UNASSIGNED: Healthcare work is a major risk for having musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), including low back pain (LBP). This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of LBP and define its associated risk factors among resident physicians.
UNASSIGNED: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted among all resident physicians of all specialties in Abha city during the period from July 2020 to September 2020. Data were collected using an online pre-structured data collection tool. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) (back pain section) was applied to assess the effect of LBP on the residents\' ability to perform job duties effectively.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 312 resident physicians responded. Their age ranged between 25 and 41 years. Males represented 57.7% of them. The prevalence of LBP was 64.7%. The most common reported aggravating factors for LBP were working in uncomfortable posture (73.3%), standing for long periods (64.4%), and long sitting sessions (51.5%). Regarding the pain-relieving factors, sleeping ranked first (60.4%), followed by taking analgesics (48.5%) and maintaining a good posture (35.6%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that obese subjects were at higher risk than underweight subjects to develop LBP (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) =6.18, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.26-30.34, P = 0.025). Compared to resident physicians without family history of back pain, those with such history were at almost 4-fold higher risk of developing LBP (AOR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.33-6.52, P < 0.001).
UNASSIGNED: LBP is a very prevalent problem among resident physicians, particularly obese subjects and those with family history of back pain. LBP adversely impacts the work performance of the affected physicians.

UNASSIGNED: Low back pain (LBP) is the most frequent indication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations of the lumbosacral spine. The individual role of soft tissues, including muscles, on LBP is not fully understood and the contribution of each MRI-derived parameter of soft tissues status on the intensity of LBP has not been investigated in detail.
UNASSIGNED: The study design was observational retrospective, single center carried out at a University Hospital. Images were acquired using a using a 1.5 Tesla scanner. Patients completed a symptom questionnaire and rated their pain intensity using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The VAS scores ​​were categorized as mild, moderate, and severe using cutoff values of 3.8 and 5.7, based on the literature. Biometric data, including weight and height, were also recorded to calculate the body mass index (BMI). The ratios between intramuscular fat infiltration and net muscle area were also calculated. Patient sample included 94 patients with LBP underwent MRI of the lumbosacral spine.
UNASSIGNED: The stepwise analysis revealed that increasing psoas net area was associated with lower VAS levels (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-0.98; p=.005), and an increase of one square centimeter of total psoas area resulted in a greater probability of reporting a mild (+1.21%; 95% CI: 0.37, 2.05%) or a moderate VAS (+0.40%; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.82%), Furthermore, a more severe VAS was associated with a higher BMI (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.00-1.27).
UNASSIGNED: Our study demonstrates a relationship between LBP and MRI parameters of paravertebral and psoas muscles status. The psoas muscle is extremely important for spine stabilization and is linked to clinical symptoms of patients affected by LBP. These findings could contribute to future studies and improve treatment options in patients with LBP, possibly reducing the impact on disability, quality of life and socioeconomical burden.

暂无摘要。

Background: The World Health Organization reports that back pain is a major cause of disorder worldwide. It is the most common musculoskeletal disorder with limited pain, muscle tension, and stiffness, and 70-80% of all individuals experience it once in their lifetime, with higher prevalence in women than in men. This study aimed to investigate the effects of gluteal muscle strengthening exercise- based core stabilization training (GSE-based CST) on pain, function, fear-avoidance patterns, and quality of life in patients with chronic back pain. Methods: This study included 34 patients with non-specific chronic low back pain. Seventeen individuals each were included in GSE-based CST and control groups. The GSE-based CST group performed GSE and CST for 15 min, three times a week for four weeks, and the control group performed CST for 30 min a day, three times a week for four weeks. The numeric pain rating scale was used to evaluate pain before and after treatment, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire was used to evaluate function, fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire was used to evaluate fear-avoidance patterns, and quality of life was measured using the short form-36. Results: In this study, pain, function, and fear-avoidance pattern decreased significantly in both groups (All p < 0.05). During the evaluation of quality of life, both groups showed significant increase in physical and mental factors (p < 0.05). There were significant differences in pain and quality of life (p < 0.05) between the GSE-based CST and control groups. Conclusions: Therefore, GSE-based CST can be used as a basis for effective intervention to enhance pain, function, fear-avoidance patterns, and quality of life, emphasizing the need for gluteal muscle strengthening exercises in patients with non-specific chronic back pain in the future.

