Physical risk factors for adolescent neck and mid back pain: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Besides low back pain (LBP), also neck pain (NP) and mid back pain (MBP) are common health issues in adolescence. Psychological factors are regarded as main risk factors for spinal pain in adolescence, but recent studies suggest that the importance of physical factors might be underestimated. The purpose of this study was to summarize the results of studies on physical risk factors for adolescent NP and MBP.Methods
Cross-sectional and prospective English studies on NP and MBP in adolescents aged 10 to 18 were searched by a professional librarian in Medline (OvidSP), Premedline (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, PEDro and PsycINFO up to October 2016. Studies that were restricted to self-report via questionnaires were excluded.Results
Eight cross-sectional studies could be included in this review. Some aspects of sagittal alignment in sitting (increased lumbar lordosis) and standing (anteroposition of the head, sway-back posture) were associated with NP. Study comparability was impeded by inconsistent definitions of NP and MBP and a wide variety of outcome measures.Conclusions
This systematic review indicates that prospective studies using a consistent definition of NP and MBP are needed. Such studies might further investigate sagittal alignment in sitting and standing as possible risk factors for NP and MBP in adolescence using a consistent terminology for the outcomes and longitudinal research designs.
SUBMITTER: Wirth B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6151922 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeLow back pain (LBP) is prevalent in military personnel. We aimed to systematically review the literature regarding risk factors for first-time LBP during military service among active duty military personnel.MethodsWe searched six electronic databases (inception-April 2020) for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Eligible studies were independently critically appraised by paired reviewers and a descriptive synthesis was conducted.ResultsWe screened 1981 records, reviewed 118 full-text articles, and synthesised data from eight acceptable quality cohort studies. Studies assessed physical (n = 4), sociodemographic (n = 2), and/or occupational factors (n = 5) associated with LBP. Two studies reported prior LBP was associated with a greater than twofold increased risk of LBP compared to those without prior LBP. Other factors consistently associated with LBP included previous musculoskeletal injury (n = 2), less time spent on physical training (n = 2), female sex (n = 2), and lower rank (n = 2). Factors associated with LBP from single studies included marital status, lower education level, blast injury, job duties, and service type. We found inconsistent associations for performance on physical fitness tests, age, and occupation type. Psychological risk factors were not assessed in any included studies.ConclusionIn active duty personnel, prior history of LBP, previous musculoskeletal injury, less time in physical training, female sex, and lower rank were consistent risk factors for LBP. This information is relevant for researchers, active duty military personnel, and other decision makers. Future studies should explore causal relationships for LBP in this population. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084549.
| S-EPMC8719410 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundYoung adulthood is a sensitive period of life where development of musculoskeletal neck pain may be established and impact future health. The objective of this systematic review was to investigate risk factors for non-specific neck pain in young adults.MethodsSystematic searches were conducted in six databases in September 2019. Prospective cohorts and registry studies including participants in whom the risk factor or the outcome (neck pain) was registered in the ages 18-29?years old were included. The Quality in Prognosis Studies tool was used for quality assessment. A modification of the Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence. Potential risk factors investigated in more than one study were summarised.ResultsSearches yielded 4527 articles, of which six matched the eligibility criteria. Fifty-six potential risk factors were investigated in the six studies, covering a broad range of domains. Five risk factors were investigated in more than one study (female sex, body mass index (BMI), physical activity, duration of computer use and perceived stress). Physical activity and BMI showed no association with neck pain, and inconsistent results were found for female sex, duration of daily computer use and perceived stress. Risk of bias was moderate or high in all studies, and the overall quality of evidence was very low.ConclusionThe studies included many potential risk factors, but none of them showed consistent associations with neck pain. There is a paucity of high-quality studies investigating risk factors for neck pain in young adults.
