Background
Methods
-
Adolescent: individual aged 11–19 years old.
-
Adult: individual aged 20 years and older.
-
Low back pain: Pain experienced in the lumbar region of the spine.
-
Musculoskeletal condition: Affecting the muscles and/or skeleton of the spinal column.
-
Africa: All countries located on the African continent.
-
Prevalence: the total number of cases of a disease in a given population at a specific time.
Search Strategy
Inclusion criteria
Methodological appraisal
A: Is the final sample representative of the target population? 1. At least one of the following must apply in the study: an entire target population, randomly selected sample, or sample stated to represent the target population. 2. At least one of the following: reasons for nonresponse described, nonresponders described, comparison of responders and nonresponders, or comparison of sample and target population. 3. Response rate and, if applicable, drop-out rate reported. | |
B: Quality of the data?
4. Were the data primary data of low back pain or was it taken from a survey not specifically designed for that purpose? 5. Were the data collected from each adult directly or were they collected from a proxy? 6. Was the same mode of data collection used for all subjects? 7. At least one of the following in case of questionnaire: a validated questionnaire or at least tested for reproducibility. 8. At least one of the following in the case of an interview: Interview validated, tested for reproducibility, or adequately described and standardized. 9. At least one of the following in the case of an examination: Examination validated, tested for reproducibility, or adequately described and standardized. | |
C: Definition of low back pain (LBP)
10. Was there a precise anatomic delineation of the lumbar area or reference to an easily obtainable article that contains such specification? 11. Was there further useful specification of the definition of LBP, or question(s) put to study subjects quoted such as the frequency, duration or intensity, and character of the pain. Or was there reference to an easily obtainable article that contains such specification? 12. Were recall periods clearly stated: e.g., 1 week, 1 month or lifetime? |
Evidence hierarchy
Level 1 | Meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials |
Level 2a | One randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) |
Level 2b | One non-randomized, or non-controlled, or non-blinded clinical trial |
Level 3 | Observational studies |
Level 4 | Pre-post test clinical trials |
Level 5 | Descriptive studies |
Level 6 | Anecdotal evidence |
Data extraction
Data analysis
Results
Evidence hierarchy
General description of the studies reviewed
Study | Country | Study design | Tool | Urban or rural | Setting | Sample size | Population | Age:Yrs | Gender | Response rate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mulimba 199019
| Nairobi | Retrospective | E | Urban | Private clinic | 2201 | Ortho patients | 11–75 | F/M | NM |
Bezzaoucha 199221
| Algiers | Survey | Q | Rural | Community | 6956 | Residents | 15 + | F/M | NM |
Bwanahali et al 199222
| Zaire | Retrospective | Q | Rural | Hospital | 169 | OPD patients | F/M | NM | |
Harris 199320
| South Africa | Survey | Q | Urban | Clubs | 110 | Cricketers | 15–35 | M | 90 |
Schierhout et al 199329
| South Africa | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 155 | Factory workers | NM | F/M | 100 |
Mijiyawa et al 200024
| Togo | Retrospective | Q | Rural | Hospital | 9065 | OPD patients | 17–94 | F/M | 100 |
Omokhodion et al 200025
| Nigeria | Cross-sectional | Q | Rural | Hospital | 74 | Hospital staff | 20–60 | F/M | 93 |
Worku 200011
| South Africa | Retrospective | Q | Rural | Community | 4001 | Mothers | NM | F | 100 |
Wallner-Scholtfeldt et al 200030
| South Africa | Survey | Q | Urban | Work | 196 | Workers | 23–59 | M | 64 |
Omokhodion 200226
| Nigeria | Cross-sectional | Q | Rural | Houses | 900 | Residents | 20–85 | F/M | 100 |
Mbaye et al 200023
| Senegal | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 69 | Workers | M | NM | |