Genipin polymers are self-forming tensile-load-carrying oligomers, derived from the gardenia fruit, that covalently bond to amines on collagen. The potential therapeutic mechanical benefits of a non-discrete in situ forming mesh of genipin oligomers for degraded spinal discs were first conceived in 1998. Over more than two decades, numerous studies have demonstrated the immediate mechanical effects of this injectable, intra-annular polymeric mesh including an early demonstration of an effect on clinical outcomes for chronic or recurrent discogenic low back pain. This literature review focused on articles investigating mechanical effects in cadaveric animal and human spinal discs, biochemical mechanism of action studies, articles describing the role of mechanical degradation in the pathogenesis of degenerative disc disease, initial clinical outcomes and articles describing current discogenic low back pain treatment algorithms. On the basis of these results, clinical indications that align with the capabilities of this novel injectable polymer-based treatment strategy are discussed. It is intended that this review of a novel nano-scale material-based solution for mechanical deficiencies in biologically limited tissues may provide a helpful example for other innovations in spinal diseases and similarly challenging musculoskeletal disorders.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a frequent disease. It is a critical health concern that can influence functional capacity by restricting living activities.
OBJECTIVE: The current study is to investigate the effects of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (TVNs) in the management of CLBP.
METHODS: We searched the databases on Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Pedro for randomized clinical trial (RCT) studies published in any language that looked at the effectiveness of TVNs in people with chronic LBP. The inclusion criteria were PICO. Participants in the research were people (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with persistent low back pain for more than 3 months. Study quality was assessed using Cochrane ROB 2.
RESULTS: Our database search found 1084 RCT. A number of studies that were not necessary for the issue were removed, and the overall outcome was six trials. Risk of bias (ROB) evaluations at the study level (derived from outcomes) are reported. In the six studies, two (33.3%) had an overall uncertain ROB (i.e., some concerns), whereas one (16.7%) had a high overall ROB. Three trials (50%) had a low overall RoB.
CONCLUSIONS: There is still no evidence to support the use of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation as a viable therapeutic rehabilitation strategy. Therefore, we recommend high-quality trials and long-term follow-up to evaluate disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes in these patients.

OBJECTIVE: To explore if there are differences in the design and/or conduct of studies that have tested the STarTBack treatment approach for the management of low back pain (LBP), potentially explaining differences in study results.
METHODS: A literature review.
METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched from inception to 26 July 2023.
METHODS: We included studies that included (1) participants with LBP and/or leg pain, (2) randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and interrupted time series designs, (3) used the STarTBack Tool to stratify participants into subgroups and (4) studies provided matched treatments according to participants STarTBack score.
METHODS: Two review authors independently reviewed the search results and extracted data into the data extraction form. Due to the exploratory nature of this study, results are presented descriptively.
RESULTS: 11 studies conducted across 5 countries were included. There were substantial differences in the proportion of participants allocated to the different risk groups; low-risk group (range: 19%-58%), medium risk group (range: 31%-52%) and high-risk group (range: 6%-38%). There were large differences between studies in the implementation of the STarTBack approach. The original STarTBack trial (Hill et al, 2011) had a more explanatory design while in many subsequent studies, the design was more pragmatic/real world. Only the two original studies provided clear evidence that the implementation of the STarTBack tool led to a higher proportion of participants receiving matched treatment. In the other studies, there was no evidence of a difference, or it was unclear. In two studies, a researcher made the decision about which matched treatment participants received based on the STartTback Tool, while in nine studies, this was done by a clinician. Most studies recommended the same matched treatment for each risk group as per the original study except for a small number of studies. Only three studies reported whether the clinician delivering matched treatment followed the recommended treatment as per the tool. There was substantial variability in the training clinicians received.
CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of important study-level factors (eg, differences in study design, whether clinicians were trained and how the tool was used in each study) in how the STarTBack approach was implemented was unclear. There is some suggestion that key factors may include the individual who implemented the STarTBack tool, whether the recommendations of the tool were followed, the amount of training the clinician delivering the matched treatment received, and whether clinicians actually delivered the matched treatment.

