Methodologic issues in low back pain research in primary care

被引:93
作者
Bouter, LM [1 ]
van Tulder, MW [1 ]
Koes, BW [1 ]
机构
[1] Free Univ Amsterdam, Fac Med, Inst Res Extramural Med, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
classification; low back pain; methodology; outcome measures; primary care; study design;
D O I
10.1097/00007632-199809150-00019
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Narrative review and discussion of the selected literature. Objectives. To discuss some important methodologic challenges in low back pain research in primary care. Summary of Background Data. Many methodologic problems must be confronted when conducting low back pain research. Some of these problems are back pain specific or specific to the primary care setting. Methods. Methodologic problems related to four research issues wilt be discussed: study designs, definition of low back pain, determinants of low back pain, and outcome assessment. Results. Two fundamentally different study designs are frequently used in low back pain research, namely observational studies and experimental studies. The definition of low back pain is typically restricted to a highly variable self-reported symptom, the sensation of pain in the back. There clearly is a need for an evidence-based classification system for low back pain. Because a tenable theoretical framework is lacking, it is difficult to know which determinants of low back pain should be quantified. Low back pain studies focus usually on health-related quality-of-life outcome parameters. The identification of the minimum clinically relevant changes for the most important outcome instruments needs further consideration. Conclusions. In years to come, low back pain researchers are challenged to overcome some of these (and other) problems to enhance the quality of low back pain research in primary care.
引用
收藏
页码:2014 / 2020
页数:7
相关论文
共 55 条
  • [1] Assendelft W J, 1996, J Manipulative Physiol Ther, V19, P499
  • [2] Reliability of lumbar spine radiograph reading by chiropractors
    Assendelft, WJJ
    Bouter, LM
    Knipschild, PG
    Wilmink, JT
    [J]. SPINE, 1997, 22 (11) : 1235 - 1241
  • [3] Evaluating changes in health status: Reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders
    Beaton, DE
    HoggJohnson, S
    Bombardier, C
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 50 (01) : 79 - 93
  • [4] MEASURING THE FUNCTIONAL STATUS OF PATIENTS WITH LOW-BACK-PAIN - ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF 4 DISEASE-SPECIFIC QUESTIONNAIRES
    BEURSKENS, AJ
    DEVET, HC
    KOKE, AJ
    VANDERHEIJDEN, GJ
    KNIPSCHILD, PG
    [J]. SPINE, 1995, 20 (09) : 1017 - 1028
  • [5] BEURSKENS AJH, 1996, LOW BACK PAIN TRACTI, P83
  • [6] Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: A comparison of different instruments
    Beurskens, AJHM
    deVet, HCW
    Koke, AJA
    [J]. PAIN, 1996, 65 (01) : 71 - 76
  • [7] A GUIDE TO INTERPRETING EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES ON THE ETIOLOGY OF BACK PAIN
    BOMBARDIER, C
    KERR, MS
    SHANNON, HS
    FRANK, JW
    [J]. SPINE, 1994, 19 (18) : S2047 - S2056
  • [8] PSYCHOSOCIAL FACTORS AT WORK AND MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE
    BONGERS, PM
    DEWINTER, CR
    KOMPIER, MAJ
    HILDEBRANDT, VH
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF WORK ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH, 1993, 19 (05) : 297 - 312
  • [9] An agenda for primary care research on low back pain
    Borkan, JM
    Cherkin, DC
    [J]. SPINE, 1996, 21 (24) : 2880 - 2884
  • [10] BRONFORT G, 1997, EFFICACY MANUAL THER, P69