Altered breathing pattern valuation relatively to dyspnea assessment and treatment for low back pain: Effects of clinical practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. e1-e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram Mohan ◽  
Aatit Paungmali ◽  
Patraporn Sitilertpisan
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Breathing Pattern ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Dyspnea Assessment

Role of Vaitarana Basti in the management of Gridhrasi w.s.r. to Sciatica

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Suresh N. Hakkandi ◽  
Dr. Manjunath Akki ◽  
Dr. Bhavana KS
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Routine Activity ◽  
Daily Routine ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Common Condition ◽  
Locomotor System

Vata Vyadhi is one of the most prevailing health problems in our day today clinical practice, Gridhrasi is one among them. Gridhrasi is Shoola Pradhana Nanatmaja Vatavyadhi, affecting the locomotor system and disable from daily routine activity. Gridhrasi the name itself indicates the way of gait shown by the patient due to extreme pain i.e. like Gridhra or Vulture. Gridhrasi is a condition characterized by Ruk, Toda, Stambha, Spandana in Sphik Pradesha and radiates downwards to Kati, Prusta, Uru, Janu, Jangha and Pada. Gridhrasi can be compared with Sciatica. Pain is the chief cause of person to visit a doctor. Although low back pain is a common condition that affects as many as 80 to 90 percent of people during their lifetime. Gridhrasi can be cured by the help of Vaitarana Basti. Hence in the case study of male patient of age 30 yrs presenting with cardinal clinical sign and symptoms of Gridhrasi are Ruka, Toda and Muhu Spandana in the Sphika, Kati, Uru, Janu, Jangha and Pada in order and Sakthikshepanigraha that is restricted lifting of the leg.

Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

2017 ◽  
Vol 166 (7) ◽  
pp. 493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Chou ◽  
Richard Deyo ◽  
Janna Friedly ◽  
Andrea Skelly ◽  
Robin Hashimoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guideline ◽  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Low Back

Treatment of low back pain in 2020: Monitoring clinical practice through audit

Physiotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. e193
Author(s):  
W.J. Gregory ◽  
K. Jeavons ◽  
G. Ford
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Low Back

scholarly journals Optimizing management of low back pain through the pain and disability drivers management model: A feasibility trial

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. e0245689
Author(s):  
Christian Longtin ◽  
Simon Décary ◽  
Chad E. Cook ◽  
Marc O. Martel ◽  
Sylvie Lafrenaye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Pragmatic Trial ◽  
Attrition Rate ◽  
Feasibility Trial ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Low Back

Introduction Self-reported levels of disability in individuals with low back pain (LBP) have not improved in the last decade. A broader perspective and a more comprehensive management framework may improve disability outcomes. We recently developed and validated the Low Back Pain and Disability Drivers Management (PDDM) model, which aims to identify the domains driving pain and disability to guide clinical decisions. The objectives of this study were to determine the applicability of the PDDM model to a LBP population and the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic trial, as well as to explore clinicians’ perceived acceptability of the PDDM model’s use in clinical settings. Methods This study was an one-arm prospective feasibility trial. Participants included physiotherapists working with a population suffering from LBP and their patients aged 18 years or older presenting with a primary complaint of LBP that sought a new referral and deemed fit for rehabilitation from private and public clinical settings. Clinicians participated in a one-day workshop on the integration of the PDDM model into their clinical practice, and were asked to report various LBP-related outcomes via self-reported questionnaires (i.e., impact of pain on physical function, nervous system dysfunctions, cognitive-emotional factors, work disabilities) at baseline and at six-week follow-up. Physiotherapists’ acceptability of the use of the PDDM model and appreciation of the training were assessed via semi-structured phone interviews. Analyses focused on a description of the model’s applicability to a LBP population, feasibility outcomes and acceptability measures. Results Applicablity of the PDDM model was confirmed since it successfully established the profile of patients according to the elements of each categories, and each of the 5 domains of the model was represented among the study sample. Trial was deemed feasible contingent upon few modifications as our predefined success criteria for the feasibility outcomes were met but feasibility issues pertaining to data collection were highlighted. Twenty-four (24) clinicians and 61 patients were recruited within the study’s timeframe. Patient’s attrition rate (29%) and clinicians’ compliance to the study protocol were adequate. Clinicians’ perceived acceptability of the use of the model in clinical settings and their appreciation of the training and online resources were both positive. Recommendations to improve the model’s integration in clinical practice, content of the workshop and feasibility of data collection methods were identified for future studies. A positive effect for all patients’ reported outcome measures were also observed. All outcome measures except for the PainDetect questionnaire showed a statistically significant reduction post-intervention (p<0.05). Conclusion These findings provide preliminary evidence of the potential of the PDDM model to optimize LBP management as well as conducting a future larger-scale pragmatic trial to determine its effectiveness. Trial registration Clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03949179.

