were used to detect lumbar motion. RESULTS: In the study group current pain scores (VAS) at first and last trimester correlated strongly (r = .82, p < .00). Pain scores correlated with body weight at the first trimester (r = .54, p = .003) and at the last trimester (r = .67, p < .00). Significant correlation was noted between current pain intensity and back muscle activity level during forward body flexion at first trimester (r = .704, p < .00). Back muscle activity during bending measured at first trimester significantly correlated with pain intensity at last trimester (r = .703, p < .00). Back muscle activity during the first trimester of pregnancy had a negative correlation with current (r = -.57, p = .002) and later subjective disability index (r = -.42, p = .02). It correlated inversely (r = -.54, p = .003) with pain score at last trimester of pregnancy, ie, the lower the back muscle activity at the beginning of pregnancy, the more pain and disability throughout pregnancy. In the control group, three women developed LBP and disability feelings during pregnancy. They had increased muscle activity during flexion at delivery, ie, disturbed flexion relaxation. CONCLUSIONS: Prepregnancy LBP predicts renewed pain during pregnancy, and dysfunction of back muscles has been established in LBP. In this study, disturbance in the relaxation of the back muscles was linearly related to current, and also to later, pain scores. In addition, back muscle activity level was inversely related to the disability index. For the first time, it has been shown prospectively that the function pattern of back extensors seems to predict, and is related to, future back pain. Simple function testing is promising and might be valuable in identifying mothers with a high risk of pregnancy-related back pain and in directing preventive intervention to high risk women by making them aware of self-treatment methods.
Activities of Daily Living↗
Back schools for non-specific low back pain.
BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1980, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. Back schools are frequently used in the treatment of low back pain patients. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of back schools for patients with non-specific low back pain. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Medline and Embase databases up to December 1997 and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to December 1998 if reported in English, Dutch, French or German. We also screened references given in relevant reviews and identified randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised trials that reported on any type of back school for non-specific low back pain were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers blinded with respect to authors, institution and journal independently extracted the data and assessed trial quality. Our preset "high quality" level was 6 or more out of 11 internal validity criteria with positive scores. As data were statistically and clinically too heterogeneous, a qualitative review (best evidence synthesis) was performed. The evidence was classified into 4 levels (strong, moderate, limited or no evidence) taking into account the methodological quality of the studies. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs were included in our systematic review. Overall, the methodological quality was low. Only 3 trials were considered high quality. It was not possible to make relevant subgroup analyses for radiation versus no radiation or to have a relevant subgroup of studies reporting on acute low back pain only. The results indicate that there is moderate evidence that back schools have better short-term effects than other treatments for chronic low back pain, and that there is moderate evidence that back schools in an occupational setting are more effective compared to 'placebo' or waiting list controls. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Back schools may be effective for patients with recurrent and chronic low back pain in occupational settings, but little is known about the cost-effectiveness of back schools.
Exercise↗
Effect of preexisting back pain on the incidence and severity of back pain in intercollegiate rowers.
BACKGROUND: Back pain is a common problem among rowers. PURPOSE: To determine whether preexisting back pain is a significant risk factor for back pain in intercollegiate rowers and how it relates to the ability of athletes to participate in college rowing. STUDY DESIGN: Survey. METHODS: Surveys from 1829 former intercollegiate rowing athletes were analyzed. The surveys included questions concerning back pain before the subjects' college career, back pain during intercollegiate rowing, missed practices, the duration of time lost from college rowing because of back pain, and career-ending back pain. Back pain was defined as pain lasting longer than 1 week. RESULTS: More subjects with preexisting back pain developed back pain during their college rowing career than subjects without preexisting back pain (57.1% versus 36.6%). Of those with preexisting pain, 55% missed practice because of back pain and 8% ended their college rowing careers; for those without preexisting pain, the percentages were 62% and 17%, respectively. For subjects with pain before their college rowing career, 78.8% missed less than 1 week and 5.9% missed more than 1 month. For subjects with no preexisting pain, 61.9% missed less than 1 week and 18.1% missed more than 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: While rowers with preexisting back pain are more likely to have back pain in college, they are less likely to miss extended periods of practice time or end their college rowing careers because of back pain.