The aim of the present study was to determine the gender respiratory differences of bilateral diaphragm thickness, respiratory pressures, and pulmonary function in patients with low back pain (LBP). A sample of 90 participants with nonspecific LBP was recruited and matched paired by sex (45 women and 45 men). Respiratory outcomes included bilateral diaphragm thickness by ultrasonography, respiratory muscle strength by maximum inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory (MEP) pressures, and pulmonary function by forced expiratory volume during 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and FEV1/FVC spirometry parameters. The comparison of respiratory outcomes presented significant differences (p < 0.001), with a large effect size (d = 1.26-1.58) showing means differences (95% CI) for MIP of -32.26 (-42.99, -21.53) cm H2O, MEP of -50.66 (-64.08, -37.25) cm H2O, FEV1 of -0.92 (-1.18, -0.65) L, and FVC of -1.00 (-1.32, -0.69) L, with lower values for females versus males. Gender-based respiratory differences were presented for maximum respiratory pressures and pulmonary function in patients with nonspecific LBP. Women presented greater inspiratory and expiratory muscle weakness as well as worse lung function, although these differences were not linked to diaphragm thickness during normal breathing.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic research in low back pain (LBP) is essential for understanding and managing the condition. This study aimed to, (1) describe the proportions with mild-moderate and severe pain and disability at baseline, 1-year and 4-year follow-up, and (2) investigate prognostic factors for improvement in pain and disability over 4 years in a cohort of secondary care LBP patients.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cohort of patients with LBP aged 18-40 years recruited from a non-surgical outpatient spine clinic between March 2011 and October 2013 (n = 1037). Questionnaires were collected at baseline, 1-year, and 4-year follow-up. Disability was assessed using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ 0-100) and pain intensity using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS 0-10). \'Mild-moderate pain\' was defined as NRS < 7 and \'severe pain\' as NRS ≥ 7. Likewise, \'mild-moderate disability\' was defined as RMDQ < 58.3, and \'severe disability\' was RMDQ ≥ 58.3. In the prognostic analysis, improvement in pain and disability over 4 years was defined as meeting both criteria: decrease of ≥ 2 on the NRS and of ≥ 20.8 on the RMDQ. Sixteen candidate prognostic factors were assessed by multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: Among patients with information available at all three time points (n = 241), 54%/48% had persistent mild-moderate pain/disability, while only 7%/15% had persistent severe pain/disability. Of patients included in the multivariate prognostic analysis regarding improvement over 4 years (n = 498), 32% had improved in pain and disability after 4 years. Positive associations were found for pain intensity (OR 1.34 [95%CI: 1.17-1.54]), disability (OR 1.01 [1.00-1.02]), and regular employment or studying (OR 1.67 [1.06-2.64]), and negative associations for episode duration (OR 0.99 [0.99-1.00]) and risk of persistent pain (OR 0.58 [0.38-0.88]).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with persistent LBP in secondary care had mostly mild-moderate pain and disability consistently at all three time points, with few having consistently severe symptoms over 4 years. Moreover, approximately half of the included patients improved in pain and disability. We found that pain intensity, disability, episode duration, regular employment or studying, and risk of persistent pain predicted a long-term improvement. However, the limited availability of complete follow-up data may affect generalisability.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar strain originating from the quadratus lumborum (QL) is an important cause of low back pain; however, its diagnosis is often missed, and treatment is often inadequate. This leads to unnecessary diagnostic investigations and chronicization of pain. Therefore, it is important to treat it effectively and safely. In this study, we aimed to find out the effect of ultrasound (US)-guided QL block in acute-subacute low back pain caused by a strain of QL.
METHODS: Our study was retrospective, and the changes in the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores within one week in 50 patients with acute-subacute localized low back pain, unilateral lumbar strain, palpation tenderness, paravertebral spasm, and decreased lumbar range of motion in the QL muscle, in whom we applied US-guided block to the QL muscle, were analyzed.
RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the mean VAS and ODI scores of the patients after the procedure. There was a negative correlation between improvement rates in VAS and ODI scores and age and body mass index (BMI). Recovery rates were higher in female patients than in male patients.
CONCLUSIONS: It can be said that US-guided QL block is an effective treatment method for QL-induced lumbar strains, and younger age, female gender, and lower BMI are associated with better responses after injection.