Articles: back-pain.
-
A valid method for classifying chronic pain patients into more homogenous groups could be useful for treatment planning, that is, which treatment is effective for which patient, and as a marker when evaluating treatment outcome. One instrument that has been used to derive subgroups of patients is the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate a classification method based on the Swedish version of the MPI, the MPI-S, to predict sick leave among chronic neck and back pain patients for a period of 7 years after vocational rehabilitation. ⋯ Further analyses showed that the difference between patient groups was most pronounced among patients with more than 60days of sickness absence prior to rehabilitation. Cost-effectiveness calculations indicated that the DYS patients showed an increase in production loss compared to AC patients. The present study yields support for the prognostic value of this subgroup classification method concerning long-term outcome on sick leave following this type of vocational rehabilitation.
-
Outcomes of spinal treatments are evaluated by clinical relevance: the proportion of patients who reach a minimum clinically important outcome change. Outcomes are evaluated through multiple measurements, and the inconsistency of outcome change across measurements is not known. ⋯ Efforts should be made to take into account the inconsistency of outcomes and to make clinical relevance more readily understandable by patients and clinicians.
-
Back pain severity has extensively been targeted in clinical and epidemiologic studies. However, despite the importance of a valid pain severity grading its adequate conceptualization in the general population has received comparatively little attention. The potentially misleading influence of measurement error remains unclear. ⋯ This classification showed statistically significant and clinically important associations to health-related variables. Our results confirm the high burden of back pain in the general population but suggest a different categorization of those with severe back pain. This entails consequences on how to best target this important health problem from a public health perspective.
-
We analyzed a statewide survey of individuals with chronic back and neck pain to determine whether prevalence and care use varied by patient race or ethnicity. We conducted a telephone survey of a random sample of 5,357 North Carolina households in 2006. Adults with chronic (>3 months duration or >24 episodes of pain per year), impairing back or neck pain were identified and were asked to complete a survey about their health and care utilization. 837 respondents (620 white, 183 black, 34 Latino) reported chronic back or neck pain. Whites and blacks had similar rates of chronic back pain. Back pain prevalence was lower in Latinos (10.4% [9.3-11.6] vs 6.3% [3.8-8.8]), likely due to their younger age; and the prevalence of chronic, disabling neck pain was lower in blacks (2.5% [1.9-3.1] vs 1.1% [.04-1.9]). Blacks had higher pain scores in the previous 3 months (5.2 vs 5.9 P < .05), and higher Roland disability scores (0-23 point scale): 14.2 vs 16.8, P < .05. Care seeking was similar among races (83% white, 85% black, 72% Latino). Use of opioids was also similar between races, at 49% for whites, 52% for blacks, and trended lower at 35% for Latinos. We found few racial/ethnic differences in care seeking, treatment use, and use of narcotics for the treatment of chronic back and neck pain. ⋯ This article presents new, population-based data on the issue of racial and ethnic disparities in neck- and back-pain prevalence and care. Few disparities were found; care quality issues may affect all ethnic groups similarly. Previous findings of disparities in chronic-pain management may be decreasing, or may perhaps be site specific.
-
We use vertebroplasty for patients with the most severe pain caused by osteoporotic vertebral fractures less than 6 weeks old, and have observed dramatic pain relief in this acute setting. A recent editorial in the Journal, written by the authors of two recent vertebroplasty trials, suggested that vertebroplasty is not an effective therapy for acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The trials described in the editorial sampled a very different patient cohort to the one that we treat with vertebroplasty. Our clinical experience and most of the published literature relating to the benefits of vertebroplasty are in striking contrast to the opinions presented in that editorial.