Back Pain↗
Back school in a first episode of compensated acute low back pain: a clinical trial to assess efficacy and prevent relapse.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of a back school program for patients with a first episode of acute work-related low back pain requiring compensation. DESIGN: A randomized single-blind controlled trial. SETTING: A private physiatrics outpatient clinic. PATIENTS: The mean duration of low back pain was 15 days. INTERVENTION: Eligible patients were randomized to a standard treatment program that included daily physiotherapy (n = 86) or the same program with the addition of back school (n = 82). The back school program consisted of three 90-minute sessions given by a single trained instructor at 0, 1, and 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the time off work for the presenting episode of back pain and the number and duration of recurrences in the year following the study onset. Secondary outcomes included the level of pain, spinal mobility, active straight-leg raising, and functional disability assessed by the Oswestry and Roland-Morris scales. RESULTS: Those randomized to the back school group gained significantly more knowledge, based on the multiple choice examination (p = .0001) and performed the exercise program significantly better (p = .0001) than the standard care group. There were no differences between the two treatment groups for either of the primary outcomes. The median time to return to work from randomization was 33 days for both the back school and the standard care groups (p = .48). The number of compensated recurrences of low back pain over 1 year was similar (back school = 14, standard care = 10, p = .16), as was the median duration of these episodes (back school = 25 days, standard care = 70 days, p = .21). There were no significant differences favoring the back school group for any of the secondary outcomes at the posttreatment, 6-month, or 12-month assessments. CONCLUSION: A back school intervention in addition to standard care resulted in no reduction in the time to return to work or the number or duration of recurrences of low back pain requiring compensation over a period of one year.
Absenteeism↗
Active back school: prophylactic management for low back pain. A randomized, controlled, 1-year follow-up study.
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, single-center trial with a stratified group design. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the secondary prophylactic effect of the Active Back School program on minimizing recurrences of low back pain episodes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The results of back school interventions are controversial. Previous work often used short intervention periods and low doses of practical training. However, studies with the highest methodologic scores have shown the best results, especially when conducted in occupational settings and coupled with a comprehensive rehabilitation program. METHODS: By block randomization, 19 men and 24 women were allocated to Active Back School, with 18 men and 20 women as control subjects. The Slumps test and number of low back pain episodes during the previous 36 months were used as stratification factors. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to demographic factors and initially observed variables. Active Back School consisted of 20 lessons over a 13-week period. Each lesson was divided into a 20-minute theoretical part and a 40-minute exercise part. All participants were examined on enrollment, then 5 and 12 months after initiation of the program. Outcome measures were recurrence of low back pain episodes and number of days of sick leave. RESULTS: The recurrence of new low back pain episodes was significantly lower (P < 0.05) and the time from inclusion to the first new episode significantly longer (P < 0.01) in the Active Back School group than in the control group. In the Active Back School group, seven participants took sick leave because of low back pain episodes during the first 12 months of follow-up compared with 11 among the control subjects. The number of sick leave days was significantly lower (P < 0.05) in the Active Back School group than in the control group. CONCLUSION: Active Back School reduced the recurrence and severity of new low back pain episodes according to results of follow-up examinations performed 5 and 12 months after enrollment.
Adult↗
Influence of occupational factors on the relation between socioeconomic status and self-reported back pain in a population-based sample of German adults with back pain.
