Orthopedics

Feature Article 

Low Back Pain and Sciatica Prevalence and Intensity Reported in a Mediterranean Country: Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis

Panagiotis Korovessis, MD, PhD; Thomas Repantis, MD, PhD; Spyros Zacharatos, MD, PhD; Andreas Baikousis, MD, PhD

Abstract

The objective of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to estimate the 6-month prevalence and severity of low back pain and sciatica in a representative sample of an adult Mediterranean population. The study group comprised a sample of 674 adults aged 20 years or older from a mainly (74.8%) urban population. Information regarding low back pain and sciatica prevalence and severity and its related aspects, as well as socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, was collected by personal interviews with a validated questionnaire. The association between the intensity of low back pain and sciatica with several sociodemographic parameters was tested using ordered univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

A total of 266 (39.5%) patients reported low back pain and 166 (24.6%) reported sciatica during the previous 6-month period. A woman living in a Mediterranean country reported low back pain of increased severity if she was a married housewife aged older than 65 years who was a smoker and suffered from depression. More severe sciatic pain was reported by working married women older than 65 years who were smokers.

Drs Korovessis, Repantis, and Zacharatos are from the Orthopedic Department, General Hospital “Agios Andreas,” Patras, and Dr Baikousis is from the Orthopedic Department, General Hospital of Messolonghi, Messolonghi, Greece.

Drs Korovessis, Repantis, Zacharatos, and Baikousis have no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

The authors thank Ms M. Andriopoulou and Mr B. Papanikolaou for their assistance in preparing this article.

Correspondence should be addressed to: Panagiotis Korovessis, MD, PhD, Orthopedic Department, General Hospital “Agios Andreas,” 1 Tsertidou St, 26224 Patras, Greece (korovess@otenet.gr).

Abstract

The objective of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to estimate the 6-month prevalence and severity of low back pain and sciatica in a representative sample of an adult Mediterranean population. The study group comprised a sample of 674 adults aged 20 years or older from a mainly (74.8%) urban population. Information regarding low back pain and sciatica prevalence and severity and its related aspects, as well as socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, was collected by personal interviews with a validated questionnaire. The association between the intensity of low back pain and sciatica with several sociodemographic parameters was tested using ordered univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

A total of 266 (39.5%) patients reported low back pain and 166 (24.6%) reported sciatica during the previous 6-month period. A woman living in a Mediterranean country reported low back pain of increased severity if she was a married housewife aged older than 65 years who was a smoker and suffered from depression. More severe sciatic pain was reported by working married women older than 65 years who were smokers.

Drs Korovessis, Repantis, and Zacharatos are from the Orthopedic Department, General Hospital “Agios Andreas,” Patras, and Dr Baikousis is from the Orthopedic Department, General Hospital of Messolonghi, Messolonghi, Greece.

Drs Korovessis, Repantis, Zacharatos, and Baikousis have no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

The authors thank Ms M. Andriopoulou and Mr B. Papanikolaou for their assistance in preparing this article.

Correspondence should be addressed to: Panagiotis Korovessis, MD, PhD, Orthopedic Department, General Hospital “Agios Andreas,” 1 Tsertidou St, 26224 Patras, Greece (korovess@otenet.gr).

The lifetime prevalence of low back pain is reported to be more than 70% in industrialized countries (1-year prevalence, 15% to 45%; adult incidence, 5% per year) with varying degrees of symptom severity.1 The prevalence of low back pain during school age approaches that seen in adults,2,3 increases from childhood to adolescence,4 and peaks between ages 35 and 55 years.5

Few studies specifically examine sciatica, but some low back pain studies include data on sciatica prevalence, risk factors, and natural history. Low back-related leg pain, or sciatica, is one of the most common variations of low back pain.6 Sciatica is known by a range of terms in the literature, such as lumbosacral radicular syndrome, radiculopathy, nerve root pain, and nerve root entrapment or irritation. Controversy exists in clinical and research circles about the use of sciatica as a term.5,6 Although definitions of sciatica used in epidemiological surveys vary, sciatic pain is generally defined as pain radiating to the leg, normally below the knee and into the foot and toes. As with low back pain, sciatica is a symptom rather than a specific diagnosis, but lumbar disk herniation and lumbar canal or foraminal stenosis are typical pathologies that may cause sciatic pain.

