Back pain prevalence and visit rates: estimates from U.S. national surveys, 2002.

Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Spine (Impact Factor: 2.45). 12/2006; 31(23):2724-7. DOI: 10.1097/
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Review and analysis of data from two U.S. national surveys in 2002.
To examine the prevalence of back pain and physician visits for back pain in the United States.
National data on the prevalence of back pain become available only intermittently.
We summarized published data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) on the prevalence of back pain and compared it with earlier surveys. We also analyzed the 2002 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) to determine physician visit rates for back pain.
In the 2002 NHIS, there were 31,044 adult respondents. Low back pain lasting at least a whole day in the past 3 months was reported by 26.4% of respondents, and neck pain was reported by 13.8%. Among racial groups, American Indians and Alaska Natives had the highest prevalence of low back pain, and Asian Americans had the lowest. Prevalence generally declined with greater levels of education and increasing income. Prevalence estimates were consistent with those from previous surveys, although methodologic differences limited comparisons. NAMCS data suggested that the proportion of all physician visits attributable to low back pain (2.3% in 2002) has changed little since the early 1990s.
About one fourth of U.S. adults report low back pain in the past 3 months; the proportion of physician visits attributed to back pain has changed little in the past decade.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Low-back pain (LBP) is a common condition and imposes a substantial economic burden upon people living in industrialized societies. A large proportion of people with chronic LBP use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), visit CAM practitioners, or both. Several herbal medicines have been purported for use in treating people with LBP. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of herbal medicine for non-specific LBP. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases up to September 2014: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Clinical, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Portal and PubMed; checked reference lists in review articles, guidelines and retrieved trials; and personally contacted individuals with expertise in this area. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining adults (over 18 years of age) suffering from acute, sub-acute, or chronic non-specific LBP. The interventions were herbal medicines which we defined as plants used for medicinal purposes in any form. Primary outcome measures were pain and function. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A library scientist with the Cochrane Back Review Group conducted the database searches. One review author contacted content experts and acquired relevant citations. We downloaded full references and abstracts of the identified studies and retrieved a hard copy of each study for final inclusion decisions. Two review authors assessed risk of bias, GRADE criteria (GRADE 2004), and CONSORT compliance and a random subset were compared to assessments by a third individual. Two review authors assessed clinical relevance and resolved any disagreements by consensus. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 RCTs (2050 participants) in this review. One trial on Solidago chilensis M. (Brazilian arnica) (20 participants) found very low quality evidence of reduction in perception of pain and improved flexibility with application of Brazilian arnica-containing gel twice daily as compared to placebo gel. Capsicum frutescens cream or plaster probably produces more favourable results than placebo in people with chronic LBP (three trials, 755 participants, moderate quality evidence). Based on current evidence, it is not clear whether topical capsicum cream is more beneficial for treating people with acute LBP compared to placebo (one trial, 40 participants, low quality evidence). Another trial found equivalence of C. frutescens cream to a homeopathic ointment (one trial, 161 participants, very low quality evidence). Daily doses of Harpagophytum procumbens (devil's claw), standardized to 50 mg or 100 mg harpagoside, may be better than placebo for short-term improvements in pain and may reduce use of rescue medication (two trials, 315 participants, low quality evidence). Another H. procumbens trial demonstrated relative equivalence to 12.5 mg per day of rofecoxib (Vioxx®) but was of very low quality (one trial, 88 participants, very low quality). Daily doses of Salix alba (white willow bark), standardized to 120 mg or 240 mg salicin, are probably better than placebo for short-term improvements in pain and rescue medication (two trials, 261 participants, moderate quality evidence). An additional trial demonstrated relative equivalence to 12.5 mg per day of rofecoxib (one trial, 228 participants) but was graded as very low quality evidence. S. alba minimally affected platelet thrombosis versus a cardioprotective dose of acetylsalicylate (one trial, 51 participants). One trial (120 participants) examining Symphytum officinale L. (comfrey root extract) found low quality evidence that a Kytta-Salbe comfrey extract ointment is better than placebo ointment for short-term improvements in pain as assessed by VAS. Aromatic lavender essential oil applied by acupressure may reduce subjective pain intensity and improve lateral spine flexion and walking time compared to untreated participants (one trial, 61 participants,very low quality evidence). No significant adverse events were noted within the included trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: C. frutescens (Cayenne) reduces pain more than placebo. Although H. procumbens, S. alba, S. officinale L., S. chilensis, and lavender essential oil also seem to reduce pain more than placebo, evidence for these substances was of moderate quality at best. Additional well-designed large trials are needed to test these herbal medicines against standard treatments. In general, the completeness of reporting in these trials was poor. Trialists should refer to the CONSORT statement extension for reporting trials of herbal medicine interventions.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 12/2014; 12(12). DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004504.pub4 · 5.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    07/2014; 3(2):81-87. DOI:10.15225/PNN.2014.3.2.5
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mixed methods research methodologies are increasingly applied in nursing research to strengthen the depth and breadth of understanding of nursing phenomena. This article describes the background and benefits of using mixed methods research methodologies, and provides two examples of nursing research that used mixed methods. Mixed methods research produces several benefits. The examples provided demonstrate specific benefits in the creation of a culturally congruent picture of chronic pain management for American Indians, and the determination of a way to assess cost for providing chronic pain care.
    Kango kenkyu. The Japanese journal of nursing research 01/2014; 47(3):207-217.


Available from
May 27, 2014