STUDY DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional postal survey and interview substudy. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between socioeconomic status and severe back pain and to determine whether this association can be explained by occupational factors. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Like other disorders, back pain and its consequences are inversely related to indicators of high socioeconomic status. METHODS: The associations between indicators of socioeconomic status and presence or severity of current back pain (no back pain or back pain of low intensity and low disability versus back pain with high intensity and/or high disability) were investigated in a survey among German adults 25 to 74 years of age (n = 2731) and an interview substudy of 770 participants with a recent history of back pain.- RESULTS: In the survey, educational level was inversely associated with back pain and severe current back pain. Similarly, in the interview substudy, educational level, vocational training, occupational class, household income, and health insurance status were inversely related to severe current back pain. Age-adjusted and gender-adjusted odds ratios were 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.52) for immediate educational level and 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.73) for high educational level. Recalled work tasks at the onset of back pain were significant risk factors of severe current back pain (heavy physical work: odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% CI 1.06-2.93; work in bent position among males: OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.03-3.46). After adjusting for occupational class or work tasks, the association between educational level and severe current back pain remained unchanged.- CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the hypothesis that severe back pain is less prevalent among adults of higher socioeconomic status. The underlying mechanism could not be explained by differences in self-reported occupational factors.
Adult↗
Low back pain in military recruits in relation to social background and previous low back pain. A cross-sectional and prospective observational survey.
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, studies on the etiology of low back pain have been carried out in adult populations. However, since low back pain often appears early in life, more research on young populations is needed. This study focuses on the importance of social background factors and previous low back pain in the development of low back pain in military recruits. METHODS: During a three-month period, Danish military recruits with different social backgrounds live and work under the same conditions. Thus, there is an opportunity to investigate the influence of social background on the development of low back pain, when persons are removed from their usual environment and submitted to a number of new stressors. In addition, the importance of the recruits' previous low back pain history in relation to low back pain during military service was studied. This was done by means of questionnaires to 1,711 recruits before and after this three-month period. RESULTS: Sedentary occupation was negatively associated with long-lasting low back pain (>30 days during the past year) at baseline with an odds ratios of 0.55 (95% CI: 0.33-0.90). This effect vanished during service. Having parents with higher education increased the risk of low back pain during service (OR: 1.9;1.2-3.0, for the highest educated group), but not of the consequences (leg pain and exemption from duty), whereas high IQ decreased the risk of these consequences (odds ratios as low as 0.2;0.1-0.8 for exemption from duty in the group with highest IQ). Long-lasting low back pain prior to service increased the risk of long-lasting low back pain (OR: 4.8;2.1-10.8), leg pain (OR: 3.3;1.3-8.3) and exemption from duty during service (OR: 5.9;2.4-14.8). CONCLUSION: Sedentary occupation is negatively associated with low back pain at baseline. This protective effect disappears, when the person becomes physically active. For predicting trouble related to the low back during service, the duration of low back pain prior to service and IQ-level are the most important factors.
Adult↗
The effect of a tilting seat on back, lower back and legs during sitting work.
The purpose of this study was to examine the possible effects of a tilting seat on the back, lower back and legs. Ten healthy male subjects aged 22-28 performed word-processing operations while sitting on a chair for one hour under two different seating conditions: the rocking condition and the fixed condition. While the subjects were performing the task, measurements of lower leg swelling were taken using bioelectrical impedance plethysmography, and pain scores were recorded every five min for the neck, shoulders, back, lower back, hips and legs. Electromyograms (EMGs) of the back and lower back (at Th5-6, Th8-9, L1-2 and L3-4) were recorded every sec. In addition, the subjects were videotaped while using the rocking seat, in order to analyze the angle and frequency of seat tilting. At the end of the experiment, the subjects were asked to evaluate the two conditions with respect to localized fatigue and operational efficiency. There was no significant difference in lower leg swelling between the two conditions. EMGs were significantly different at Th5-6, Th8-9 and L1-2 between the two conditions. The rocking condition generated greater EMGs at Th5-6 and L1-2, whereas the fixed condition produced greater EMGs at Th8-9. The pain scores for the neck, shoulders, back and lower back were higher under the fixed condition, while those for the buttocks were higher under the rocking condition. The average tilting frequency was as low as 25.2 times per hour, with 15.6 times per hour for tilting angles ranging from 1 to 2 degrees, and 9.6 times per hour for tilting angles exceeding 2 degrees. As for the subjective evaluations of localized fatigue, seven of the ten subjects preferred the rocking condition, while two preferred the fixed condition and one subject had no preference. Thus, there was a significant difference in the subjective evaluations of the two chairs. These findings suggest that the rocking condition, in contrast to the fixed seating condition, reduced back and lower back pain as a result of its tilting capability. The results of EMGs suggest that the rocking condition reduced back and lower back pain by increasing the overall muscle activity of the back and lower back. The leg impedance measurements showed no effect of the rocking condition on the leg swelling, as compared with the fixed condition.