| S-EPMC7285427 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent condition that substantially impairs individuals' physical functioning. This highlights the need for effective management strategies to improve patient outcomes. It is, therefore, crucial to have knowledge of physical functioning prognostic factors that can predict outcomes to facilitate the development of targeted treatment plans aiming to achieve better patient outcomes. There is no synthesis of evidence for physical functioning measures as prognostic factors in the LBP population. The objective of this systematic review is to synthesize evidence for physical measures of physical functioning as prognostic factors to predict outcomes in LBP.MethodsThe protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Prospective longitudinal observational studies investigating potential physical prognostic factors in LBP and/or low back-related leg pain population will be included, with no restriction on outcome. Searches will be performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL databases, grey literature search using Open Grey System and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, hand-searching journals, and reference lists of included studies. Two independent reviewers will evaluate the eligibility of studies, extract data, assess risk of bias and quality of evidence. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool. Adequacy of clinical, methodological, and statistical homogeneity among included studies will decide quantitative (meta-analysis) or qualitative analysis (narrative synthesis) focused on prognostic factors and strength of association with outcomes. Quality of cumulative evidence will be evaluated using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).DiscussionInformation about prognostic factors can be used to predict outcomes in LBP. Accurate outcome prediction is essential for identifying high-risk patients that allows targeted allocation of healthcare resources, ultimately reducing the healthcare burden.RegistrationPROSPERO, CRD42023406796.
| S-EPMC10712879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:CONTEXT::Low back pain is common in golfers. The risk factors for golf-related low back pain are unclear but may include individual demographic, anthropometric, and practice factors as well as movement characteristics of the golf swing. OBJECTIVE::The aims of this systematic review were to summarize and synthesize evidence for factors associated with low back pain in recreational and professional golfers. DATA SOURCES::A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus electronic databases through September 2017. STUDY SELECTION::Studies were included if they quantified demographic, anthropometric, biomechanical, or practice variables in individuals with and without golf-related low back pain. STUDY DESIGN::Systematic review and meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE::Level 3. DATA EXTRACTION::Studies were independently reviewed for inclusion by 2 authors, and the following data were extracted: characterization of low back pain, participant demographics, anthropometrics, biomechanics, strength/flexibility, and practice characteristics. The methodological quality of studies was appraised by 3 authors using a previously published checklist. Where possible, individual and pooled effect sizes of select variables of interest were calculated for differences between golfers with and without pain. RESULTS::The search retrieved 73 articles, 19 of which met the inclusion criteria (12 case-control studies, 5 cross-sectional studies, and 2 prospective longitudinal studies). Methodological quality scores ranged from 12.5% to 100.0%. Pooled analyses demonstrated a significant association between increased age and body mass and golf-related low back pain in cross-sectional/case-control studies. Prospective data indicated that previous history of back pain predicts future episodes of pain. CONCLUSION::Individual demographic and anthropometric characteristics may be associated with low back pain, but this does not support a relationship between swing characteristics and the development of golf-related pain. Additional high-quality prospective studies are needed to clarify risk factors for back pain in golfers.
| S-EPMC6204638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 epidemic, the prevalence of neck pain among college students has increased due to the shift from offline to online learning and increasing academic and employment pressures. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to identify the personal, occupational, and psychological factors associated with the development of neck pain to promote the development of preventive strategies and early intervention treatment.MethodsSeven electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2022 for cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case----control studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on neck pain. The quality of the selected studies were assessed by American Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the effects of the included risk factors on neck pain.ResultsThirty studies were included, including 18,395 participants. And a total of 33 potentially associated risk factors were identified. Ultimately, 11 risk factors were included in the meta-analysis after assessing, and all results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The factors supported by strong evidence mainly include the improper use of the pillow (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 1.39 to 3.48), lack of exercise (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.53 to 2.30), improper sitting posture (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.39 to 2.78), history of neck and shoulder trauma (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.79 to 3.01), senior grade (OR = 2.86, 95% CI: 2.07 to 3.95), staying up late (OR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.35 to 2.41), long-time electronic product usage daily (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.33 to 1.76), long-time to bow head (OR = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.58 to 2.64), and emotional problems (OR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.66 to 2.63). Risk factors supported by moderate evidence were high stress (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.52) and female gender (OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.87).ConclusionThis study obtained 11 main risk factors affecting college students neck pain, including improper use of the pillow, lack of exercise, improper sitting posture, history of neck and shoulder trauma, senior grade, staying up late, long-term electronic product usage daily, long time to bow head, high stress, emotional problems and female gender.
