Managing low back pain

Jattan, Aaron

doi:10.46747/cfp.6708597

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4 Up to 77% of nurses took LBP-related sick leaves, with an annual mean of 2.03 days. 4 Although the first episode of LBP in the general population commonly occurs in the early 30s and the highest prevalence of LBP occurs at ages between 45 and 60 years old, 5 growing evidence suggests that nursing and medical students tend to develop LBP during their college years. [6][7][8] The 12-month prevalence of LBP in nursing or medical students has been found to be as high as 65%, 6,9 whereas the reported 12-month prevalence rates of LBP among university student athletes and young adults were 39% 10 and 42%, 11 respectively; much lower than nursing or medical students.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence/Incidence of Low Back Pain and Associated Risk Factors Among Nursing and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Wong

Chan

et al. 2021

PM&R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To summarize evidence regarding the prevalence and incidence of low back pain and associated risk factors in nursing and medical students. Type: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Literature Survey: The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015029729). Its reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Seven databases were searched until August 2020 to identify relevant studies. Methodology: Two independent reviewers screened, extracted, and evaluated the risk of bias of the selected studies. Meta-analyses were used to estimate 12-month prevalence/incidence rates of low back pain and associated risk factors in these students. Levels of evidence for risk factors were determined by the updated Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Synthesis: Sixteen studies involving 7072 students were included. The pooled 12-month prevalence rates of low back pain for nursing and medical students were 44% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 27%-61%) and 53% (95% CI: 44%-62%), respectively. The 12-month incidence of low back pain in nursing students ranged from 29% to 67%. No incidence rate was reported in medical students. Strong/moderate-quality evidence supported that final year of study (pooled odds ratio [OR] from five studies, 1.96, 95% CI: 1.13-3.40), anxiety (OR ranging from 3.12 to 4.61), or high mental pressure or psychological distress (OR ranging from 1.37 to 4.52) was associated with a higher 12-month low back pain prevalence in both student groups. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that prior history of low back pain (pooled OR from two studies: 3.46, 95% CI: 1.88-6.36) was associated with a higher 12-month low back pain incidence in nursing students. Similarly, moderate-quality evidence suggested that female medical students (pooled OR from two studies: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.09-2.86) demonstrated a higher 12-month low back pain prevalence than male counterparts. Conclusions: Although it is impossible to alter nonmodifiable risk factors for low back pain, universities may develop and implement proper strategies to mitigate modifiable risk factors in these students.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence/Incidence of Low Back Pain and Associated Risk Factors Among Nursing and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Wong

Chan

et al. 2021

PM&R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generally, the onset of acute LBP symptoms occurs between ages 30 and 60, with the incidence peaking between 45 and 60 years of age. This condition is most common in people over 60, with a prevalence of 25.1% in males and 35.5% in females [5][6][7]. In a 2014 systematic review estimating the global prevalence of LBP, the total was 9.4% in 2010, with men more frequently affected than women (10.1% versus 8.8% prevalence, respectively) [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of Back Pain and Spinal Disorders Among the General Population in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia

Alsaqqa,

Alghamdi,

Basamih

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common global health problems and the second most common reason for seeking medical advice. However, most LBP does not indicate a serious disorder. Over half of the Saudi Arabian population experiences LBP at least once in their lives. Therefore, it is important to assess and understand how people manage this health problem. This study assessed back pain and spinal disorder knowledge among the general population in Saudi Arabia’s western region. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of the general population in western Saudi Arabia. The data were collected using an online, self-administered, Arabic version of the validated questionnaire about LBP. A statistical analysis of the collected data was performed using a software program. Results A total of 754 eligible participants completed the questionnaire. Less than half of the participants could correctly define acute and chronic LBP and sciatica. Only 19.2% of participants were aware that medical history and clinical examinations are used to diagnose LBP. Young participants, university graduates, and unmarried participants had good LBP knowledge. Conclusion This study showed that the general population of Saudi Arabia in the Western region needs more knowledge about the definitions of acute and chronic LBP. However, they had fair knowledge about the aggravating factors and triggers of LBP. Young participants had better knowledge about LBP. Awareness campaigns with brochures and flyers can be used to increase the population’s knowledge.