Adult↗
Kinematic evaluation of the back in the sport horse with back pain.
REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Earlier studies have developed a clinical tool to evaluate objectively the function of the equine back. The ability to differentiate horses with back pain from asymptomatic, fully functioning horses using kinematic measures from this tool has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To compare the kinematics of the back at walk and trot in riding horses with back dysfunction to the same parameters in asymptomatic sport horses. METHODS: The kinematics of the back in 12 horses with impaired performance and back pain were studied at walk and trot on a treadmill. Data were captured for 10 sees at 240 Hz. Range of movement (ROM) and intravertebral pattern symmetry of movement for flexion and extension (FE), lateral bending (LB) and axial rotation (AR) were derived from angular motion pattern data and the results compared to an earlier established database on asymptomatic riding horses. RESULTS: At walk, horses with back dysfunction had a ROM smaller for dorsoventral FE in the caudal thoracic region (T13 = 7.50 degrees, T17 = 7.71 degrees; P<0.05), greater for LB at T13 (8.13 degrees; P<0.001) and smaller for AR of the pelvis (10.97 degrees; P<0.05) compared to asymptomatic horses (FE-T13 = 8.28 degrees, FE-T17 = 8.49 degrees, LB-T13 = 6.34 degrees, AR-pelvis = 12.77 degrees). At trot, dysfunctional horses had a smaller (P<0.05) ROM for FE at the thoracic lumbar junction (T17 = 2.46 degrees, L1 = 2.60 degrees) compared to asymptomatic horses (FE-T17 = 3.07 degrees, FE-L1 = 3.12 degrees). CONCLUSIONS: The objective measurement technique can detect differences between back kinematics in riding horses with signs of back dysfunction and asymptomatic horses. The clinical manifestation of back pain results in diminished flexion/extension movement at or near the thoracic lumbar junction. However, before applying the method more extensively in practice it is necessary to evaluate it further, including measurements of patients whose diagnoses can be confirmed and long-term follow-ups of back patients after treatment. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Since the objective measurement technique can detect small movement differences in back kinematics, it should help to clinically describe and, importantly, objectively detect horses with back pain and dysfunction.
Animals↗
Efficacy of comprehensive rehabilitation programs and back school for patients with low back pain: a meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of back school as a treatment for low back pain is widespread, but determining the efficacy of this approach is complicated by variations in back schools and study methods across clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to synthesize existing evidence on the efficacy of back school as either a primary intervention or a part of a comprehensive rehabilitation program for patients with low back pain. METHODS: The results of 19 prospective randomized controlled trials were evaluated. Quantitative reviewing procedures were used to calculate the effect sizes that compared patients receiving back school with those in a control or comparison group. Effect sizes were computed for 206 hypothesis tests involving 2,373 patients. RESULTS: The average effect size for comprehensive rehabilitation programs that included back school (d = 0.28) was larger than the average effect size for programs that offered back school as the primary intervention (d = -0.14). When effect sizes were stratified by program type and outcome, the comprehensive programs were superior to primary back school programs with respect to pain reduction, increased spinal mobility, and increased strength. Both types of programs showed reasonable success with education/compliance outcomes (d = 0.27-0.28). Lower effect sizes were found among the types of programs for disability and work/vocational outcomes (d < or = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION: Back schools were most efficacious when coupled with a comprehensive rehabilitation program. Efficacy was supported for the treatment of pain and physical impairments and for education/compliance outcomes. Work/vocational and disability outcomes, however, were not improved substantially beyond control levels in comprehensive or primary back school programs. [Di Fabio RP. Efficacy of comprehensive rehabilitation programs and back school for patients with low back pain: a meta-analysis.
