Low Back Pain Consulters Research Articles

Physical activity advice given by French general practitioners for low back pain and the role of digital e-health applications: a qualitative study

BackgroundLow back pain is the fourth most common reason for consulting a general practitioner (GP) among people aged 40–50 years. Beyond the overall benefits of physical activity (PA) on health (psychological, cardiovascular, etc.), PA for low back pain seems to improve the prognosis in terms of pain, disability, and quality of life. The French National Health Insurance developed media campaigns to promote physical activity with low back pain and a smartphone application (app). Despite the known benefits and campaigns, GPs do not routinely provide advice about physical activity during low back pain consultations. To promote giving physical activity advice for low back pain, there is a need to understand how GPs currently provide this advice and whether technology could help. This study aims to explore the content of physical activity advice for low back pain that GPs provide in France, and their opinion about healthcare smartphone app provided electronically via the internet (e-health apps) as a support for this advice.MethodsThis qualitative study was conducted with semi-structured individual interviews among French GPs. The verbatim was double coded using a coding tree. Thematic analysis was performed using an inductive approach.ResultsSixteen GPs from Maine et Loire, Sarthe, and Mayenne were included. The thematic analysis identified the following themes: GPs use a global patient-centred approach to physical activity advice for low back pain. The main goal is to enable patients to participate in their care. Advice was almost always general with little information about duration and frequency. The importance of patient-appropriate and easily achievable activities was emphasised. GPs referred patients to physiotherapists to reinforce regular physical activity, maintain motivation and improve patient adherence through supervision and follow-up. GPs knew little about e-health apps but felt they could be useful with young patients. The main barriers to their use included poor internet connection, lack of technical knowledge and no supervision meaning patients could injure themselves.ConclusionsThis is one of the first studies to assess the contents of physical activity advice GPs provide for low back pain. Further research is needed into the implementation of e-health apps for low back pain management.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Providing information at the initial consultation to patients with low back pain across general practice, chiropractic and physiotherapy – a cross-sectorial study of Danish primary care

Objective Clinical guidelines for managing low back pain (LBP) emphasise patient information, patient education and physical activity as key components. Little is known about who actually receives information. This study investigates to what extent information at the first consultation with general practitioner (GP), chiropractor (DC) and physiotherapist (PT) in Danish primary care is provided to patients with LBP. Design and setting This cross-sectorial study was conducted as a prospective survey registration of LBP consultations at the three primary health care professions in Denmark. Intervention Clinicians ticked off a paper survey chart during or after consultations with patients who visited the clinic for LBP (Approval number: ID # 11.220). Subjects 33 GPs, 43 DCs and 61 PTs registered first-time consultations. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was provision of information, overall and across care settings. Results The overall proportion of patients provided with information was 72%, but this varied among professions (GP, 44%; DC, 76%; and PT, 74%). Provision of information increased to 78% if patients had increased emotional distress or back-related leg pain below the knee. The strongest association with provision of information was having two or three signs of elevated distress (OR 2.58 and 5.05, respectively, p= 0.00) or physical disability (OR 2.55, p= 0.00). Conclusion In more than a quarter of first-time consultations, patient information was not provided. Large variation in providing information was found across the settings. The proportion provided with information increased for sub-populations having elevated distress or back-related leg pain below the knee. Key Points Clinical guidelines recommend patient information, patient education and physical activity for managing low back pain (LBP) • Information is not provided in more than a quarter of first-time consultations in Danish primary care settings that manage these patients. • Information increased for the sub-populations having elevated distress and back-related leg pain below the knee. • The conducted primary care surveys monitored clinical activity and illustrated variations in provision of information.

Characteristics of patients with low back pain treated at a primary care center in Ecuador

Low back pain is a public health problem due to its high prevalence and burden of the disease. This study aimed to determine the characteristics of patients with low back pain treated at the Centro de Salud N1 from Ibarra, between January 2017 and November 2020. Two-thousand fifty-five consultations for low back pain were included, observing an increase during the study period, except for 2020 (53.78% fewer consultations than 2019). Consultation for low back pain was more frequent in women than men (64.18% vs 35.82%; z-score 12.87, p <0.05). The age in men (median 49 years, interquartile range 30.75 years) was significantly higher (p=0.003) than in women (median 46 years, interquartile range 25 years). The cumulative frequency of consultations was higher between 28-60 years, mostly (67.98%) due to unspecified low back pain. Four-point seventy-nine percent of the consultations were referred to secondary care, where most (69.77%) had a specific diagnostic coding for low back pain. Regarding subsequent consultations (220 patients), most had 2 (9.05%) and less frequent ≥3 (1.65%) yearly consultations. In conclusion, there was an increase in the frequency of consultations for low back pain, predominant in the working-age groups, with a low percentage referred to secondary care.

Predicting Physician Consultations for Low Back Pain Using Claims Data and Population-Based Cohort Data-An Interpretable Machine Learning Approach.

(1) Background: Predicting chronic low back pain (LBP) is of clinical and economic interest as LBP leads to disabilities and health service utilization. This study aims to build a competitive and interpretable prediction model; (2) Methods: We used clinical and claims data of 3837 participants of a population-based cohort study to predict future LBP consultations (ICD-10: M40.XX-M54.XX). Best subset selection (BSS) was applied in repeated random samples of training data (75% of data); scoring rules were used to identify the best subset of predictors. The rediction accuracy of BSS was compared to randomforest and support vector machines (SVM) in the validation data (25% of data); (3) Results: The best subset comprised 16 out of 32 predictors. Previous occurrence of LBP increased the odds for future LBP consultations (odds ratio (OR) 6.91 [5.05; 9.45]), while concomitant diseases reduced the odds (1 vs. 0, OR: 0.74 [0.57; 0.98], >1 vs. 0: 0.37 [0.21; 0.67]). The area-under-curve (AUC) of BSS was acceptable (0.78 [0.74; 0.82]) and comparable with SVM (0.78 [0.74; 0.82]) and randomforest (0.79 [0.75; 0.83]); (4) Conclusions: Regarding prediction accuracy, BSS has been considered competitive with established machine-learning approaches. Nonetheless, considerable misclassification is inherent and further refinements are required to improve predictions.

Taking patients to the ice cream shop but telling them that they cannot have ice cream: a qualitative study of orthopaedic spine clinicians’ perceptions of persistent low back pain consultations

ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the perceptions of orthopaedic clinicians about consultations for people with persistent musculoskeletal low back pain (PMLBP) in which surgery is not recommended. Surgery is not...

Complex sociodemographic inequalities in consultations for low back pain: lessons from multilevel intersectional analysis.

Sociodemographic inequalities in the occurrence of low back pain (LBP) are well-studied. This study aimed to examine complex sociodemographic inequalities in the risk of LBP consultation in the population from a socioeconomical intersectional perspective. Using register data, we identified 458,852 individuals aged 35 to 75 years residing in Skåne in 2013, with no previous LBP consultation since 2006. We created 108 strata using categories of age, sex, education, income, and nativity. With individuals nested within strata, we modelled the absolute risk of LBP consultation during 2014 in a series of multilevel logistic regression models. We quantified discriminatory accuracy (DA) of these variables by computing the variance partition coefficient and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). We identified 13,657 (3.0%) people with an LBP consultation. The absolute risk ranged from 2.1% (95% credible interval: 1.9%-2.3%) among young native men with high education and high income to 4.8% (4.3%-5.5%) among young foreign-born women with medium education and low income (2.3-fold relative difference). Discriminatory accuracy of intersectional strata was very low (variance partition coefficient 1.1% (0.7-1.6); and AUC 0.56 [0.55-0.56]). Sex (35.6%) and nativity (19.2%) had the largest contributions in explaining the initially small between-strata variation in risk of LBP. The low DA of the intersectional strata indicates the existence of limited intersectional inequalities in LBP consultation. Therefore, interventions to reduce LBP risk should be universal rather than targeted to specific socioeconomic groups with a higher average risk. Before planning targeted intervention, other risk factors with higher DA need to be identified.

Supporting self-management of low back pain with an internet intervention in primary care: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial of clinical and cost-effectiveness (SupportBack 2)

IntroductionSelf-management and remaining physically active are first-line recommendations for the care of patients with low back pain (LBP). With a lifetime prevalence of up to 85%, novel approaches to support...

The Fear Reduction Exercised Early (FREE) approach to management of low back pain in general practice: A pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial

BackgroundEffective and cost-effective primary care treatments for low back pain (LBP) are required to reduce the burden of the world’s most disabling condition. This study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Fear Reduction Exercised Early (FREE) approach to LBP (intervention) with usual general practitioner (GP) care (control).Methods and findingsThis pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial with process evaluation and parallel economic evaluation was conducted in the Hutt Valley, New Zealand. Eight general practices were randomly assigned (stratified by practice size) with a 1:1 ratio to intervention (4 practices; 34 GPs) or control group (4 practices; 29 GPs). Adults presenting to these GPs with LBP as their primary complaint were recruited. GPs in the intervention practices were trained in the FREE approach, and patients presenting to these practices received care based on the FREE approach. The FREE approach restructures LBP consultations to prioritise early identification and management of barriers to recovery. GPs in control practices did not receive specific training for this study, and patients presenting to these practices received usual care. Between 23 September 2016 and 31 July 2017, 140 eligible patients presented to intervention practices (126 enrolled) and 110 eligible patients presented to control practices (100 enrolled). Patient mean age was 46.1 years (SD 14.4), and 46% were female. The duration of LBP was less than 6 weeks in 88% of patients. Primary outcome was change from baseline in patient participant Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score at 6 months. Secondary patient outcomes included pain, satisfaction, and psychosocial indices. GP outcomes included attitudes, knowledge, confidence, and GP LBP management behaviour. There was active and passive surveillance of potential harms. Patients and outcome assessors were blind to group assignment. Analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. A total of 122 (97%) patients from 32 GPs in the intervention group and 99 (99%) patients from 25 GPs in the control group were included in the primary outcome analysis. At 6 months, the groups did not significantly differ on the primary outcome (adjusted mean RMDQ score difference 0.57, 95% CI −0.64 to 1.78; p = 0.354) or secondary patient outcomes. The RMDQ difference met the predefined criterion to indicate noninferiority. One control group participant experienced an activity-related gluteal tear, with no other adverse events recorded. Intervention group GPs had improvements in attitudes, knowledge, and confidence compared with control group GPs. Intervention group GP LBP management behaviour became more guideline concordant than the control group. In cost-effectiveness, the intervention dominated control with lower costs and higher Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gains. Limitations of this study were that although adequately powered for primary outcome assessment, the study was not powered for evaluating some employment, healthcare use, and economic outcomes. It was also not possible for research nurses (responsible for patient recruitment) to be masked on group allocation for practices.ConclusionsFindings from this study suggest that the FREE approach improves GP concordance with LBP guideline recommendations but does not improve patient recovery outcomes compared with usual care. The FREE approach may reduce unnecessary healthcare use and produce economic benefits. Work participation or health resource use should be considered for primary outcome assessment in future trials of undifferentiated LBP.Trial registrationACTRN12616000888460

Contrasting real time quantitative measures (weekly SMS) to patients\u2019 retrospective appraisal of their one-year\u2019s course of low back pain; a probing mixed-methods study

