Wasiak Radoslaw, Pransky Glenn S, Webster Barbara S
Liberty Mutual Center for Disability Research, 71 Frankland Road, Hopkinton, Massachusetts 01748, USA.
J Occup Rehabil. 2003 Mar;13(1):21-31. doi: 10.1023/a:1021893706683.
Recurrences of low back pain (LBP) have been shown to be both frequent and costly, with reported recurrence rates ranging from 5 to 82%. Numerous methodological approaches have been developed to identify recurrence but there has been no standardized definition of LBP recurrence or required follow-up time. The objective of this study was to compare the methodological approaches used to analyze LBP recurrence in seminal contributions and to describe the differences in definitions of LBP recurrence and follow-up structure. Twelve seminal articles were identified for review during which four types of LBP recurrence definition and two types of follow-up structure were recognized. Definitional and follow-up differences considerably contributed to variations in computed recurrence rates due either to measurement or other methodological shortcomings, such as loss to follow-up and sick person effect. The results suggest that there is a need to develop a standardized definition of LBP recurrence and a standardized approach to follow-up to allow direct comparisons of published research findings. The use of alternative definitions is also likely to impact analyses of risk factors contributing to LBP recurrence and direct and indirect costs associated with treating LBP.
下腰痛(LBP)复发已被证明既频繁又代价高昂,报告的复发率在5%至82%之间。已经开发出许多方法来识别复发,但对于LBP复发并没有标准化的定义,也没有规定所需的随访时间。本研究的目的是比较在重要文献中用于分析LBP复发的方法,并描述LBP复发定义和随访结构的差异。确定了12篇重要文章进行综述,在此期间识别出四种类型的LBP复发定义和两种类型的随访结构。由于测量或其他方法学缺陷,如失访和病人效应,定义和随访差异在很大程度上导致了计算出的复发率的变化。结果表明,需要制定LBP复发的标准化定义和标准化的随访方法,以便能够直接比较已发表的研究结果。使用替代定义也可能影响对导致LBP复发的风险因素以及与治疗LBP相关的直接和间接成本的分析。