Search

As a member of the Back Pain Consortium (BACPAC), the University of Pittsburgh Mechanistic Research Center's research goal is to phenotype chronic low back pain using biological, biomechanical, and behavioral domains using a prospective, observational cohort study. Data will be collected from 1,000 participants with chronic low back pain according to BACPAC-wide harmonized and study-specific protocols. Participation lasts 12 months with one required in person baseline visit, an optional second in person visit for advanced biomechanical assessment, and electronic follow ups at months 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 12 to assess low back pain status and response to prescribed treatments. Behavioral data analysis includes a battery of patient-reported outcomes, social determinants of health, quantitative sensory testing, and physical activity. Biological data analysis includes omics generated from blood, saliva, and spine tissue. Biomechanical data analysis includes a physical examination, lumbopelvic kinematics, and intervertebral kinematics. The statistical analysis includes traditional unsupervised machine learning approaches to categorize participants into groups and determine the variables that differentiate patients. Additional analysis includes the creation of a series of decision rules based on baseline measures and treatment pathways as inputs to predict clinical outcomes. The characteristics identified will contribute to future studies to assist clinicians in designing a personalized, optimal treatment approach for each patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) on muscle strengthening and hypertrophy depends on its dose. Patients must tolerate high doses of NMES to maximize gains in muscle function. It is unknown why some patients are able to achieve high NMES dose while others are not. Disability and psychological attributes may play a role in a patient's tolerance of NMES dose. PURPOSE: To explore if disability and psychological attributes associate with the ability to achieve high doses of NMES in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Cross-sectional study. Forty subjects with RA participated in 2 sessions of NMES intervention to the quadriceps muscles. The highest NMES dose achieved by each subject was recorded. Dose was defined as the torque produced by the NMES as a percentage of the torque produced during a maximum voluntary isometric contraction. Subjects were then grouped in high or low NMES dose. Variables investigated in this study included disability, pain coping strategies, pain acceptance, sense of mastery or control, anxiety, and depression. Correlations were sought between these factors and NMES dose. MAIN RESULTS: In unadjusted models, disability, coping self-statements, catastrophizing, and anxiety were predictors of NMES dose. In adjusted models only disability (OR = 0.17 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.77]) and catastrophizing (OR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.72, 0.99]) predicted NMES dose. CONCLUSION: Patients with RA with lower disability and lower catastrophising achieve higher doses of NMES. Identifying factors associated with achieving high NMES dose may guide strategies to improve effectiveness of this intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the highlights of the Vitalizing Practice Through Research and Research Through Practice Conference hosted by the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA). The aim of the conference is mentioned which is to bridge the gaps between physical therapist clinicians and researchers, and to reinforce the importance of translational research to the profession. The assumptions which guided the planning of meeting discussions and recommendations that emerged are discussed.

• Electrical stimulation was tolerable in patients with chronic low back pain. • Stabilization exercises with NMES did not add clinical benefit for the CLBP. • Because of the small sample; clinicians should interpreting the results cautiously. One proposed mechanism of chronic low back pain might be paraspinal muscle impairment. Commonly, this impairment is treated with stabilization exercises. However, the effect size of stabilization exercises has been previously reported to be small. Randomized controlled trial. To investigate the clinical benefit of using neuromuscular electrical stimulation as a supplement to stabilization exercises in patients with chronic low back pain. Thirty participants with chronic low back pain were randomized into a stabilization exercise only group (n = 15) or a stabilization exercise plus neuromuscular electrical stimulation group (n = 15). The stabilization exercises included abdominal, side support, and quadruped exercises. The neuromuscular electrical stimulation was applied to the lumbar paraspinal muscles for 20 min each session. Both groups received their respective interventions twice a week for 6 weeks. Participant eligibility for inclusion was age between 18 and 60 years, body mass index ≤34, chronic low back pain ≥3 months, Numeric Pain Rating Scale ≥3, Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire score ≥20 and ability to understand English. Outcome measurements were self-reported neuromuscular electrical stimulation tolerability scale, Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and paraspinal muscle strength. The neuromuscular electrical stimulation was reported to be tolerable. There were no significant between-group differences on any of the outcome measures (p > 0.05). The application of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on the paraspinal muscles was reported to be tolerable. Supplementing stabilization exercises with neuromuscular electrical stimulation did not offer any additional clinical benefit for the chronic low back pain patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: A randomized clinical trial was conducted., Objective: To compare the effectiveness of classification-based physical therapy with that of therapy based on clinical practice guidelines for patients with acute, work-related low back pain., Summary of Background Data: Clinical practice guidelines recommend minimal intervention during the first few weeks after acute low back injury. However, studies supporting this recommendation have not attempted to identify which patients are likely to respond to particular interventions., Methods: For this study, 78 subjects with work-related low back pain of less than 3 weeks duration were randomized to receive therapy based on a classification system that attempts to match patients to specific interventions or therapy based on the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines. The subjects were followed for 1 year. Outcomes included the impairment index, Oswestry scale, SF-36 component scores, satisfaction, medical costs, and return to work status., Results: After adjustment for baseline factors, subjects receiving classification-based therapy showed greater change on the Oswestry (P = 0.023) and the SF-36 physical component (P = 0.029) after 4 weeks. Patient satisfaction was greater (P = 0.006) and return to full-duty work status more likely (P = 0.017) after 4 weeks in the classification-based group. After 1 year, there was a trend toward reduced Oswestry scores in the classification-based group (P = 0.063). Median total medical costs for 1 year after injury were 1003.68 dollars for the guideline-based group and 774.00 dollars for the classification-based group (P = 0.13)., Conclusions: For patients with acute, work-related low back pain, the use of a classification-based approach resulted in improved disability and return to work status after 4 weeks, as compared with therapy based on clinical practice guidelines. Further research is needed on the optimal timing and methods of intervention for patients with acute low back pain.