BackgroundDue to the recurrent nature of low back pain (LBP), the traditional concepts of cure and recovery are challenged, and investigating the course rather than status at fixed time-points may help us understand prognosis as well as treatment effect. However, methods of frequent measuring still need development and validation. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the agreement between continuous, quantitative self-assessment (weekly SMS) of the course of LBP over a one-year period and qualitatively derived retrospective patient self-appraisal of the same time-period.MethodsParticipants were 32 subjects with LBP from primary care. The quantitative measures consisted of weekly SMS questions for one-year about pain intensity, days with LBP, and activity limitations for that week. For each subject, the weekly responses were graphed and categorized into categories based on intensity, variation and overall change patterns. Qualitative measures were based on semi-structured telephone interviews one-year after a consultation for LBP, where two coders independently categorized the self-appraisal of LBP course into the same predefined categories as the SMS-based trajectories. Furthermore, patients’ perceived overall recovery was related to variation patterns from SMS track.ResultsThere was perfect agreement for 48% in the pain intensity domain, 53% in the variation domain and 63% in the change pattern domain. Most of the discordant cases were classified in neighboring categories with the majority relating to fluctuating patterns. The self-perceived overall recovery status seemed to be reflected quite well by the quantitative measures of pain intensity and days with pain in this study.ConclusionThis study shows that a real time quantitative measure (weekly SMS) and the patient’s retrospective appraisal do not fundamentally differ in their reflection of the one-year course of LBP.As a first investigation into this area, these results are promising, as longitudinal quantitatively derived trajectories of LBP seem to reflect the lived experience of the patient to a large degree. Furthermore, the patient’s ability to retrospectively recall their one-year course of LBP appears to be quite good. Future studies should focus on refining the categories of trajectories.

Associations Between Early Care Decisions and the Risk for Long-term Opioid Use for Patients With Low Back Pain With a New Physician Consultation and Initiation of Opioid Therapy.

The aim of this study was to identify associations between early care decisions and long-term opioid (LTO) use in opioid-naïve patients with a new physician consultation for low back pain (LBP) at which an opioid was prescribed. A retrospective study of claims data was used to identify opioid-naïve LBP patients who were prescribed opioids at the index physician visit. Early care variables captured included additional nonopioid medications prescribed within 14 days and provider visits or diagnostic imaging within 30 days of the index visit. A multivariate logistic model was used to identify early care variables associated with the outcome of (LTO) use in the year following the index visit controlling for patient factors. A total of 707 patients were included in this study. The mean age was 38.1 (±11.6), and 67.8% were female individuals and 76.9% were Medicaid beneficiaries. Early care medications were muscle relaxants (32.2%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (29.3%), oral steroids (11.7%), and benzodiazepines (8.3%). The most common early care provider visits were with primary care (31.0%) and physical therapy (13.0%). A total of 172 patients (24.3%) progressed to LTO use. Controlling for patient factors, early care variables increasing risk for LTO use were an early benzodiazepine prescription and primary care visit. An early physical therapy visit was associated with reduced risk for LTO use. Early care decisions were predictive of LTO use following a new LBP consultation at which opioids were prescribed. Our results support recommendations to avoid concurrent benzodiazepine prescribing and to consider other evidence-based pain treatments such as physical therapy early, particularly for patients at high risk for LTO use or misuse.

Prevalence of curable and pseudoarthrosis stages of adolescent lumbar spondylolysis.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of curable and pseudoarthrosis stages of adolescent lumbar spondylolysis under high school students complaining of and seeking medical consultation for low back pain.Patients and Methods: We analyzed age, sex, morbidity, presence of spina bifida occulta (SBO), and competitive sport discipline of patients with lumbar spondylolysis. We then stratified their pathological stage using a modified classification system via magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography.Results: Of 507 patients, 451 lesions in 268 patients were diagnosed with lumbar spondylolysis (average age, 14.7 years; sex ratio, 215:53 male/female). Morbidity levels were as follows: L1, 1 lesion in 1 patient; L2, 9 lesions in 5 patients; L3, 38 lesions in 25 patients; L4, 106 lesions in 74 patients; L5, 297 lesions in 189 patients, and SBO verified in 111 patients. A total of 264 patients played a specific sport: baseball, 93; soccer, 49; volleyball, 21; track and field, 21; basketball, 20; others, 164. The prevalence of curable- and pseudoarthrosis-stage lumbar spondylolysis was 206 lesions in 142 patients, and 141 lesions in 87 patients, respectively.Conclusion: With 59.3% of patients having curable-stage lumbar spondylolysis, adolescent athletes with low back pain are urged to seek consultation. Furthermore, clinicians should perform magnetic resonance imaging to avoid misdiagnosis.

Episodes of low back pain: a proposal for uniform definitions to be used in research.

Literature review and group discussions. To propose uniform definitions for low back pain episodes to be used in research. Different definitions of episodes have been used in low back pain studies. This hampers comparison of study results. Definitions are proposed for episodes of low back pain, care for low back pain, and work absence because of low back pain. In a Medline search, we identified about 1200 papers, of which 81 possibly contained a definition of episodes. In group discussions, we decided which definitions to propose and discussed their applicability. We found few definitions in the literature. In the group discussions we decided to define an episode of LBP as a period of pain in the lower back lasting for more than 24 hours, preceded and followed by a period of at least 1 month without low back pain. An episode of care for low back pain was defined as a consultation or a series of consultations for low back pain, preceded and followed by at least 3 months without consultation for low back pain. An episode of work absence due to low back pain was defined as a period of work absence due to low back pain, preceded and followed by a period of at least 1 day at work. In many studies, episodes of low back pain are mentioned without a clear definition. We consider our proposed definitions of episodes to be arbitrary but well considered. We advise that they be tested for use in future research.

The relationship between findings on magnetic resonance imaging and previous history of low back pain.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and previous low back pain (LBP) in participants without current LBP. Current LBP was defined as LBP during the past month. Previous LBP was defined as a history of medical consultation for LBP. Ninety-one participants without current LBP were included. Sagittal T2-weighted MRI was used to assess the intervertebral space from T12/L1 to L5/S1. These images were classified into five grades based on the Pfirrmann grading system. Furthermore, we evaluated the presence of disk bulging, high-intensity zone, and spondylolisthesis. We compared the MRI findings between groups with (27 participants) and without (64 participants) previous LBP without current LBP. Intraobserver and interobserver kappa values were evaluated. Participants had an average age of 34.9 years; 47 were female and 44 were male; and their average body mass index was 21.8 kg/m2. Compared to the group of participants without previous LBP, the group of participants with previous LBP had a significantly higher incidence of disk degeneration such as a Pfirrmann grade ≥3, disk bulging, and high-intensity zone in the analyses adjusted by age and sex. There were no significant differences in spondylolisthesis between the groups. An odds ratio of >10 was only found for Pfirrmann grade ≥3, ie, a Pfirrmann grade ≥3 was strongly associated with a history of previous LBP in participants without current LBP.

Developing and testing a measure of consultation-based reassurance for people with low back pain in primary care: a cross-sectional study.

BackgroundReassurance from physicians is commonly recommended in guidelines for the management of low back pain (LBP), but the process of reassurance and its impact on patients is poorly researched.We aimed to develop a valid and reliable measure of the process of reassurance during LBP consultations.MethodsItems representing the data-gathering stage of the consultation and affective and cognitive reassurance were generated from literature on physician-patient communication and piloted with expert researchers and physicians, a Patient and Public Involvement group, and LBP patients to form a questionnaire. Patients presenting for LBP at 43 General Practice surgeries were sent the questionnaire. The questionnaire was analysed with Rasch modelling, using two samples from the same population of recent LBP consultations: the first (n = 157, follow-up n = 84) for exploratory analysis and the second (n = 162, follow-up n = 74) for confirmatory testing. Responses to the questionnaire were compared with responses to satisfaction and enablement scales to assess the external validity of the items, and participants completed the questionnaire again one-week later to assess test-retest reliability.ResultsThe questionnaire was separated into four subscales: data-gathering, relationship-building, generic reassurance, and cognitive reassurance, each containing three items. All subscales showed good validity within the Rasch models, and good reliability based on person- and item-separations and test-retest reliability. All four subscales were significantly positively correlated with satisfaction and enablement for both samples. The final version of the questionnaire is presented here.ConclusionsOverall, the measure has demonstrated a good level of validity and generally acceptable reliability. This is the first measure to focus specifically on reassurance for LBP in primary care settings, and will enable researchers to further understanding of what is reassuring within the context of low back pain consultations, and how outcomes are affected by different types of reassurance. Additionally, the measure may provide a useful training and audit tool for physicians. The new measure requires testing in prospective cohorts, and would benefit from further validation against ethnographic observation of consultations in real time.