| S-EPMC10408143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Neck pain (NP) and low back pain (LBP) are common symptoms bothering people in daily life. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used to treat various symptoms and diseases in China and has been demonstrated to be effective. The objective of the present study was to review and analyze the existing data about pain and disability in TCM treatments for NP and LBP.Studies were identified by a comprehensive search of databases, such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, up to September 1, 2013. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM in managing NP and LBP.Seventy five randomized controlled trials (n = 11077) were included. Almost all of the studies investigated individuals experiencing chronic NP (CNP) or chronic LBP (CLBP). We found moderate evidence that acupuncture was more effective than sham-acupuncture in reducing pain immediately post-treatment for CNP (visual analogue scale (VAS) 10 cm, mean difference (MD) = -0.58 (-0.94, -0.22), 95% confidence interval, p = 0.01), CLBP (standardized mean difference = -0.47 (-0.77, -0.17), p = 0.003), and acute LBP (VAS 10 cm, MD = -0.99 (-1.24, -0.73), p< 0.001). Cupping could be more effective than waitlist in VAS (100 mm) (MD = -19.10 (-27.61, -10.58), p < 0. 001) for CNP or medications (e.g. NSAID) for CLBP (MD = -5.4 (-8.9, -0.19), p = 0.003). No serious or life-threatening adverse effects were found.Acupuncture, acupressure, and cupping could be efficacious in treating the pain and disability associated with CNP or CLBP in the immediate term. Gua sha, tai chi, qigong, and Chinese manipulation showed fair effects, but we were unable to draw any definite conclusions, and further research is still needed. The efficacy of tuina and moxibustion is unknown because no direct evidence was obtained. These TCM modalities are relatively safe.
| S-EPMC4339195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAbstracts of systematic reviews (SR) are frequently used to guide clinical decision-making. However, if the abstract is inadequately reported, key information may be missing and it may not accurately summarize the results of the review.ObjectiveWe aimed to investigate 1) if abstracts are fully reported; 2) if abstract reporting is associated with review/journal characteristics in physical therapy for low back pain (LBP); and 3) if these abstracts are consistent with the corresponding full texts.MethodsWe searched the Physiotherapy Evidence Database for SRs in physical therapy for LBP published between 2015 and 2017. Associations between abstract reporting quality and review/journal characteristics were explored with linear regression. Abstract reporting was assessed with the 12 item Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for abstracts (PRISMA-A) checklist. Consistency of reporting between abstracts and the full text was evaluated by comparing responses to each item of the PRISMA-A using Kappa coefficients. Methodological quality of the reviews was assessed with A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2).ResultsWe included 66 SRs, 9 Cochrane and 57 non-Cochrane. Review methodological quality ranged from 'high' (8%) to 'critically low' (76%). The mean ± SD of the "total number of PRISMA-A fully reported items" (range 0-12 points for fully reported items) was 4.1 ± 1.9 points for non-Cochrane review abstracts and 9.9 ± 1.1 points for Cochrane abstracts. Factors associated with reporting quality of abstracts were: journal impact factor (ß 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.35), number of words in abstract (ß 0.01; 95% CI: 0.00, 0.01) and review methodological quality ('critically low' with ß -3.06; 95% CI: -5.30, -0.82; with 'high' as reference variable). There was typically inconsistent reporting between abstract and full text, with most Kappa values lower than 0.60.ConclusionsThe abstracts of SRs in physical therapy for LBP were poorly reported and inconsistent with the full text. The reporting quality of abstracts was higher in journals with a higher impact factor, in abstracts with a greater number of words, and when the review was of higher methodological quality.
