腰背痛的分类及其与残疾、生活质量和社会人口因素的关系:使用 PainDETECT 问卷进行的全面检查。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1080/03007995.2024.2378177
Zachary Gan, Stone Sima, Samuel Lapkin, Ashish D Diwan
{"title":"腰背痛的分类及其与残疾、生活质量和社会人口因素的关系:使用 PainDETECT 问卷进行的全面检查。","authors":"Zachary Gan, Stone Sima, Samuel Lapkin, Ashish D Diwan","doi":"10.1080/03007995.2024.2378177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is a debilitating phenomenon that significantly impacts quality-of-life (QoL). The PainDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) is a screening tool aimed at distinguishing nociceptive pain (NoP) and neuropathic pain (NeP) classifications. Associations between these classifications and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and sociodemographic parameters are yet to be established.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to determine the relationship between NeP as assessed by the PD-Q and pain, disability, QoL, and sociodemographic factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospectively collected database was conducted involving 512 patients aged >18 years who presented to a tertiary spine clinic for LBP having completed the PainDETECT questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol Five-Dimensional (EQ-5D) questionnaire, or answered questions regarding sociodemographic status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The NeP group had a higher mean numerical rating scale (NRS) score (7.96<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>1.54 vs. 5.76<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>2.27, <i>p</i> <.001) and lower age (55<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>15.6 vs. 59<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>17.8, <i>p</i> <.05) compared to the NoP group. When confounded for NRS, analysis of covariance demonstrated an 89.5% higher total ODI score (<i>p</i> <.001) and 50.5% lower EQ-5D utility score (<i>p</i> <.001) in the NeP compared to NoP group. Smokers and individuals with a no partner marital status were 2.373 (OR = 2.373, 95% CI = 1.319-4.266, <i>p</i> <.01) and 2.384 times (OR = 2.384, 95% CI = 1.390-4.092, <i>p</i> <.01) more likely to have NeP compared to NoP, respectively. Patients with NeP were also of lower income class compared to patients with NoP (Z = -2.45, <i>p</i> <.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NeP was associated with higher levels of disability and lower QoL. Smokers, individuals with a no partner marital status, and individuals with a lower income class were more likely to suffer NeP rather than NoP. These findings have illuminated a crucial notion: in patients with elevated NRS, the detrimental impact of NeP on patient wellbeing underscores the fundamental need to represent pain on a nociceptive-neuropathic continuum, permitting more accurate differentiation of pain components.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low back pain classifications and their associations with disability, quality-of-life, and sociodemographic factors: a comprehensive examination using the PainDETECT questionnaire.\",\"authors\":\"Zachary Gan, Stone Sima, Samuel Lapkin, Ashish D Diwan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03007995.2024.2378177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is a debilitating phenomenon that significantly impacts quality-of-life (QoL). The PainDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) is a screening tool aimed at distinguishing nociceptive pain (NoP) and neuropathic pain (NeP) classifications. Associations between these classifications and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and sociodemographic parameters are yet to be established.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to determine the relationship between NeP as assessed by the PD-Q and pain, disability, QoL, and sociodemographic factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospectively collected database was conducted involving 512 patients aged >18 years who presented to a tertiary spine clinic for LBP having completed the PainDETECT questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol Five-Dimensional (EQ-5D) questionnaire, or answered questions regarding sociodemographic status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The NeP group had a higher mean numerical rating scale (NRS) score (7.96<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>1.54 vs. 5.76<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>2.27, <i>p</i> <.001) and lower age (55<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>15.6 vs. 59<math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math>17.8, <i>p</i> <.05) compared to the NoP group. When confounded for NRS, analysis of covariance demonstrated an 89.5% higher total ODI score (<i>p</i> <.001) and 50.5% lower EQ-5D utility score (<i>p</i> <.001) in the NeP compared to NoP group. Smokers and individuals with a no partner marital status were 2.373 (OR = 2.373, 95% CI = 1.319-4.266, <i>p</i> <.01) and 2.384 times (OR = 2.384, 95% CI = 1.390-4.092, <i>p</i> <.01) more likely to have NeP compared to NoP, respectively. Patients with NeP were also of lower income class compared to patients with NoP (Z = -2.45, <i>p</i> <.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NeP was associated with higher levels of disability and lower QoL. Smokers, individuals with a no partner marital status, and individuals with a lower income class were more likely to suffer NeP rather than NoP. These findings have illuminated a crucial notion: in patients with elevated NRS, the detrimental impact of NeP on patient wellbeing underscores the fundamental need to represent pain on a nociceptive-neuropathic continuum, permitting more accurate differentiation of pain components.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2378177\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2024.2378177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:腰背痛(LBP)是一种严重影响生活质量(QOL)的衰弱现象。疼痛检测问卷(PD-Q)是一种筛查工具,旨在区分痛觉性疼痛(NoP)和神经性疼痛(NeP)的分类。这些分类与患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)和社会人口学参数之间的关系尚未确定:本研究旨在确定由 PD-Q 评估的 NeP 与疼痛、残疾、QOL 和社会人口学因素之间的关系:该研究对正在进行的前瞻性数据库进行了回顾性分析,涉及 512 名年龄大于 18 岁、因腰痛到一家三级脊柱诊所就诊的患者,这些患者填写了疼痛检测问卷、Oswestry 残疾指数 (ODI)、EuroQol 五维 (EQ-5D) 问卷或回答了有关社会人口学状况的问题:NeP组的数字评分量表(NRS)平均得分更高(7.96±1.54 vs. 5.76±2.27,p ±15.6 vs. 59±17.8,p 结论:NeP与更高的疼痛水平相关:NeP 与较高的残疾程度和较低的 QOL 有关。吸烟者、无伴侣婚姻状况者和低收入阶层的人更有可能患 NeP,而不是 NoP。这些发现揭示了一个重要的概念:在 NRS 升高的患者中,NeP 对患者健康的不利影响凸显了在痛觉-神经病理连续体上表示疼痛的基本需要,从而可以更准确地区分疼痛的组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Low back pain classifications and their associations with disability, quality-of-life, and sociodemographic factors: a comprehensive examination using the PainDETECT questionnaire.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a debilitating phenomenon that significantly impacts quality-of-life (QoL). The PainDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) is a screening tool aimed at distinguishing nociceptive pain (NoP) and neuropathic pain (NeP) classifications. Associations between these classifications and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and sociodemographic parameters are yet to be established.

