nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.04.2009 | Review

Identification of prognostic factors for chronicity in patients with low back pain: a review of screening instruments

verfasst von: M. Melloh, A. Elfering, C. Egli Presland, C. Roeder, T. Barz, C. Rolli Salathé, O. Tamcan, U. Mueller, J. C. Theis

Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics | Ausgabe 2/2009

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is currently the most prevalent and costly musculoskeletal problem in modern societies. Screening instruments for the identification of prognostic factors in LBP may help to identify patients with an unfavourable outcome. In this systematic review screening instruments published between 1970 and 2007 were identified by a literature search. Nine different instruments were analysed and their different items grouped into ten structures. Finally, the predictive effectiveness of these structures was examined for the dependent variables including “work status“, “functional limitation”, and “pain“. The strongest predictors for “work status” were psychosocial and occupational structures, whereas for “functional limitation” and “pain” psychological structures were dominating. Psychological and occupational factors show a high reliability for the prognosis of patients with LBP. Screening instruments for the identification of prognostic factors in patients with LBP should include these factors as a minimum core set.

Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, Hildebrandt J, Klaber-Moffett J, Kovacs F, Mannion AF, Reis S, Staal JB, Ursin H, Zanoli G (2006) Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Eur Spine J 15(Suppl 2):S192–S300PubMedCrossRef

Gobel H (2001) Epidemiology and costs of chronic pain syndromes exemplified by specific and unspecific low back pain. Schmerz 15:92–98PubMedCrossRef

Grotle M, Vollestad NK, Brox JI (2006) Screening for yellow flags in first-time acute low back pain: reliability and validity of a Norwegian version of the Acute Low Back Pain Screening Questionnaire. Clin J Pain 22:458–467. doi:10.1097/01.ajp.0000208243.33498.cb PubMedCrossRef

Hazard RG, Haugh LD, Reid S, Preble JB, MacDonald L (1996) Early prediction of chronic disability after occupational low back injury. Spine 21:945–951PubMedCrossRef

Heneweer H, Aufdemkampe G, van Tulder MW, Kiers H, Stappaerts KH, Vanhees L (2007) Psychosocial variables in patients with (sub)acute low back pain: an inception cohort in primary care physical therapy in The Netherlands. Spine 32:586–592. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000256447.72623.56 PubMedCrossRef

Hurley DA, Dusoir TE, McDonough SM, Moore AP, Baxter GD (2001) How effective is the acute low back pain screening questionnaire for predicting 1-year follow-up in patients with low back pain? Clin J Pain 17:256–263PubMedCrossRef

Huyse FJ, Lyons JS, Stiefel FC, Slaets JP, de Jonge P, Fink P, Gans RO, Guex P, Herzog T, Lobo A, Smith GC, van Schijndel RS (1999) “INTERMED”: a method to assess health service needs. I. Development and reliability. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 21(1):39-48

Ibrahim T, Tleyjeh IM, Gabbar O (2008) Surgical versus non-surgical treatment of chronic low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Int Orthop 32:107–113. doi:10.1007/s00264-006-0269-6 PubMedCrossRef

Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM, Strom SE (1995) The Chronic Pain Coping Inventory: development and preliminary validation. Pain 60(2):203–216

10.

Katz JN (2006) Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(Suppl 2):21–24PubMedCrossRef

11.

Linton SJ, Boersma K (2003) Early identification of patients at risk of developing a persistent back problem: the predictive validity of the Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire. Clin J Pain 19:80–86PubMedCrossRef

12.

Linton SJ, Hallden K (1998) Can we screen for problematic back pain? A screening questionnaire for predicting outcome in acute and subacute back pain. Clin J Pain 14:209–215PubMedCrossRef

13.

Melloh M, Aebli N, Elfering A, Roder C, Zweig T, Barz T, Herbison P, Hendrick P, Bajracharya S, Stout K, Theis JC (2008) Development of a screening tool predicting the transition from acute to chronic low back pain for patients in a GP setting: protocol of a multinational prospective cohort study [ACTRN12608000520336]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord (under review)

14.

