Back Pain
It is a common condition that can be caused by a variety of factors, including muscle strain, herniated discs, arthritis, or underlying medical conditions.
Effective management of back pain often involves a combination of treatments, such as physical therapy, pain medication, and lifestyle changes.
Researchers utilize various protocols to study the epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment options for back pain, aiming to develop more effective interventions and improve patient outcomes.
PubCompare.ai can assist researchers by identifying relevant protocols from the literature, preprints, and patents, and providin data-driven insights to enhance back pain studies.
Most cited protocols related to «Back Pain»
The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) includes two scales that assess pain intensity and pain-related functional impairment (physical and emotional).13 ,15 (link) The four items of the BPI severity scale assess the intensity of current pain and pain at its least, worst, and average during the past week on scales from 0 (“no pain”) to 10 (“pain as bad as you can imagine”). The BPI interference scale assesses pain-related functional interference with seven items assessing different domains (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life) rated from 0 (“does not interfere”) to 10 (“interferes completely”).
The Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire (CPG) includes two three-item scales (intensity and disability) that are transformed into 0–100 scores.19 (link) An algorithm classifies pain into four graded categories: 1) low disability-low intensity, 2) low disability-high intensity, 3) high disability-moderately limiting, and 4) high disability-severely limiting. The CPG has been validated in primary care, chronic pain, and general populations.20 (link)–22 (link)
The Roland Disability questionnaire is a pain-specific measure of physical disability validated in patients with back pain and other chronic pain conditions.23 (link),24 (link) It includes a checklist of 24 statements about pain effects on function; the score is the number of items endorsed.
The Short-Form 36-item questionnaire (SF-36) Bodily Pain Scale is a two item scale assessing pain severity and interference.25 (link),26 Responses are transformed into a 0–100 score.
The Pain Global Rating of Change is a single item assessing patients’ overall impression of change in their pain. Study 1 participants were asked whether their pain was worse, about the same, or better since the start of the study. Those who reported that pain was better were asked to rate the magnitude of improvement (a little, somewhat, moderately, a lot, or completely better). Global ratings of change may be more sensitive to improvement and better correlated with patient satisfaction than serial measures.27 (link)
The Functional Morbidity Index was developed to assess general functional status in older adults.28 (link) Patients indicate whether they are able perform four different activities independently, and if not, whether the impairment is due to a health problem.
Overall Pain Distress is a single item: “How much did overall pain distress or bother you during the past week?” Response options are not at all, a little bit, somewhat, quite a bit, and very much.
Most recents protocols related to «Back Pain»
The Nordic questionnaire of back pain [19 (link)], adjusted for sport specific settings [20 (link)], was used to examine the lifetime and one-year prevalence of thoracolumbar back pain as well as training volume of the participants. The Nordic questionnaire of back pain has shown acceptable test–retest reliability and validity to clinical examination [19 (link), 20 (link)]. Based on the sport adjusted Nordic questionnaire, questions focusing on training volume between 10 and 20 years of age were computed, since athletes are plausibly more susceptible to develop radiographic spinal changes of the spine during the growth spurt [13 (link), 21 (link)]. The Oswestry back pain disability index [22 (link)] was used to examine disability associated to thoracic and lumbar back pain.
Since high cumulative training load and pre-growth spurt training debut are plausible risk factors for developing spinal changes, inclusion criteria were based on a combination of criteria where climbers had been exposed to these plausible risks. Inclusion criteria of all climbing participants were: a minimum climbing level of elite during last 12 months, as classified by the International Rock Climbing Research Association (IRCRA) [18 (link)], age over 18 years, having a minimum of five years of climbing experience, current or previous participation in national or international climbing competitions and frequent use of bouldering as a training method. Since elite-level climbers already constitute a limited study sample, the inclusion was not limited by an upper age limit, nor was back pain included as a parameter in the inclusion criteria.
A control group was recruited, matched in terms of age and sex, through advertisement on social media. Participants voluntarily reported their interest to participate in the study. For the control group, any experience of regular climbing, as well as previous or present participation on elite level, in any sport, led to exclusion. Individuals that had tried climbing on a few occasions were allowed to participate. Exclusion criteria for all participants were prior spinal surgery, and contraindications to undergo MRI.
The MRI images were classified by a senior radiologist (> 15 years of experience) according to a predetermined standardized protocol. Disc degeneration was classified according to the Pfirrmann classification [23 (link)]. In the thoracic spine, no distinction between Pfirrmann grade 1 and grade 2 was made since the resolution of the images was not considered adequate for reliable differentiation between these grades. Vertebral and endplate changes were classified according to the Modic classification [24 (link)] and a modified Endplate defect score, adapted to our MRI protocol. The Endplate defect score [25 (link)] was modified where Type I-III (representing no degeneration) were pooled (Table
Modified endplate score, based on the original endplate defect score [25 (link)]
Modified endplate defect score | Original endplate defect score |
---|---|
1 | Type I—Normal endplate with no interruption |
Type II—Thinning of the endplate, no obvious break | |
Type III—Focal endplate defect with established disc marrow contact but with maintained endplate contour | |
2 | Type IV—Endplate defects < 25% of the endplate area |
3 | Type V—Endplate defects up to 50% of the endplate area |
4 | Type VI—Extensive damaged endplates up to total destruction |
For inference testing of spinal parameters, all non-dichotomous spinal parameters were dichotomized according to the established cut off for degenerative findings for each classification system (Pfirrmann ≥ 3, Endplate defect score ≥ 2, Modic ≥ 1).
For comparison of training amount, thoracolumbar back pain, and spinal changes between groups; Fisher ´s Exact test (lowest 1-sided p-value multiplied by 2) was used for dichotomous variables and the Mantel–Haenszel Chi Square Exact test was used for ordered categorical variables. The Fisher ´s Non-Parametric Permutation Test was used for continuous variables. The cumulative number of IVDs/levels/vertebrae per participant were compared between the climbing and control group.
Intra-observer and inter-observer reliability measures were analyzed with Gwent’s agreement coefficient with type 1 utilized for nominal and dichotomous variables and type 2 for ordinal variables.
Top products related to «Back Pain»
More about "Back Pain"
This common condition can arise from a variety of factors, such as muscle strain, herniated intervertebral discs, joint arthritis, or underlying medical issues.
Effective management often entails a combination of treatments, including physical therapy, pain medication, and lifestyle modifications.
Researchers utilize various protocols, such as those found in SAS 9.4, SPSS 20, R 3.6.1, and Stata 14, to study the epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment options for back pain, with the ultimate goal of developing more effective interventions and improving patient outcomes.
PubCompare.ai can assist researchers by identifying relevant protocols from the literature, preprints, and patents, and providing data-driven insights to enhance back pain studies and unlock more reproducible and accurate findings.