Reassurance during low back pain consultations with GPs: a qualitative study.

Reassurance is commonly recommended in guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care, although it is poorly defined, and what it means to patients remains unknown. To explore how patients with low back pain perceive practitioners' reassuring behaviours during consultations. Qualitative study undertaken with patients from nine GP surgeries in Northamptonshire, England. Twenty-three patients who had recently consulted for non-specific low back pain were recruited from general practice. Semi-structured interviews explored what they had found reassuring during their consultations and the effect of such reassurance since their consultations. Interview transcripts were analysed using the thematic framework method. Patients each brought to their consultations experiences, beliefs, expectations, and concerns that they wanted the doctor to hear and understand. They were reassured implicitly when it seemed the doctor was taking them seriously and wanted to help; this was also achieved through relationship building and feeling that the GP was readily available to them. However, it was only explicit, informational reassurance that directly addressed patients' concerns by providing them with explanations ruling out serious disease, and helped them to understand and cope with their pain. The themes of implicit and explicit reassurance uncovered here correspond with ideas of affective and cognitive reassurance, respectively. Although the findings support the use of information and education to alleviate concerns, the role of implicit reassurance through relationship building and empathy remains less clear. The impact of these behaviours on outcomes should form a priority for future research.

Use of Physical Therapy for Low Back Pain by Medicaid Enrollees.

Medicaid insures an increasing proportion of adults in the United States. Physical therapy use for low back pain (LBP) in this population has not been described. The study objectives were: (1) to examine physical therapy use by Medicaid enrollees with new LBP consultations and (2) to evaluate associations with future health care use and LBP-related costs. The study was designed as a retrospective evaluation of claims data. A total of 2,289 patients with new LBP consultations were identified during 2012 (mean age=39.3 years [SD=11.9]; 68.2% women). The settings in which the patients entered care and comorbid conditions were identified. Data obtained at 1 year after entry were examined, and physical therapy use was categorized with regard to entry setting, early use (within 14 days of entry), or delayed use (>14 days after entry). The 1-year follow-up period was evaluated for use outcomes (imaging, injection, surgery, and emergency department visit) and LBP-related costs. Variables associated with physical therapy use and cost outcomes were evaluated with multivariate models. Physical therapy was used by 457 patients (20.0%); 75 (3.3%) entered care in physical therapy, 89 (3.9%) received early physical therapy, and 298 (13.0%) received delayed physical therapy. Physical therapy was more common with chronic pain or obesity comorbidities and less likely with substance use disorders. Entering care in the emergency department decreased the likelihood of physical therapy. Entering care in physical medicine increased the likelihood. Relative to primary care entry, physical therapy entry was associated with lower 1-year costs. A single state was studied. No patient-reported outcomes were included. Physical therapy was used often by Medicaid enrollees with LBP. High rates of comorbidities were evident and associated with physical therapy use. Although few patients entered care in physical therapy, this pattern may be useful for managing costs.