Melloh M, Roder C, Elfering A, Theis JC, Muller U, Staub LP, Aghayev E, Zweig T, Barz T, Kohlmann T, Wieser S, Juni P, Zwahlen M (2008) Differences across health care systems in outcome and cost-utility of surgical and conservative treatment of chronic low back pain: a study protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:81. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-9-81 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Neubauer E, Junge A, Pirron P, Seemann H, Schiltenwolf M (2006) HKF-R 10 - screening for predicting chronicity in acute low back pain (LBP): a prospective clinical trial. Eur J Pain 10:559–566. doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2005.08.002 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Pfingsten M (2004) Fear avoidance beliefs in patients with back pain. Psychometric properties of the German version of the FABQ. Schmerz 18:17–27PubMedCrossRef

17.

Pincus T, Burton AK, Vogel S, Field AP (2002) A systematic review of psychological factors as predictors of chronicity/disability in prospective cohorts of low back pain. Spine 27:E109–E120PubMedCrossRef

18.

Reis S, Borkan J, Vanraalte R, Tamir A, Dahan R, Hermoni D (2007) The LBP patient perception scale: a new predictor of LBP episode outcomes among primary care patients. Patient Educ Couns 67:191–195. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2007.03.015 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Scerri M, de Goumoens P, Fritsch C, Van Melle G, Stiefel F, So A (2006) The INTERMED questionnaire for predicting return to work after a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for chronic low back pain. Joint Bone Spine 73:736–741. doi:10.1016/j.jbspin.2005.12.012 PubMedCrossRef

20.

Schmidt CO, Kohlmann T (2005) What do we know about the symptoms of back pain? Epidemiological results on prevalence, incidence, progression and risk factors. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 143:292–298PubMedCrossRef

21.

Schultz IZ, Crook J, Berkowitz J, Milner R, Meloche GR (2005) Predicting return to work after low back injury using the Psychosocial Risk for Occupational Disability Instrument: a validation study. J Occup Rehabil 15:365–376PubMedCrossRef

22.

Shaw WS, Pransky G, Fitzgerald TE (2001) Early prognosis for low back disability: intervention strategies for health care providers. Disabil Rehabil 23:815–828PubMedCrossRef

23.

Staerkle R, Mannion AF, Elfering A, Junge A, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Grob D, Dvorak J, Boos N (2004) Longitudinal validation of the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire (FABQ) in a Swiss-German sample of low back pain patients. Eur Spine J 13:332–340PubMedCrossRef

24.

Steenstra IA, Verbeek JH, Heymans MW, Bongers PM (2005) Prognostic factors for duration of sick leave in patients sick listed with acute low back pain: a systematic review of the literature. Occup Environ Med 62:851–860PubMedCrossRef

25.

Stiefel FC, de Jonge P, Huyse FJ, Slaets JP, Guex P, Lyons JS, Vannotti M, Fritsch C, Moeri R, Leyvraz PF, So A, Spagnoli J (1999) INTERMED-an assessment and classification system for case complexity. Results in patients with low back pain. Spine 24:378–384, discussion 385PubMedCrossRef

26.

Truchon M, Cote D (2005) Predictive validity of the Chronic Pain Coping Inventory in subacute low back pain. Pain 116:205–212. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2005.04.003 PubMedCrossRef

27.

van Tulder MW, Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, Bouter LM (1997) Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. Spine 22:2323–2330PubMedCrossRef

28.

Waddell G, Burton AK (2001) Occupational health guidelines for the management of low back pain at work: evidence review. Occup Med (Lond) 51:124–135CrossRef

29.

Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52:157–168PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Identification of prognostic factors for chronicity in patients with low back pain: a review of screening instruments
verfasst von: M. Melloh
A. Elfering
C. Egli Presland
C. Roeder
T. Barz
C. Rolli Salathé
O. Tamcan
U. Mueller
J. C. Theis
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2009
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: International Orthopaedics / Ausgabe 2/2009
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0707-8

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Identification of prognostic factors for chronicity in patients with low back pain: a review of screening instruments

Abstract

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2009

Midterm results following revision surgery in clubfeet

Emergence of the alumina matrix composite in total hip arthroplasty

Stability comparison of anterior cruciate ligament between double- and single-bundle reconstructions

Experimental study of nano-HA artificial bone with different pore sizes for repairing the radial defect

Minimally invasive dynamic hip screw for fixation of hip fractures

Comparison of the modified subvastus and medial parapatellar approaches in total knee arthroplasty

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie