Céline Bouton

Psychosocial risk factors for chronic low back pain in primary care—a systematic review

BACKGROUND Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem, often encountered in primary care. Guidelines recommend early identification of psychosocial factors that could prevent recovery from acute LBP. METHODS To review the evidence on the prognostic value of psychosocial factors on transition from acute to chronic non-specific LBP in the adult general population. Systematic review is the design of the study. A systematic search was undertaken for prospective studies dealing with psychosocial risk factors for poor outcome of LBP in primary care, screening PubMed, PsychInfo and Cochrane Library databases. The methodological quality of studies was assessed independently by two reviewers using standardized criteria before analysing their main results. RESULTS Twenty-three papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, covering 18 different cohorts. Sixteen psychosocial factors were analysed in three domains: social and socio-occupational, psychological and cognitive and behavioural. Depression, psychological distress, passive coping strategies and fear-avoidance beliefs were sometimes found to be independently linked with poor outcome, whereas most social and socio-occupational factors were not. The predictive ability of a patients self-perceived general health at baseline was difficult to interpret because of biomedical confounding factors. The initial patients or care providers perceived risk of persistence of LBP was the factor that was most consistently linked with actual outcome. CONCLUSION Few independent psychosocial risk factors have been demonstrated to exist. Randomized clinical trials aimed at modifying these factors have shown little impact on patient prognosis. Qualitative research might be valuable to explore further the field of LBP and to define new management strategies.

Interventions focusing on psychosocial risk factors for patients with non-chronic low back pain in primary care--a systematic review.

BACKGROUND Low back pain (LBP) is a problem that is frequently encountered in primary care, and current guidelines encourage care providers to take into account psychosocial risk factors in order to avoid transition from acute to chronic LBP. OBJECTIVE To review the effectiveness of interventions focusing on psychosocial risk factors for patients with non-chronic LBP in primary care. METHODS A systematic search was undertaken for controlled trials focusing on psychosocial factors in adult patients with non-chronic, non-specific LBP in primary care by exploring Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Francis, Web of Sciences and The Cochrane Library. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed before analysing their findings. RESULTS Thirteen studies were selected, seven being considered as having a low risk of bias. Information strategies were assessed by eight trials, with high-quality evidence of no effectiveness for pain, function, work issues and health care use, low-quality evidence of no effectiveness for self-rated overall improvement, satisfaction and pain beliefs and lack of evidence in terms of quality of life. Cognitive behavioural therapy was assessed by three trials, with very low-quality evidence of moderate effectiveness for pain, function, quality of life, work issues and health care use. There was lack of evidence concerning the effectiveness of individual and group education intervention or work coordination. CONCLUSION Among the wide range of psychosocial risk factors, research has focused mainly on pain beliefs and coping skills, with disappointing results. Extended theoretical models integrating several psychosocial factors and multicomponent interventions are probably required to meet the challenge of LBP.

Psychosocial risk factors, interventions, and comorbidity in patients with non-specific low back pain in primary care: need for comprehensive and patient-centered care

Non-specific low back pain (LBP) affects many people and has major socio-economic consequences. Traditional therapeutic strategies, mainly focused on biomechanical factors, have had moderate and short-term impact. Certain psychosocial factors have been linked to poor prognosis of LBP and they are increasingly considered as promising targets for management of LBP. Primary health care providers (HCPs) are involved in most of the management of people with LBP and they are skilled in providing comprehensive care, including consideration of psychosocial dimensions. This review aims to discuss three pieces of recent research focusing on psychosocial issues in LBP patients in primary care. In the first systematic review, the patients’ or HCPs’ overall judgment about the likely evolution of LBP was the factor most strongly linked to poor outcome, with predictive validity similar to that of multidimensional scales. This result may be explained by the implicit aggregation of many prognostic factors underlying this judgment and suggests the relevance of considering the patients from biopsychosocial and longitudinal points of view. The second review showed that most of the interventions targeting psychosocial factors in LBP in primary care have to date focused on the cognitive-behavioral factors, resulting in little impact. It is unlikely that any intervention focusing on a single factor would ever fit the needs of most patients; interventions targeting determinants from several fields (mainly psychosocial, biomechanical, and occupational) may be more relevant. Should multiple stakeholders be involved in such interventions, enhanced interprofessional collaboration would be critical to ensure the delivery of coordinated care. Finally, in the third study, the prevalence of psychosocial comorbidity in chronic LBP patients was not found to be significantly higher than in other patients consulting in primary care. Rather than specifically screening for psychosocial conditions, this suggests taking into account any potential comorbidity in patients with chronic LBP, as in other patients. All these results support the adoption of a more comprehensive and patient-centered approach when dealing with patients with LBP in primary care. As this condition is illustrative of many situations encountered in primary care, the strategies proposed here may benefit most patients consulting in this setting.

Management of low back pain in primary care prior to multidisciplinary functional restoration: a retrospective study of 72 patients.

OBJECTIVE Chronic low back pain is a major socioeconomic health issue, due to the high direct (healthcare) and indirect (sick leave) costs. The aim of the present study was to describe the primary care management of low back pain patients prior to their inclusion in a multidisciplinary functional restoration network. METHODS A descriptive, retrospective, questionnaire-based survey of the general practitioners dealing with 72 low back pain patients. RESULTS Patients had been monitored by their general practitioner for an average of four years, with a mean frequency of eight appointments per year per patient. Ninety-three percent and 60% of the patients had been referred to a rheumatologist and a surgeon, respectively. Ninety-eight percent had had lumbar radiographies, 80% had undergone a computed tomography scan and 64% had undergone magnetic resonance imaging. The most commonly prescribed medications were anti-inflammatories and first- or second-line analgesics. Thirty percent had already received morphine analgesics and 50% had taken antidepressants. Thirty-two percent had undergone lumbar surgery. Physiotherapy was frequently reported and, indeed, 6% of patients had participated in over 100 sessions. Total sick leave averaged 8.25 months over the studys follow-up period. CONCLUSION The time interval before referral to a multidisciplinary care team is long and so GPs should be encouraged and helped to organize this process earlier. It is also essential to determine factors which predict progression to chronic LBP.

Psychosocial risk factors for transition from acute to chronic low back pain in primary care: a systematic review

European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) Abstracts from the EGPRN meeting in Nice, France, 19-22 May, 2011. Theme: “ Relevant outcome measures in General Practices from the EGPRN meeting in Nice, France, 19-22 May, 2011. Theme: “ Relevant outcome measures in General Practice research into chronic diseases” European Journal of General Practice, 2011; 17: 171–189

Contraception and screening for cervical and breast cancer in neuromuscular disease: A retrospective study of 50 patients monitored at a clinical reference centre

OBJECTIVE To analyse contraceptive methods and the extent of screening for breast and cervical cancer in women with neuromuscular disease, compare these results with data and guidelines for the general population and determine the environmental and attitudinal barriers encountered. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective, descriptive study in a population of female neuromuscular disease patients (aged 20 to 74) monitored at a clinical reference centre. RESULTS Complete datasets were available for 49 patients. Seventy percent used contraception (hormonal contraception in most cases). Sixty-eight percent had undergone screening for cervical cancer at some time in the previous 3 years and 100% of the patients over 50 had undergone a mammography. Architectural accessibility and practical problems were the most common barriers to care and were more frequently encountered by wheelchair-bound, ventilated patients. CONCLUSIONS In general, the patients had good access to contraceptive care and cervical and breast cancer screening. However, specific measures may be useful for the most severely disabled patients.