Objective: The study aimed to determine the relationship between NeP as assessed by the PD-Q and pain, disability, QoL, and sociodemographic factors.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospectively collected database was conducted involving 512 patients aged >18 years who presented to a tertiary spine clinic for LBP having completed the PainDETECT questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol Five-Dimensional (EQ-5D) questionnaire, or answered questions regarding sociodemographic status.

Results: The NeP group had a higher mean numerical rating scale (NRS) score (7.96±1.54 vs. 5.76±2.27, p <.001) and lower age (55±15.6 vs. 59±17.8, p <.05) compared to the NoP group. When confounded for NRS, analysis of covariance demonstrated an 89.5% higher total ODI score (p <.001) and 50.5% lower EQ-5D utility score (p <.001) in the NeP compared to NoP group. Smokers and individuals with a no partner marital status were 2.373 (OR = 2.373, 95% CI = 1.319-4.266, p <.01) and 2.384 times (OR = 2.384, 95% CI = 1.390-4.092, p <.01) more likely to have NeP compared to NoP, respectively. Patients with NeP were also of lower income class compared to patients with NoP (Z = -2.45, p <.05).

Conclusion: NeP was associated with higher levels of disability and lower QoL. Smokers, individuals with a no partner marital status, and individuals with a lower income class were more likely to suffer NeP rather than NoP. These findings have illuminated a crucial notion: in patients with elevated NRS, the detrimental impact of NeP on patient wellbeing underscores the fundamental need to represent pain on a nociceptive-neuropathic continuum, permitting more accurate differentiation of pain components.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信