| S-EPMC8134840 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth care personnel are exposed to ergonomic hazards, musculoskeletal disorders, and other work-related injuries. Low back pain is the most common musculoskeletal disorder. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of low back pain and the risk factors in health care personnel at the hospital in a form of a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, the articles published in international electronic databases including Web of Knowledge, Embase, Scopus, PubMed were searched until May 2019. We included cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies estimate the prevalence and risk factors for low back pain in health personnel. Data were analyzed using Stata-14 software and random effect model at 95% confidence level.Findings154 studies were included in the study for analysis. The estimated lifetime prevalence of lower back pain in health care personnel was 54.8%. The estimated odds ratios were as follows: age 1.23, female gender 1.11, BMI 1.17, lack of regular physical activity 1.56 occupational factors 1.12, patient related factors 1.24, body position at work 2.55, and stress 1.67.Conclusions/application to practice: The prevalence of low back pain in health care personnel is high. Body position at work, stress and lack of physical activity were the strongest risk factors, respectively. Future studies and educational programs are required to reduce the incidence of low back pain in health care personnel.
| S-EPMC8519806 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPhysical therapy for neck and low back pain is highly variable despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPG). This review aimed to determine the impact of CPG implementation on patient-level outcomes for spinal pain. Implementation strategies were also examined to determine prevalence and potential impact.MethodsMultiple databases were searched through April 2021 for studies assessing CPG implementation in physical therapy for neck and low back pain. Articles were screened for eligibility. The Modified Downs and Black checklist was utilized to determine study quality. Due to the heterogeneity between studies, a meta-analysis was not performed.ResultsTwenty-one studies were included in this review. Implementation strategies were significantly varied between studies. Outcomes pertaining to healthcare utilization, pain, and physical functioning were assessed in relation to the implementation of CPGs. Multiple implementation strategies were identified, with Managing Quality as the most frequently utilized key implementation process. Findings indicate CPG implementation decreased healthcare utilization, but inconsistent results were found with physical functioning and pain outcomes.ConclusionsCPG implementation appears to have a beneficial effect on healthcare utilization outcomes, but may not impact pain and physical functioning outcomes. Effective CPG implementation strategies remain unknown, though utilizing implementation framework may improve outcomes. More research is needed to determine the most effective implementation strategies and effects on pain and physical function outcomes.
| S-EPMC9164354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledBackgroundIt is generally believed that the prevalence of back pain increases with age and as the proportion of elderly will keep rising we may be facing serious public health concerns in the future.AimThe aim of this systematic literature review is to establish whether back pain (i.e. neck, mid-back and/or low back pain) becomes increasingly common in the older population, specifically to study 1) whether there is a significant increase in the prevalence of back pain after middle age, and 2) whether there is a significant gradually increasing prevalence of back pain with continued old age.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in Pubmed on articles in English, published between January 2000 and July 2011. Non-clinical studies from the developed countries with prevalence estimates on elderly people (60+) on any type of self-reported back pain and on different age groups with adequate sample sizes were included in the review. The included articles were extracted for information by two independent reviewers.ResultsA total of 12 articles were included covering the entire spine. Neck pain was studied nine times, low back pain eight times, back pain three times, upper back two times and neck/shoulders once. All studies showed no significant increase of back pain with age, neither when passing from middle age (i.e. 45+ years of age) into the sixties, nor later in life. In contrast, most studies reported a decline for the oldest group.ConclusionsBack pain is no more common in the elderly population (>60 years) when compared to the middle age population. Back pain does not increase with increasing age, but seems to decline in the oldest people.
| S-EPMC3526387 | biostudies-literature