Comprehensive Health Care↗
Short-term physical risk factors for new episodes of low back pain. Prospective evidence from the South Manchester Back Pain Study.
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective population-based cohort study performed in South Manchester, United Kingdom. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether nonoccupational physical activity and indicators of physical stress on the spine predict low back pain in the short term. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is evidence that physical activity outside the workplace helps to protect against low back pain in the long term. However, such activity may injure or stress the spine in the short term. METHODS: A baseline survey questionnaire identified 2715 adults, aged 18-75 years, with no low back pain at the time of the survey. Information on potential predictors of low back pain also was obtained. New episodes of back pain were identified during the subsequent year. RESULTS: A new low back pain episode occurred in 34% of men and 37% of women. Poor general health at baseline was the strongest predictor of a new episode of pain (men: relative risk (RR) 1.5, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.8, 2.7; women: RR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2, 4.0). High weight was associated with subsequent low back pain in women (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0, 2.0), but neither height nor weight predicted low back pain in men. A self-rated low level of physical activity was not consistently linked with subsequent low back pain, nor were specific nonoccupational physical activities, apart from home-improvement work in men and regular sports in women. CONCLUSION: Although some specific activities may be hazardous to the back, physical activity outside the workplace does not increase the short-term risk of low back pain overall. Leisure-time physical activity is not a hazard to the back, whereas poor physical health in both genders and heavier weight in women do increase the risk of new low back pain episodes in the short term.
Adult↗
Can passive prone extensions of the back prevent back problems? A randomized, controlled intervention trial of 314 military conscripts.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Back schools may be effective in treating back problems, but there is conflicting evidence of the effect on prevention. OBJECTIVES: To investigate if passive prone extensions of the back can prevent back problems. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled intervention trial. METHODS: In total, 314 male conscripts were randomized into two groups. After randomization, 65 conscripts dropped out for administrative reasons, leaving 249 conscripts to participate fully in the study. Data were collected through questionnaires at the start of military duty and after 10 months. All conscripts in the intervention group had one 40-minute theoretical lesson on back problems and ergonomics and had to perform passive prone extensions of the back daily during the rest of their military duty. The control group had no intervention. Outcome variables were as follows: 1) number of persons with self-reported back problems during the last 3 weeks; 2) number of persons with self-reported back problems during the last year; and 3) number of persons who reported having consulted the regiment medical physician with back problems during their military service. RESULTS: In an intention-to-treat analysis, significantly fewer persons in the intervention group versus those in the control group reported back problems during the last year (33% versus 51%), and the number needed to prevent was 6. Significantly fewer persons in the intervention group versus those in the control group consulted the regiment infirmary (9% versus 25%), and the number needed to prevent was 6. CONCLUSION: It may be possible to reduce the prevalence rate of back problems and the use of health care services during military service, at a low cost, using passive prone extensions of the back motivated by a back school approach, including the theory of the disc as a pain generator and ergonomic instructions.
