RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISABILITY AND RADIOGRAPHIC FINDINGS OF LUMBAR DISK DEGENERATION IN SAMPLE OF IRAQI PATIENTS WITH MECHANICAL LOW BACKACHE

Objectives: Disability related to chronic low back pain (LBP) is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon all over the world. The prevalence of backache in middle age and elderly is up to 84%. This study aims to evaluate the associations of X-ray features of lumbar disk degeneration with severity of disability among patients with mechanical LBP. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on a total of 300 patients with chronic mechanical LBP. Severity of disability was measured using Modified Oswestry Disability Index and intensity of backache was assessed using numeric rating scale (0–10). X-ray features of lumbar disc degeneration according to Lane classification and spondylolisthesis were assessed in lateral recumbent lumbar X-rays. Results: The mean age of our sample was 52.45±7.87 and 71.7% of involved patients were women. Most patients were recorded as overweight or obese. The findings of disk space narrowing were mild in 65.7%, moderate in 28.7%, and severe in 5.6%, where the presence of osteophytes were small in 76.9%, moderate in 20.5%, and large in 2.6%. Regarding disability, two-third of cases were focused on minimal disability, followed by moderate, severe, and crippled as (26%), (6%), and (2%), respectively. There was highly significant association between women and pain radiation to legs (p=0.004). Obesity and overweight had meaningless effects on all markers. Conclusions: The severity of disability was significantly more in women, high intensity of lower back pain, presence of pain radiating to legs, moderate/severe disk space narrowing on X-ray, and disk degenerative disease score on X-ray, while age, presence of osteophytes and spondylolisthesis, body mass index, and pain duration were not associated with severity of disability.

Association Between Self-Reported Spinal Morning Stiffness and Radiographic Evidence of Lumbar Disk Degeneration in Participants of the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) Study

Background Low back pain (LBP) is very common and is a main cause of limited activity and work absence. Patients with LBP may also report spinal morning stiffness; this symptom could be useful for identifying subgroups with signs and symptoms related to spinal osteoarthritis. Objective This study investigated whether an association exists between reported spinal morning stiffness and radiographic evidence of lumbar disk degeneration (LDD) in people with LBP and a history of pain of the hip and/or knee. Design This cross-sectional study used 8-year follow-up data from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee study. Methods The association between spinal morning stiffness and radiographic LDD features was assessed with multivariable logistic regression models. Results The presence of osteophytes was significantly associated with spinal morning stiffness (odds ratio [OR] = 2.1 [95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3–3.2]) as was the presence of grade 2 or 3 disk space narrowing (OR = 2.0 [95% CI = 1.1–3.5]). There was also a significant association between morning stiffness persisting for > 30 minutes and grade 2 osteophytes (OR = 2.6 [95% CI = 1.1–6.2]) and grade 1 disk space narrowing (OR = 2.0 [95% CI = 1.1–3.6]). Furthermore, there was a significant association between moderate spinal morning stiffness and the presence of osteophytes (OR = 2.0 [95% CI = 1.2–3.2]). Both the presence of osteophytes and disk space narrowing were significantly associated with severe spinal morning stiffness (for osteophytes: OR = 2.0 [95% CI = 1.2–3.7]; for narrowing at L1-S1: OR = 1.8 [95% CI = 1.1–3.1]). Limitations Only lumbar lateral radiographs were available for each participant, implying that the LDD features could have been underestimated. The quality of the radiographs was not consistent. Conclusions This study showed an association between self-reported spinal morning stiffness and symptomatic LDD. When morning stiffness lasted > 30 minutes, there was a significant association with the features of LDD. The association was stronger when the severity of spinal morning stiffness increased.

The Dose-Response Relationship Between Cumulative Lifting Load and Lumbar Disk Degeneration Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings

BackgroundLumbar disk degeneration (LDD) has been related to heavy physical loading. However, the quantification of the exposure has been controversial, and the dose-response relationship with the LDD has not been established.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the dose-response relationship between lifetime cumulative lifting load and LDD.DesignThis was a cross-sectional study.MethodsEvery participant received assessments with a questionnaire, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine, and estimation of lumbar disk compression load. The MRI assessments included assessment of disk dehydration, annulus tear, disk height narrowing, bulging, protrusion, extrusion, sequestration, degenerative and spondylolytic spondylolisthesis, foramina narrowing, and nerve root compression on each lumbar disk level. The compression load was predicted using a biomechanical software system.ResultsA total of 553 participants were recruited in this study and categorized into tertiles by cumulative lifting load (ie, <4.0 × 105, 4.0 × 105 to 8.9 × 106, and ≥8.9 × 106 Nh). The risk of LDD increased with cumulative lifting load. The best dose-response relationships were found at the L5–S1 disk level, in which high cumulative lifting load was associated with elevated odds ratios of 2.5 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]=1.5, 4.1) for dehydration and 4.1 (95% CI=1.9, 10.1) for disk height narrowing compared with low lifting load. Participants exposed to intermediate lifting load had an increased odds ratio of 2.1 (95% CI=1.3, 3.3) for bulging compared with low lifting load. The tests for trend were significant.LimitationsThere is no “gold standard” assessment tool for measuring the lumbar compression load.ConclusionsThe results suggest a dose-response relationship between cumulative lifting load and LDD.