MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328559796 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181e53334

Poor Back Muscle Endurance Is Related to Pain Catastrophizing in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

2010· article· en· W2328559796 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Larivière, Martin Bilodeau, Robert Forget, R Vadeboncoeur, Hakim Mecheri

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsÉlisabeth Bruyère HospitalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversity of OttawaInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeconditioningMedicinePhysical therapyLow back painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPain catastrophizingLumbarElectromyographyMuscle fatigueBack painAerobic capacityChronic painSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: An experimental and comparative study of chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients and healthy controls. OBJECTIVE: To use a motivation-independent electromyography (EMG) based test of back muscle capacity to determine whether back muscle deconditioning is present in CLBP patients and whether it is related to pain-related psychological variables. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The verification of the deconditioning syndrome in CLBP patients might be biased by the use of performance-based measures to assess physical fitness, especially in patients having fear of injury. Also, the use of lumbar-specific measures of physical fitness, such as back muscle strength and endurance, might be more sensitive to physical deconditioning than more general assessments such as aerobic capacity. METHODS: A time-limited submaximal fatigue test was performed by 27 nonspecific CLBP subjects (14 men) who had not had any surgery, and 31 healthy controls (17 men) while surface EMG signals were collected from back muscles. Motivation-independent EMG indices, which are sensitive to muscle fatigue or to activation patterns, were then computed and entered as input into previously developed regression equations to predict endurance (PTend) and strength (PStrength). Between-group comparisons were completed with patients divided in subgroups based on a median split of pain intensity, fear of movement, or pain catastrophizing scores. RESULTS: Differences between healthy and CLBP subgroups were mainly observed when patients were divided using pain catastrophizing scores (PCS). High-PCS patients showed significantly lower PTend than low-PCS patients. Various EMG indices showed comparable results to PTend. However, some of them also pointed out that the PCS-low patients were more fatigue-resistant and showed different activation patterns comparatively to healthy subjects. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that physical deconditioning that is specific to back muscle capacity was present in a subgroup of patients while the opposite was observed in another subgroup, pain catastrophizing being related to this outcome. These findings support previous theoretical models of pain/disability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207