• Eur J Pain · Aug 2005

    Comparative Study

    Do psychological factors increase the risk for back pain in the general population in both a cross-sectional and prospective analysis?

    • Steven James Linton.
    • Department of Behavioral, Social and Legal Sciences-Psychology, Orebro University, Orebro, Sweden. steven.linton@orebroll.se
    • Eur J Pain. 2005 Aug 1;9(4):355-61.

    AbstractThis study aimed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of background, individual and workplace psychological risk factors to investigated their relationship with spinal pain. Because there is some doubt as to whether the results of cross-sectional findings hold in longitudinal studies, a prospective study was superimposed upon a cross-sectional design of the effects of psychological variables on back pain and function to determine, whether similar results are obtained. Participants were workers randomly selected from the general population, where 372 had not experienced pain during the past year, and 209 had experienced considerable pain problems. A cross-sectional comparison of these groups using multivariate statistics indicated that the most potent risk factors were psychological distress (odds ratio=13.2) and poor function (odds ratio=6.4). Much smaller levels of risk were found for perceived workload, gender and foreign birth. Those participants with no pain were followed for one year to determine development of a spinal pain problem. Although few participants developed a significant pain problem, the prospective analyses showed that psychological distress (odds ratio=2.2), catastrophizing (odds ratio=3.0), and workload (odds ratio=2.3) produced the highest odds ratios. Taken together these results underscore the need for a multidimensional view of the development of pain disability. Moreover, individual psychological factors such as distress and catastrophizing as well as work place factors like work load were found to be highly related to the development of back pain in a sample of workers from the general population. The cross-sectional and prospective results were similar in character and demonstrate that cross-sectional studies may provide valuable information. Because psychological variables were relevant very early on, these factors may be important targets for pain prevention programs.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…