Omokhodion et al 200315
| Nigeria | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 1285 | Office workers | 20–60 | F/M | 66 |
Igumbor et al 200331
| Zimbabwe | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 198 | Physiotherapists | 23–76 | F/M | 72 |
Omokhodion 200416
| Nigeria | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Community | 474 | Residents | 20–82 | F/M | 100 |
Govender 200432
| South Africa | Survey | Q | Urban | Hospital | 320 | Nurses | 20–62 | F/M | 68 |
Puckree et al 200433
| South Africa | Survey | Q | Urban | Schools | 320 | Scholars | 11–14 | F/M | 55 |
Prista et al 200427
| Mozambique | Survey | Q | Rural/urban | Schools | 204 | Scholars | 11–16 | F/M | 85 |
Fabunmi et al 200541
| Nigeria | Survey | Q | Rural | Farms | 500 | Farmers | 25–84 | F/M | 100 |
Sanya et al 200542
| Nigeria | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Industry | 604 | Industrial workers | 20–60 | F/M | 53 |
Bejia (Adol) et al 200534
| Tunisia | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Schools | 622 | Scholars | 11–19 | F/M | 98 |
Jordaan et al 200528
| South Africa | Cross sectional | Q | Rural/Urban | Schools | 1123 | Scholars | 13–18 | F/M | 89 |
Adedoyin et al 200535
| Nigeria | Survey | Q | Urban | Universities | 1115 | Computer users | NM | F/M | 93 |
Bejia (hosp) et al 200536
| Tunisia | Survey | Q | Urban | Hospital | 350 | Hospital staff | 18–60 | F/M | 100 |
Van Vuuren et al 200537
| South Africa | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 109 | Workers | NM | M | 96 |
Galukande et al 200538
| Uganda | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Hospital | 204 | Outpatients | 19–86 | F/M | 100 |
Van Vuuren et al 200539
| South Africa | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 366 | Workers | NM | NM | 100 |
Van Vuuren et al 200640
| South Africa | Cross-sectional | Q | Urban | Work | 366 | Workers | NM | M | 100 |
Definition of low back pain
Author | Back pain definition |
---|---|
Bezzaoucha 199221
| Existence of pain in the lumbar region |
Wallner-Schlotfedlt et al 200030
| Pain in the lumbar region |
Omokhodion 200226
| Graphic representation of lumbar area |
Govender 200432
| Pain between the 12th rib and gluteal fold |
Puckree et al 200433
| Pain in specific region of the body |
Prista et al 200427
| Pain in the lumbar area |
Fabunmi et al 200541
| A condition of pain, aches, stiffness, or fatique localized to lower back or lumbosacral region of spine |
Jordaan et al 200528
| Pain or discomfort in the lower part of your back |
Bejia et al 200536
| Mechanical pain of the lower part of your back |
Galukande et al 200538
| Pain limited to the region between the lower margins of the 12th rib and the gluteal folds |
Treatment
Study(author) | Treatment type | Treatment reported |
---|---|---|
Omokhodion et al 200025
| rest, analgesics | 70% analgesics; 29% rest |
Omokhodion 200226
| analgesics, orthodox health care personnel, non-orthodoxed personnel, patent medicine stored, traditional healers, drug peddlers, rest | Rest 80%; Analgesics 18% No treatment 42% |
Omokhodion et al 200315
| health practitioner, rest | |
Igumbor et al 200331
| rest, physician and other therapists | |
Omokhodion 200416
| analgesics, health practitioner, anti-inflammatory drugs, clinic, hospital, chemist | Analgesics 61%; Seen medical practitioner 77% |
Govender 200432
| medication, rest, physiotherapy, hospital admission, manipulation, acupuncture, surgery | Medication73%; Rest 59%; Physiotherapy 46% Hospital admission 26% |
Bejia et al 200534
| Physiotherapy, medical officer | 32% had treatment (Medical officer or physiotherapy); |
Bejia et al 200536
| physiotherapy, self medication, surgery, rest, thermal water care | Medication 42%, Physiotherapy 15%, Surgery 0.0002% |
Methodological appraisal
Criterion no. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | % | MA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mulimba 199019
| √ | X | X | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | X |
X
|
X
|
X
| 40 |
N
|
Bezzaoucha 199221
| √ | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | X |
