Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review

被引:118
作者
Hayden, Jill A. [1 ]
Wilson, Maria N. [1 ]
Riley, Richard D. [2 ]
Les, Ross [3 ]
Pincus, Tamar [4 ]
Ogilvie, Rachel [5 ]
机构
[1] Dalhousie Univ, Dept Community Hlth & Epidemiol, 5790 Univ Ave,Room 403, Halifax, NS B3H 1V7, Canada
[2] Keele Univ, Sch Primary Community & Social Care, Keele, Staffs, England
[3] Monash Univ, Dept Physiotherapy, Fac Med Nursing & Hlth Sci, Frankston, Australia
[4] Royal Holloway Univ London, Dept Psychol, Egham, Surrey, England
[5] Dalhousie Univ, Community Hlth & Epidemiol, Halifax, NS, Canada
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2019年 / 11期
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
MULTIDISCIPLINARY TREATMENT PROGRAM; COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL TREATMENT; CHRONIC MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN; FEAR-AVOIDANCE-BELIEFS; SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS; PRIMARY-CARE; PREDICTIVE FACTORS; SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE; INJURED-WORKERS; OLDER-ADULTS;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD011284.pub2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Low back pain is costly and disabling. Prognostic factor evidence can help healthcare providers and patients understand likely prognosis, inform the development of prediction models to identify subgroups, and may inform new treatment strategies. Recent studies have suggested that people who have poor expectations for recovery experience more back pain disability, but study results have differed. Objectives To synthesise evidence on the association between recovery expectations and disability outcomes in adults with low back pain, and explore sources of heterogeneity. Search methods The search strategy included broad and focused electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CI NAHL, and PsycINFO to 12 March 2019, reference list searches of relevant reviews and included studies, and citation searches of relevant expectation measurement tools. Selection criteria We included low back pain prognosis studies from any setting assessing general, self-efficacy, and treatment expectations (measured dichotomously and continuously on a 0 - 10 scale), and their association with work participation, clinically important recovery, functional limitations, or pain intensity outcomes at short (3 months), medium (6 months), long (12 months), and very long (> 16 months) follow-up. Data collection and analysis We extracted study characteristics and all reported estimates of unadjusted and adjusted associations between expectations and related outcomes. Two review authors independently assessed risks of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. We conducted narrative syntheses and meta analyses when appropriate unadjusted or adjusted estimates were available. Two review authors independently graded and reported the overall quality of evidence. Main results We screened 4635 unique citations to include 60 studies (30,530 participants). Thirty-five studies were conducted in Europe, 21 in North America, and four in Australia. Study populations were mostly chronic (37%), from healthcare (62%) or occupational settings (26%). General expectation was the most common type of recovery expectation measured (70%); 16 studies measured more than one type of expectation. Usable data for syntheses were available for 52 studies (87% of studies; 28,885 participants). We found moderatequality evidence that positive recovery expectations are strongly associated with better work participation (narrative synthesis: 21 studies; meta-analysis: 12 studies, 4777 participants: odds ratio (OR) 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64 to 3.62), and low quality evidence for clinically impor tant recovery outcomes (narrative synthesis: 12 studies; meta-analysis: 5 studies, 1820 participants: OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.41), both at follow-up times closest to 12 months, using adjusted data. The association of recovery expectations with other outcomes of interest, including functional limitations (narrative synthesis: 10 studies; meta-analysis: 3 studies, 1435 participants: OR 1,40, 95% CI 0.85 to 2,31) and pain intensity (narrative synthesis: 9 studies; meta-analysis: 3 studies, 1555 participants: OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.23) outcomes at follow-up times closest to 12 months using adjusted data, is less certain, achieving very low- and low-quality evidence, respectively. No studies reported statistically significant or clinically important negative associations between recovery expectations and any low back pain outcome. Authors conclusions We found that individual recovery expectations are probably strongly associated with future work participation (moderate-quality eviderice) and may be associated with clinically important recovery outcomes (low-quality evidence). The association of recovery expectations with other outcomes of interest is less certain, Our findings suggest that recovery expectations should be considered in future studies, to improve prognosis and management of low back pain.
引用
收藏
页数:129
相关论文
共 199 条
  • [1] Long-term trajectories of patients with neck pain and low back pain presenting to chiropractic care: A latent class growth analysis
    Ailliet, L.
    Rubinstein, S. M.
    Hoekstra, T.
    van Tulder, M. W.
    de Vet, H. C. W.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2018, 22 (01) : 103 - 113
  • [2] Negative beliefs about back pain are associated with persistent, high levels of low back disability in community-based women
    Alyousef, Bothaina
    Cicuttini, Flavia M.
    Davis, Susan R.
    Bell, Robin
    Botlero, Roslin
    Urquhart, Donna M.
    [J]. MENOPAUSE-THE JOURNAL OF THE NORTH AMERICAN MENOPAUSE SOCIETY, 2018, 25 (09): : 977 - 984
  • [3] DEVELOPMENT AND INITIAL VALIDATION OF A SCALE TO MEASURE SELF-EFFICACY BELIEFS IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC PAIN
    ANDERSON, KO
    DOWDS, BN
    PELLETZ, RE
    EDWARDS, WT
    PEETERSASDOURIAN, C
    [J]. PAIN, 1995, 63 (01) : 77 - 83
  • [4] [Anonymous], BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL
  • [5] [Anonymous], PHYSIOTHERAPY
  • [6] [Anonymous], DIS MANAGEMENT
  • [7] [Anonymous], EVIDENCE PARTNERS
  • [8] [Anonymous], 2004, BMC MED
  • [9] [Anonymous], 2009, INT STAT REV
  • [10] [Anonymous], EXPECTANCIES SHAPE E