Differences among outcome measures in occupational low back pain

The rate of recurrence in low back pain patients has been reported as high as 70%; therefore, it is believed that researchers have a poor understanding of low back pain recovery. To enhance our understanding of recovery, a large cross-sectional study was conducted to compare outcome measures of retu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of occupational rehabilitation 2005-09, Vol.15 (3), p.329-341
Main Authors: Ferguson, Sue A, Marras, William S, Burr, Deborah L
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Activities of Daily Living
Adult
Asymptomatic
Back pain
Cross-Sectional Studies
Disability Evaluation
Ergonomics
Humans
Industry
Injuries
Laboratories
Low back pain
Low Back Pain - physiopathology
Low Back Pain - rehabilitation
Manufacturing
Middle Aged
Midwestern United States
Occupational Diseases - physiopathology
Occupational Diseases - rehabilitation
Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - methods
Pain Measurement
Questionnaires
Range of motion
Range of Motion, Articular - physiology
Recovery of Function
Recurrence
Rehabilitation, Vocational
Surveys and Questionnaires
Velocity
Workers
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The rate of recurrence in low back pain patients has been reported as high as 70%; therefore, it is believed that researchers have a poor understanding of low back pain recovery. To enhance our understanding of recovery, a large cross-sectional study was conducted to compare outcome measures of return to work, impairment of activities of daily living, pain symptoms, and functional performance probability. A total of 208 workers were examined. The percentage of workers recovered based on return to work criteria was 99% compared to 25% for impairment of activities of daily living, 17% for symptoms, and 12.5% for functional performance probability. Single functional performance measures of range of motion, velocity, and acceleration had recovery rates of 59, 13, and 10%, respectively. It appears that all these criteria are measuring very different parameters of low back pain recovery. The residual loss in functional performance may indicate a decreased tolerance to physical demand providing potential insight for why recurrent low back pain rates are high.
ISSN:1053-0487
1573-3688
DOI:10.1007/s10926-005-5940-4