scholarly journals Expression of concern: Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2019-100886eoc1
Keyword(s):  
British Journal ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Exercise Training ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Editorial Note ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Recent Editorial

Editorial NoteAs discussed in a recent editorial, the British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) rescinds the Expression of Concern [1] for a recent network meta-analysis (NMA) [2] that was issued solely on the basis of comments by Professor Maher and colleagues [3]. The original authors (Dr Belavy and colleagues) have responded [4]. The original NMA paper did not require any changes. We editors of the BJSM have full confidence in the findings of the NMA [2]. The findings of the NMA inform clinical practice and can serve to inform clinical practice guidelines.Karim Khan, MD, PhDEditor-in-Chief, BJSMJuly 27th, 2020REFERENCES1 Expression of concern: Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2020;:bjsports-2019-100886eoc1. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-100886eoc12 Owen PJ, Miller CT, Mundell NL, et al. Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2019;:in press. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-1008863 Maher CG, Hayden JA, Saragiotto BT, et al. Letter in response to: “Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis” by Owen et al. Br J Sports Med Published Online First: 5 February 2020. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-1018124 Belavy DL, Owen PJ, Miller CT, et al. Response to Discussion: “Which specific modes of exercise training are most effective for treating low back pain? Network meta-analysis.” Br J Sports Med Published Online First: 10 June 2020. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2020-102673

scholarly journals Prevalence of low backache in practicing dentists of Eastern region of Nepal

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 29-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Shubham ◽  
RP Yadav
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Eastern Region ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Severe Back Pain

AIM: To analyze the prevalence of low backache among practicing dentists of Eastern Region of Nepal. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional, questionnaire based study was conducted among the practicing dentists of Eastern region of Nepal from April 2012 July 2012. A pre-tested, pre-calibrated self-administered verbal rating questionnaire "The Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire" was distributed to a random sample of 85 dentists from different parts of eastern region of Nepal through direct contact and e-mails. RESULTS: A total of 85 dentists were identified among which 76 dentists participated in the research. Research finding showed that the prevalence of back pain among practicing dentists in Eastern region of Nepal was 90.79% among which 50% (minimal), 36.84% (moderate) and3.95% (severe). Among 45 males 4.44% had no back pain, 53.33% had minimal, 37.77% had moderate and 4.44% had severe back pain. On contrary females (31 participants) showed lesser prevalence of low back pain with 16.12% no back pain, 45.16% minimal, 35.48% moderate and3.22% severe back pain. The participants were divided into 3 different age group intervals in which dentists between 25-30 years were 50 in which 8% had no back pain, 58% had minimal, 28% moderate and 6% had severe back pain. Between 31-35 years were 22 participants in which 50% had minimal, 50% moderate and 0% had severe low back pain. More than 35 years were 4 participants in which 75% had no back pain, 25 % had moderate. Similarly the participants were divided into 5 different groups according the years of clinical practice in dentists having 1- 2 years of clinical practice (37 participants) had 2.70% no back pain, 56.75% minimal, 35.13% moderate and 5.40% severe back pain. 16 participants had 3-4 years of clinical practice out of which 12.50% had no low back pain, 62.50% had minimal, 18.75% had moderate and 6.25% had severe back pain. 10 participants had 5-6 years of clinical practice out of which 10% had no low back pain, 50% had minimal and 40% had moderate. 9 participants had 7-8 years of clinical practice out of which 11.11% had no low back pain, 33.33% had minimal and 55.55% had moderate. 5 participants had >9 years of clinical practice out of which 75% had no low back pain, 25% had minimal and 25% had moderate. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of back pain among dental personnel in Eastern region of Nepal was relatively high. The significant risk factors associated with it might be poor posture. Innovations for preventive and, ergonomic strategies should be undertaken to reduce the low back pain. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/jucms.v1i4.9570 Journal of Universal College of Medical Sciences (2013) Vol.1 No.04: 29-32

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document