Changes in general practitioners’ sensitivity to patients’ distress in low back pain consultations

ObjectiveWe aim to study GPs’ sensitivity to patients’ distress and communication on psychosocial factors prior to and after the introduction of the clinical guideline for low back pain. MethodsConsultations from previous studies on doctor–patient communication in the Netherlands were available for secondary analyses. We selected consultations in which patients presented low back pain complaints (N=168; 25 from 1989, 6 from 1995, 116 from 2001, 21 from 2008) and analyzed these consultations using the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) and the Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences (VR-CoDES). ResultsGPs more often acknowledged psychosocial factors during consultations after implementation of the guideline for non-specific low back pain. Moreover, patients more often voiced their worries, while GPs put more emphasis on providing biomedical information and counseling during these consultations. ConclusionsGPs tend to emphasize biomedical factors rather than supporting their patients emotionally. Patients are likely to voice their worries implicitly, indicating they have a need for emotional support from their GPs. Practice implicationsGPs now face the challenge of not only recognizing psychosocial aspects during consultations with low back pain, but also actively eliciting concerns regarding these psychosocial aspects.

Accumulation of psychosocial and lifestyle factors and risk of low back pain in adolescence: a cohort study.

Low back pain (LBP) is common already in adolescence, and many risk indicators including both psychosocial and lifestyle factors have been recognized. Our purpose was to assess whether the co-occurrence of psychosocial (externalizing and internalizing) problems and lifestyle factors (leisure time physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep, smoking, and overweight/obesity) associate with LBP at 16years cross-sectionally or with new LBP at 18-year follow-up. The study population, drawn from the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986, consisted of 1625 participants (712 boys and 913 girls) who completed a questionnaire on potential explanatory factors at 16years and on LBP at 16 and 18years. The outcome measure was 'reporting LBP' or 'consultation for LBP' during the past 6months. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was utilized to study the co-occurrence of the explanatory factors. Among both genders, four clusters were found. Externalizing behaviour problems were associated with 'reporting LBP' (RR 1.5, boys 1.4, girls) and 'consultation for LBP' (RR 1.6 for both genders) at baseline among both genders. In addition, the cluster of multiple risk behaviours was associated with both 'reporting LBP' (RR 1.3) and 'consultation for LBP' (RR 2.5) and the obese cluster with 'consultation for LBP' (RR 1.7) among girls. Externalizing behaviour problems at 16years predicted 'consultation for LBP' at 18years among girls (RR 3.6). Our results stress the role of psychosocial factors in reporting and seeking care for adolescent LBP.

Physical Therapy or Advanced Imaging as First Management Strategy Following a New Consultation for Low Back Pain in Primary Care: Associations with Future Health Care Utilization and Charges.

Compare health care utilization and charges for low-back-pain (LBP) patients receiving advanced imaging or physical therapy as a first management strategy following a new primary care consultation. Electronic medical record (EMR) and insurance claims data. Retrospective analysis of propensity-matched groups. Claims and EMR data were used. Utilization and LBP-related charges over a 1-year period were extracted from claims data. In the propensity-matched sample (n = 406), advanced imaging recipients had higher odds of all utilization outcomes. Charges were higher with advanced imaging by an average $4,793 (95 percent CI: $3,676, $5,910). For patients with LBP whom newly consulted primary care referred for additional management, advanced imaging as a first management was associated with higher health care utilization and charges than physical therapy.

Effects of workplace, family and cultural influences on low back pain: What opportunities exist to address social factors in general consultations?

Social factors are widely acknowledged in behavioural models of pain and pain management, but incorporating these factors into general medical consultations for low back pain (LBP) can be challenging. While there is no compelling evidence that social factors contribute to LBP onset, these factors have been shown to influence functional limitation and disability, especially the effects of organisational support in the workplace, spousal support, family conflict and social disadvantage. A number of barriers exist to address such social factors in routine medical encounters for LBP, but there is emerging evidence that improving social and organisational support may be an effective strategy to reduce the negative lifestyle consequences of LBP. For clinicians to address these factors in LBP treatment requires a clearer psychosocial framework in assessment and screening, more individualised problem-solving efforts, more patient-centred interventions involving family, peers and workplace supports and a less biomechanical and diagnostic approach.