The spinal stenosis pedometer and nutrition lifestyle intervention (SSPANLI): development and pilot

Tomkins-Lane, Christy; Lafave, Lynne M. Z.; Parnell, Jill A.; Rempel, Jocelyn; Moriartey, Stephanie; Andreas, Yvette; Wilson, Philip M.; Hepler, Charles D.; Ray, Heather; Hu, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.10.015

Cited by 29 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some preliminary work with pedometers demonstrated that people with LSS take an average of around 4,000 steps/day [17], which is considered sedentary [22]. This research is supported by other pedometer-based studies suggesting that people with LSS are severely inactive [2,3,23]. This symptom-related sedentary behavior has many implications for overall health, obesity, and risk for diseases of inactivity [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Objective measurement of free-living physical activity (performance) in lumbar spinal stenosis: are physical activity guidelines being met?

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Research suggests that people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) would benefit from increased physical activity. Yet, to date, we do not have disease-specific activity guidelines for LSS, and the nature of free-living physical activity (performance) in LSS remains unknown. LSS care providers could endorse the 2008 United States Physical Activity Guidelines; however, we do not know if this is realistic. The goal of the present study was to determine the proportion of individuals with LSS meeting the 2008 Guidelines. A secondary goal was to better understand the nature of physical performance in this population. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective study. PATIENT SAMPLE People from the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Accelerometry Database, all of whom have both radiographic and clinical LSS and are seeking various treatments for their symptoms. OUTCOME MEASURES Seven-day accelerometry (functional outcome) and demographics (self-reported). METHODS For the present study, we analyzed only baseline data that were obtained before any new treatments. Patients with at least 4 valid days of baseline accelerometry data were included. We determined the proportion of individuals with LSS meeting the 2008 US Physical Activity Guidelines of at least 150 minutes of moderate-vigorous (MV) physical activity per week in bouts of 10 minutes or more. We also used the novel Physical Performance analysis designed by our group to determine time spent in varying intensities of activity. There are no conflicts of interest to disclose. RESULTS We analyzed data from 75 individuals with a mean age of 68 (SD 9), 37% of whom were male. Three people (4%) were considered Meeting Guidelines (at least 150 MV minutes/week), and 56 (75%) were considered Inactive with not even 1 MV minute/week. With the 10-minute bout requirement removed, 10 of 75 (13%) achieved the 150-minute threshold. The average time spent in sedentary activity was 82%, and of time spent in nonsedentary activity, 99.6% was in the light activity range. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, the present study confirms that people with symptomatic LSS, neurogenic claudication, walking limitations, and LSS-related disability are extremely sedentary and are not meeting guidelines for physical activity. There is an urgent need for interventions aimed at reducing sedentary behavior and increasing the overall level of physical activity in LSS, not only to improve function but also to prevent diseases of inactivity. The present study suggests that reducing sedentary time, increasing time spent in light intensity activity, and increasing time spent in higher intensities of light activity may be appropriate as initial goals for exercise interventions in people with symptomatic LSS and neurogenic claudication, transitioning to moderate activity when appropriate. Results of the present study also demonstrate the importance of employing disease-specific measures for assessment of performance in LSS, and highlight the potential value of these methods for developing targeted and realistic goals for ph...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Increased physical activity in daily life would not only help to prevent diseases of inactivity, but could also positively impact symptoms [23,24]. Research to date investigating physical activity for LSS has demonstrated that physical activity is effective for improving pain and function [25–27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objective measurement of free-living physical activity (performance) in lumbar spinal stenosis: are physical activity guidelines being met?

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This sedentary behavior has a number of important implications for people with LSS, including functional decline, decreased autonomy, and strength deficits [23]. Weight gain associated with inactivity has the potential to limit treatment options, including surgery for people with severe LSS [52][53][54].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Objective Measurement of Free-Living Physical Activity (Performance) in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Are Physical Activity Guidelines Being Met?

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND-Research suggests that people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) would benefit from increased physical activity. Yet, to date, we do not have disease-specific activity guidelines for LSS, and the nature of free-living physical activity (performance) in LSS remains unknown. LSS care providers could endorse the 2008 United States Physical Activity Guidelines; however, we do not know if this is realistic. The goal of the present study was to determine the proportion of individuals with LSS meeting the 2008 Guidelines. A secondary goal was to better understand the nature of physical performance in this population.

show abstract

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Zaina

Tomkins-Lane

Carragee

et al. 2016

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

202

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a debilitating condition associated with degeneration of the spine with aging. ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of different types of surgery compared with different types of non-surgical interventions in adults with symptomatic LSS. Primary outcomes included quality of life, disability, function and pain. Also, to consider complication rates and side effects, and to evaluate short-, intermediate-and long-term outcomes (six months, six months to two years, five years or longer). Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases and two trials registries up to February 2015. We also screened reference lists and conference proceedings related to treatment of the spine. Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical versus non-operative treatments in participants with lumbar spinal stenosis confirmed by clinical and imaging findings. Main resultsFrom the 12,966 citations screened, we assessed 26 full-text articles and included five RCTs (643 participants).Low-quality evidence from the meta-analysis performed on two trials using the Oswestry Disability Index (pain-related disability) to compare direct decompression with or without fusion versus multi-modal non-operative care showed no significant differences at six months (mean difference (MD) -3.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.12 to 2.80) and at one year (MD -6.18, 95% CI -15.03 to 2.66). At 24 months, significant differences favoured decompression (MD -4.43, 95% CI -7.91 to -0.96). Low-quality evidence from 1 Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (Review)

show abstract

The spinal stenosis pedometer and nutrition lifestyle intervention (SSPANLI): development and pilot

Cited by 29 publications

References 75 publications

Objective measurement of free-living physical activity (performance) in lumbar spinal stenosis: are physical activity guidelines being met?

Objective measurement of free-living physical activity (performance) in lumbar spinal stenosis: are physical activity guidelines being met?

Objective Measurement of Free-Living Physical Activity (Performance) in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Are Physical Activity Guidelines Being Met?

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About