√
| 70 |
Y
|
Bwanahali et al 199222
| X | X | √ | X | X | √ | x | NA | NA | x | x | x | 20 |
N
|
Harris 199320
| X | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 60 |
N
|
Schierhout et al 199329
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | X |
√
| 70 |
Y
|
Mijiyawa et al 200024
| X | X | √ | X | X | √ | X | NA | NA | X | X |
√
| 30 |
N
|
Omokhodion et al 200025
| √ | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 70 |
Y
|
Worku 200011
| √ | X | √ | X | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 60 |
N
|
Wallner-Scholtfeldt et al 200030
| X | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 80 |
Y
|
Omokhodion 200226
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Mbaye et al 200023
| X | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 60 |
N
|
Omokhodion et al 200315
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | X |
√
| 70 |
Y
|
Igumbor et al 200331
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 80 |
Y
|
Omokhodion 200416
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Go√ender 200432
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Puckree et al 200433
| X | X | √ | X | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | X | X |
√
| 50 |
N
|
Prista et al 200427
| √ | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Fabunmi et al 200541
| √ | X | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | √ | √ | √ | 80 |
Y
|
Sanya et al 200542
| √ | x | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ | √ | 70 |
Y
|
Bejia (Adol) et al 200534
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 100 |
Y
|
Jordaan et al 200528
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 100 |
Y
|
Adedoyin et al 200535
| X | √ | √ | X | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 60 |
N
|
Bejia (hosp) et al 200536
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Van Vuuren et al 200537
| √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 90 |
Y
|
Galukande et al 200538
| X | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | √ | √ |
√
| 80 |
Y
|
Van Vuuren et al 200539
| X | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 60 |
N
|
Van Vuuren et al 200640
| √ | X | √ | √ | √ | √ | X | NA | NA | X | √ |
√
| 70 |
Y
|
LBP prevalence
Point prevalence for high quality studies including males and females
One-year prevalence for high quality studies including males and females
Lifetime prevalence for high quality studies including males and females
Studies reporting on male LBP prevalence only
Sensitivity analysis
Study | Point prevalence | One year prevalence | Lifetime prevalence | Population/setting |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mulimba 199019
| 10 | - | - | Orthopaedic clinic |
Bwanahali et al 199222
| 47 | - | - | Rheumatology clinic |
Harris 199320
| 62 | - | - | In cricketers |
Worku 200011
| 10 | - | - | Rural community/mothers |
Mijiyawa et al 200024
| 35 | - | - | Rheumatology unit |
Mbaye et al 200223
| - | - | - | Transport company |
Puckree et al 200433
| - | - | - | School children |
Adedoyin et al 200535
| 74 | - | - | Computer users |
Van Vuuren et al 200539
| 36 | 56 | 64 | Steel industry |
Risk factors
Author | Risk factor | Odds ratio(95% CI) |
---|---|---|
Omokhodion et al 200416
| Past history of smoking | 6.24 (1.33–29.23) |
Jordaan et al 200528
| Smoking tobacco | 1.69 (1.03–3.07) |
Omokhodion et al 200416
| Farming | 4.06 (1.24–12.95) |
Prista et al 200427
| Urban school area | 3.07 (0.99–9.48) |
Prista et al 200427
| Walking >30 min | 4.76 (1.61–14.28) |
Bejia et al 200534
| School failure | 2.6 (1.96–3.8) |
Bejia et al 200534
| Football | 3.07 92.15–5.1) |
Bejia et al 200534
| Dissatisfaction with school chair | 3.4 (2.24–5.29) |
Bejia et al 2005 (adults)36
| LBP history | 18.6 (2.92–35.04) |
Bejia et al 2005 (adults)36
| LBP history | 6.46 (1.86–17.52) |
Omokhodion et al 200416
| History of trauma | 4.14 (1.99–8.61) |
Bejia et al 200534
| LBP family history | 3.8 (2.94–5.92) |
Bejia et al 2005 (adults)36
| Psychological profile | 1.93 (1.01–3.9) |
Bejia et al 2005 (adults)36
| Married/divorced | 4.79 (1.56–22.57) |