Cargando…
Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population
BACKGROUND: Low Back Pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem, with variation in prevalence. Epidemiological reports of rating of pain intensity and location within the low back area are rare. The objective is to describe LBP in a large, multi-center, occupational cohort detailing both point and 1-...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25146722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-283 |
_version_ | 1782333351325073408 |
---|---|
author | Thiese, Matthew S Hegmann, Kurt T Wood, Eric M Garg, Arun Moore, J Steven Kapellusch, Jay Foster, James Ott, Ulrike |
author_facet | Thiese, Matthew S Hegmann, Kurt T Wood, Eric M Garg, Arun Moore, J Steven Kapellusch, Jay Foster, James Ott, Ulrike |
author_sort | Thiese, Matthew S |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Low Back Pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem, with variation in prevalence. Epidemiological reports of rating of pain intensity and location within the low back area are rare. The objective is to describe LBP in a large, multi-center, occupational cohort detailing both point and 1-month period prevalence of LBP by location and intensity measures at baseline. METHODS: In this cross-sectional report from a prospective cohort study, 828 participants were workers enrolled from 30 facilities performing a variety of manual material handling tasks. All participants underwent a structured interview detailing pain rating and location. Symptoms in the lower extremities, demographic and other data were collected. Body mass indices were measured. Outcomes are pain rating (0–10) in five defined lumbar back areas (i) LBP in the past month and (ii) LBP on the day of enrollment. Pain ratings were reported on a 0–10 scale and subsequently collapsed with ratings of 1–3, 4–6 and 7–10 classified as low, medium and high respectively. RESULTS: 172 (20.8%) and 364 (44.0%) of the 828 participants reported pain on the day of enrollment or within the past month, respectively. The most common area of LBP was in the immediate paraspinal area with 130 (75.6%) participants with point prevalence LBP and 278 (77.4%) with 1-month period prevalence reported having LBP in the immediate paraspinal area. Among those 364 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain, ratings varied widely with 116 (31.9%) reporting ratings classified as low, 170 (46.7%) medium and 78 (21.4%) providing high pain ratings in any location. Among the 278 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain in the immediate paraspinal area, 89 (32.0%) reported ratings classified as low, 129 (46.4%), medium and 60 (21.6%) high pain ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Pain ratings varied widely, however less variability was seen in pain location, with immediate paraspinal region being the most common. Variations may suggest different etiological factors related to LBP. Aggregation of different locations of pain or different intensities of pain into one binary classification of LBP may result in loss of information which may potentially be useful in prevention or treatment of LBP. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-283) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4153910 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41539102014-09-05 Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population Thiese, Matthew S Hegmann, Kurt T Wood, Eric M Garg, Arun Moore, J Steven Kapellusch, Jay Foster, James Ott, Ulrike BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Low Back Pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem, with variation in prevalence. Epidemiological reports of rating of pain intensity and location within the low back area are rare. The objective is to describe LBP in a large, multi-center, occupational cohort detailing both point and 1-month period prevalence of LBP by location and intensity measures at baseline. METHODS: In this cross-sectional report from a prospective cohort study, 828 participants were workers enrolled from 30 facilities performing a variety of manual material handling tasks. All participants underwent a structured interview detailing pain rating and location. Symptoms in the lower extremities, demographic and other data were collected. Body mass indices were measured. Outcomes are pain rating (0–10) in five defined lumbar back areas (i) LBP in the past month and (ii) LBP on the day of enrollment. Pain ratings were reported on a 0–10 scale and subsequently collapsed with ratings of 1–3, 4–6 and 7–10 classified as low, medium and high respectively. RESULTS: 172 (20.8%) and 364 (44.0%) of the 828 participants reported pain on the day of enrollment or within the past month, respectively. The most common area of LBP was in the immediate paraspinal area with 130 (75.6%) participants with point prevalence LBP and 278 (77.4%) with 1-month period prevalence reported having LBP in the immediate paraspinal area. Among those 364 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain, ratings varied widely with 116 (31.9%) reporting ratings classified as low, 170 (46.7%) medium and 78 (21.4%) providing high pain ratings in any location. Among the 278 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain in the immediate paraspinal area, 89 (32.0%) reported ratings classified as low, 129 (46.4%), medium and 60 (21.6%) high pain ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Pain ratings varied widely, however less variability was seen in pain location, with immediate paraspinal region being the most common. Variations may suggest different etiological factors related to LBP. Aggregation of different locations of pain or different intensities of pain into one binary classification of LBP may result in loss of information which may potentially be useful in prevention or treatment of LBP. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-283) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4153910/ /pubmed/25146722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-283 Text en © Thiese et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Thiese, Matthew S Hegmann, Kurt T Wood, Eric M Garg, Arun Moore, J Steven Kapellusch, Jay Foster, James Ott, Ulrike Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title | Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title_full | Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title_fullStr | Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title_full_unstemmed | Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title_short | Prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
title_sort | prevalence of low back pain by anatomic location and intensity in an occupational population |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25146722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-283 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thiesematthews prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT hegmannkurtt prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT woodericm prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT gargarun prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT moorejsteven prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT kapelluschjay prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT fosterjames prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation AT ottulrike prevalenceoflowbackpainbyanatomiclocationandintensityinanoccupationalpopulation |