show abstract

“…The most common advantages are reduced commuting times, increased staff motivation and productivity, and better ability to meet deadlines. On the other hand, the most frequently highlighted disadvantages include difficulty in monitoring performance and communication problems among colleagues, the absence of ergonomic devices in the domestic environment, and an increased possibility of musculoskeletal symptoms [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. The related work section contains a detailed discussion of the available evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on Psychological Stress Perceived among Employees in an Italian University during Mandatory and Voluntary Remote Working during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic

Tobia,

Vittorini,

Di Battista

et al. 2024

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective of the Study: This cross-sectional study examined the perceived psychological well-being of administrative/technical employees and researchers/lecturers at the University of L’Aquila (Italy) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was carried out in two different periods of 2022: April 2022, when remote working was still mandatory, and December 2022, when the pandemic emergency had ended and, in Italy, remote working had become voluntary for two days a week and exclusively for administrative staff. Materials and Methods: Perceived psychological well-being was investigated using the GHQ-12 (Global Health Questionnaire, short-form with 12 items), a self-administered questionnaire created on Google Forms and sent via email to all the employees of the University of L’Aquila. Statistical analysis was conducted using means, standard deviations, and frequency tables for the descriptive analysis of socio-demographic data, while the t-test or Wilcoxon test and the Χ2 test were used to verify the statistical difference and association between categorical variables. Results: Overall, 365 employees, including 118 administrative/technical and 247 research/teaching staff, participated in the survey in April 2022 when remote working was mandatory. Among them, 219 (52.8%) were female and 196 (47.2%) were male. In December 2022, 266 employees engaged in voluntary remote working, including 184 (69.2%) women and 82 (30.8%) men, took part in the study. The most represented age group was 50–59 years old (36.3% of study participants). During mandatory remote working, 83.4% of lecturers reported a perceived level of psychological distress ranging from moderate to severe versus 69.5% of technicians. The percentage of self-reported psychological distress was higher among the technicians forced to work from home (n. 118–42.9%) vs. the technicians working from home on a voluntary basis (n. 157–57.1%), with GHQ score being >14 in 65.5% of enforced remote workers vs. 62.3% of voluntary remote workers. During mandatory remote working, there was a significant difference in the GHQ-12 score between administrative and research staff, particularly related to items such as loss of self-confidence, emotional pressures, and diminished productivity. Moreover, from the comparison between the group of administrative staff engaged in mandatory remote working and those in voluntary remote working for specific GHQ-12 items, a statistically significant difference emerged concerning the perception of not being able to overcome difficulties; the GHQ-12 score was higher in the first group. Significant differences in the overall GHQ-12 score were evident between male and female lecturers, as the latter reported higher levels of perceived stress during mandatory remote working. Discussion: The results confirm that remote working could be associated with a better psychological state of administrative university staff, especially in the case of voluntary remote working. During mandatory remote working, a difference was observed between teaching and administrative staff, with higher stress in the first group and among women. Therefore, our sample appears fragmented in the self-assessment of psychological well-being during remote working, possibly due to profound differences in the organization of work activities between lecturers and administrative employees. Additionally, the increased perception of stress by female lecturers compared to males may reflect gender disparities, as women working from home during the pandemic experienced an increased workload including domestic activities. Conclusions: Remote working is a type of working that has both advantages and disadvantages. An advantage is undoubtedly a better work–life balance; however, the risks of technostress, workaholism, increased sedentary behaviour, and social isolation are negative aspects. This study provides an indicative overview of the psychological state related to remote working in a university setting during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The study might therefore serve as a starting point for further research on the impact of remote working on self-reported psychological well-being, especially in the university environment.

show abstract

Managing low back pain

Abstract: Do not do imaging for lower back pain unless red flags are present.

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Prevalence/Incidence of Low Back Pain and Associated Risk Factors Among Nursing and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Prevalence/Incidence of Low Back Pain and Associated Risk Factors Among Nursing and Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Knowledge of Back Pain and Spinal Disorders Among the General Population in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia

Study on Psychological Stress Perceived among Employees in an Italian University during Mandatory and Voluntary Remote Working during and after the COVID-19 Pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About