Adult↗
Low back pain among endurance athletes with and without specific back loading--a cross-sectional survey of cross-country skiers, rowers, orienteerers, and nonathletic controls.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey among athletes competing at the national elite level in cross-country skiing, rowing, and orienteering, as well as a matched nonathletic control group. OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of symptoms of low back pain between endurance sports with different loading characteristics on the lumbar region: cross-country skiing, rowing, and orienteering, as well as a nonathletic control group. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although it is claimed that back pain is a frequent problem in endurance sports loading the lower spine such as rowing or cross-country skiing, the prevalence of low back problems in such sports has not been compared with relevant control groups. METHODS: Self-reported questionnaire on low back pain adapted for sports based on standardized Nordic questionnaires for musculoskeletal symptoms. Responders were 257 cross-country skiers (response rate: 100%), 199 rowers (99.5%), and 278 orienteerers (99.3%), and 197 control subjects (66%). RESULTS: Low back pain was reported to be somewhat more common among cross-country skiers and rowers than orienteerers and nonathletic controls. The prevalence among cross-country skiers of reported low back pain ever (65.4%) and low back pain during the previous 12 months (63.0%) was higher than nonathletic controls (OR [95% CI]: 1.94 [1.29-2.92]). Rowers (25.6%) reported missing training because of low back pain more frequently than orienteerers did (13.7%, OR: 2.16 [1.25-3.74]). The athletes reported more low back pain during periods when training and competition load was higher, and cross-country skiers more frequently reported having low back problems using classic than freestyle skiing techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Low back pain appears to be somewhat more common in endurance sports that specifically load the low back during training and competition. The relationship between seasonal training patterns and specific skiing techniques indicate that there is a relationship between low back pain and the specific loading patterns of skiing and rowing.
Adult↗
Combination of low back pain and previous low back pain and shoulder stiffness in construction employees.
A postal questionnaire for the prevalence of low back pain was studied with relevance to stiffness of that shoulder and a history of low back disorders in construction employees. The percentage of clerical employees with low back pain was 31.3% and of field workers was 30.3%. Odds ratios representing a relative risk factor for low back pain relating to each age group showed 2.35 in the clerical and 2.10 in the field workers at the age of 30-34 years, and 3.34 and 2.58 at the age of 35-39 years, respectively. In the persons with positive previous low back pain, the prevalence rate of low back pain was 52.6% in the clerical, and 50.2% in the field workers. Odds ratios for low back pain relating to previous low back pain significantly exceeded unity for the clerical employees (OR = 9.53) and the field workers (OR = 10.28), compared to those without a history of previous low back pain. The incidence of stiffness of the shoulder was 48.2% in the clerical and 45.2% in the field workers, and the prevalence rate of low back pain among those with stiffness of the shoulder was 68.5% in the clerical and 65.8% in the field workers. Odds ratio were 3.03 in both groups. Among each age group, the prevalence rate of stiffness of the shoulder with low back pain increased gradually to a maximum in the 45-49 age group of 19%, and then dropped. In those with a history of low back pain and/or stiffness of the shoulder, the prevalence of low back pain showed significantly greater value than other risk factors.
Adult↗
Prevalence of back discomfort and estimates of back load in two manufacturing facilities.
This study evaluated the association between the prevalence of back discomfort and estimates of back load posed by nine jobs in two manufacturing facilities. Prevalence of back discomfort experienced was estimated through self-administered questionnaires. A total of 266 questionnaires were distributed to workers randomly selected from nine jobs in two factories. Workers were asked to rate on a 0-5 scale the discomfort level they experienced in the back for a one-month period before and at the time of the survey. The return rate for each job ranges from 57% to 100%. Overall, 14.5% of the survey respondents experienced some discomfort in the back. With the assistance of a checklist, nine supervisors rated each task of the job they supervised by the magnitude of the force (low, moderate, or high) and by the duration, (less than 30% time, 30% to 50% time, and greater than 50% time) that workers typically spent in awkward back postures, such as back flexion, extension, twisting, and lateral bending. An additional total back load estimate was provided independently by an ergonomist. Logistic regression analysis found a positive association between the back discomfort prevalence observed in the present study and the load estimates both by the ergonomist and by task information based on back twisting. Significant concordance was found between the ergonomist's load estimates and the supervisors' estimate of the duration of twisted back. This study demonstrated not only that a checklist approach could provide useful task information for deriving exposure estimates, but also that exposure estimate for a job could be derived from its constituent tasks. Though in this study it was the supervisor who utilized the checklist to estimate the back loads, there is no reason why experienced workers could not use the checklist to provide similar estimates. A large-scale study should be conducted to improve the design of this checklist approach.
Adolescent↗