OBJECTIVE: To estimate the one year prognosis and identify prognostic factors in cases of recent onset low back pain managed in primary care. DESIGN: Cohort study with one year follow-up. SETTING: Primary care clinics in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: An inception cohort of 973 consecutive primary care patients (mean age 43.3, 54.8% men) with non-specific low back pain of less than two weeks' duration recruited from the clinics of 170 general practitioners, physiotherapists, and chiropractors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and were contacted six weeks, three months, and 12 months after the initial consultation. Recovery was assessed in terms of return to work, return to function, and resolution of pain. The association between potential prognostic factors and time to recovery was modelled with Cox regression. RESULTS: The follow-up rate over the 12 months was more than 97%. Half of those who reduced their work status at baseline had returned to previous work status within 14 days (95% confidence interval 11 to 17 days) and 83% had returned to previous work status by three months. Disability (median recovery time 31 days, 25 to 37 days) and pain (median 58 days, 52 to 63 days) took much longer to resolve. Only 72% of participants had completely recovered 12 months after the baseline consultation. Older age, compensation cases, higher pain intensity, longer duration of low back pain before consultation, more days of reduced activity because of lower back pain before consultation, feelings of depression, and a perceived risk of persistence were each associated with a longer time to recovery. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with acute low back pain in primary care, prognosis was not as favourable as claimed in clinical practice guidelines. Recovery was slow for most patients. Nearly a third of patients did not recover from the presenting episode within a year.
An operant behavioural and time-contingent graded exercise therapy program was developed to improve functional ability irrespective of pain experience in patients with chronic shoulder complaints. The clinical effectiveness of graded exercise therapy compared to usual care was evaluated in a randomised clinical trial. Assessments were carried out before and after 12 weeks of treatment. Performance of daily activities was measured by two outcome measures: the main complaints instrument and the Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ). Patients were eligible for participation if they had suffered from shoulder complaints for at least three months. Patients suffering from systemic diseases, referred pain or severe biomedical or psychiatric disorders were excluded. Patients (n = 176) were randomised and allocated either to graded exercise therapy (n = 87) or usual care (n = 89). Graded exercise therapy led to greater improvement in the performance of daily activities than usual care. However, only mean differences between groups in performance of activities related to the main complaints reached statistical significance (p = 0.049; 95% CI 0.0 to 15.0). The observed beneficial effects were considered to be small to moderate (calculated effect sizes: 0.30 for the main complaints instrument and 0.07 for the SDQ). Subgroup analysis showed larger improvements on the mean complaints instrument in patients not reporting pain reduction over time. Graded exercise therapy seems to be less effective in restoring performance of daily activities as assessed by the SDQ in patients showing a painful arc during physical examination. Results showed that graded exercise therapy is more effective in restoring the ability to daily activities in patients with chronic shoulder complaints than usual care, although beneficial effects are small.
