Search

Background: The Back Belief Questionnaire (BBQ) measures beliefs about negative consequences of back pain. The aim of this study was to describe the back beliefs of a large clinical population with low back pain (LBP), to investigate the associations between back beliefs and patient characteristics when care-seeking, and between on-going pain and back beliefs at follow up.Methods: Patients aged over 18, consulting with LBP with or without radicular pain of all symptom durations, were recruited from chiropractic clinics. The BBQ was completed on the first visit and at 3- and 12-month follow-ups. Sociodemographic- and symptom-related questions were answered at baseline. A BBQ sum score was calculated at all three time points, and linear regression was used to analyse the cross-sectional association between baseline patient characteristics and BBQ scores. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test differences in BBQ scores for patients with and without on-going LBP at 3- and 12-months follow up.Results: The baseline population consisted of 2295 participants. The median BBQ sum scores at baseline, 3 and 12 months had interquartile ranges of 33 [29-36], 33 [29-37], and 31 [27-35] respectively. Patient characteristics and symptoms were associated with baseline BBQ scores (p < 0.05), but most association were weak. The strongest association was with severe disability (4.0 points (95% CI 3.3-4.6) lower BBQ than no disability). Negative beliefs were related to more severe LBP at baseline and with on-going pain at follow up.Conclusion: At a population level, back beliefs were generally positive and relatively constant over time, but misconceptions about a poor prognosis were common. Studies exploring individual patterns of back beliefs and associations with clinical outcomes over time are recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• There is a high variation in measuring causal beliefs about low back pain. • No measurement exists that clearly isolates causal beliefs from other belief domains. • There is a lack of studies exploring longitudinal relationships between causal beliefs and health outcomes. • Causal beliefs are just one element of a complex beliefs construct, and there is very little quantitative evidence from which its unique relevance can be judged. To explore how causal beliefs regarding non-specific low back pain (LBP) have been quantitatively investigated. A scoping review based on the guidelines by the JBI (former Joanna Briggs Institute) was conducted. We searched Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, and CINAHL for relevant studies and included peer-reviewed original articles that measured causal beliefs about non-specific LBP among adults and reported results separate from other belief domains. A total of 81 studies were included, of which 62 (77%) had cross sectional designs, 11 (14%) were cohort studies, 3 (4%) randomized controlled trials, 4 (5%) non-randomized controlled trials, and 1 (1%) case control. Only 15 studies explicitly mentioned cause, triggers, or etiology in the study aim. We identified the use of 6 questionnaires from which a measure of causal beliefs could be obtained. The most frequently used questionnaire was the Illness Perception Questionnaire which was used in 8 of the included studies. The studies covered 308 unique causal belief items which we categorized into 15 categories, the most frequently investigated being causal beliefs related to " structural injury or impairment" , which was investigated in 45 (56%) of the studies. The second and third most prevalent categories were related to " lifting and bending " (26 studies [32%]) and " mental or psychological " (24 studies [30%]). There is a large variation in how causal beliefs are measured and a lack of studies designed to investigate causal beliefs, and of studies determining a longitudinal association between such beliefs and patient outcomes. This scoping review identified an evidence gap and can inspire future research in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe characteristics and primary healthcare utilisation in Danish patients with low back pain (LBP) or neck/thoracic spine pain (NTP) 8 years before and 2 years after assessment in secondary care. Methods: In this cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 18 who were assessed at an outpatient spine clinic from 2013 to 2021 and linked self‐reported information with national registry data. We calculated the prevalence of all‐cause healthcare utilisation in primary care. Then, we determined changes in the number of consultations from before to after assessment in secondary care using generalised estimating equations. Results: We included 56,949 LBP patients and 18,926 NTP patients. The baseline characteristics were similar overall. For both LBP and NTP, all‐cause healthcare utilisation increased slightly over time, with a substantial increase in the quarter before the secondary care assessment and a decrease after. Before the assessment, almost all patients consulted general practitioners (95%), while some consulted physiotherapists or chiropractors (60%). Overall, consultations decreased by 19% and 17% for patients with LBP and NTP from 12 to 1 month before to 1–12 months after the assessment. In contrast, 13–24 months after assessment, we found a slight increase in consultations in both groups compared to the same period before. Conclusions: Patients with LBP and NTP were similar and used similar primary healthcare, which slightly increased over the 10 years. As physiotherapists and chiropractors are first‐line providers of guideline‐recommended spine pain treatment, the finding that 40% did not consult these professions the year before the secondary care assessment indicates that not all patients receive recommended care before referral. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]