Patients with sciatica usually have a more persistent and severe type of pain than patients with low back pain, have a less favorable outcome, consume more health resources, and have more prolonged disability and absence from work.5,7–12

Low back pain was long considered a mainly mechanical problem. However, in the past decade, several authors13–15 reported that sociocultural, socioeconomic, and work-related factors (eg, poor job satisfaction and psychological stress at work) not previously investigated may contribute to low back pain prevalence and intensity.16–22 A patient’s culture may also affect not only the likelihood of reporting low back pain, but also the perception and intensity of low back pain.23,24

It is well known among researchers that significant cultural, social, economic, and mentality differences exist between the people living in northern and southern Europe. The objective of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to estimate the 6-month prevalence and severity of low back pain and sciatica in a representative sample of a general adult Mediterranean population.

Materials and Methods

This study was conducted between October 2005 and May 2006 in a prefecture (ie, second-level administrative division) located in the southwestern region of a Mediterranean country with a mainly urban population of approximately 350,000 people. It included a sample of 674 randomly selected people, aged 20 years or older, stratified on sex, age, socioeconomic status, and employment. Information was collected by means of structured personal interviews conducted by 2 of the authors (P.K., T.R.) after written consent was obtained from all participants. The interview was based on a questionnaire that included 26 questions that elicited the following information: demographics (ie, age, sex, nationality), socioeconomic parameters, employment variables (ie, work status and type of work), health-related parameters (ie, smoking and depression), reported individual history of low back pain and sciatica in the past 6 months, and medical sequences (Tables 1, 2).

Anthropometric and General Data Affecting LBP and Sciatica (N=674)

Table 1: Anthropometric and General Data Affecting LBP and Sciatica (N=674)

LBP and Sciatica Data and Medical Sequences (N=674)

Table 2: LBP and Sciatica Data and Medical Sequences (N=674)

The section of the questionnaire referring to low back pain and sciatica pain intensity (using the visual analog scale [VAS]) was validated by the authors during a 2-week interval using 50 people who consented to participate in this evaluation. To compare with other variables, pain intensity was categorized into 4 categories: VAS score of 0=no pain; VAS score of 1 to 3=mild pain; VAS score of 4 to 7=moderate pain; and VAS score of 8 to 10=se-vere pain (Tables 3, 4). No clinical evaluation for sciatica and low back pain was performed because physical examinations were not in the scope of this study.

Parameters Affecting Low Back Pain Intensity (N=674)

Table 3: Parameters Affecting Low Back Pain Intensity (N=674)

Parameters Affecting Sciatica Pain Intensity (N=674)

Table 4: Parameters Affecting Sciatica Pain Intensity (N=674)

Low back pain was considered pain and discomfort localized below the costal margin and above the inferior gluteal folds, and sciatica considered pain, numbness, or tingling radiating in the posterior surface of the leg.

Statistical Analysis

Analysis was performed using Stata/SE version 11.0 software (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas).

Frequency distributions of responses and cross-tabulations of demographic, socioeconomic, and employment analysis with reported history of low back pain and sciatica were examined. For each question specified, associations of demographic, socioeconomic, and employment variables with low back pain and sciatica intensity were tested by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated.

The association of VAS scores with pain duration, days in bed, and duration of work absenteeism were tested using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (giving numerical values as follows: age 20–40 years=1; age 46–65 years=2; age older than 65 years=3). The association of the pain intensity (VAS score 1–10) of low back pain (first dependent variable) and sciatica (second dependent variable) with several socioeconomic and demographic parameters (independent variables) was tested with ordinal logistic regression analysis using the whole cohort. Results of ordered adjusted (multivariate) and unadjusted (univariate) logistic regression for low back pain and sciatica are shown in Tables 58.

Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

Table 5: Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

Ordered Univariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

Table 6: Ordered Univariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

Table 7: Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

Univariate (Unadjusted) Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

Table 8: Univariate (Unadjusted) Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

In the ordered logistic regression, the modeling strategy was to chunkwise delete nonsignificant predictors (deletion of nonsignificant terms at 1 time) using the likelihood ratio test. Although most researchers use stepwise procedures, these are not optimal. Then postestimation was performed as appropriate (linear model, residuals, multicollinearity, heteroskedasticity). Ordered logistic regression included the proportional odds assumption. Categorical predictors of all demographics were entered into the model. In regression models, Stata software takes the first category as the reference group by default and compares the other groups with this reference group. For example, no smoking=0, smoking=1: the model provides a relative risk of smokers compared with nonsmokers.

Results

The validation of the questionnaire showed high Kappa values (0.90–0.95). Women composed 62.3% of participants. The majority (60.5%) of participants were younger than 46 years; 8.5% were older than 65 years (Table 1).

Almost all (98.7%) participants were citizens of Greece. The majority (74.8%) of participants lived in an urban area; 25.2% lived in a rural area. Approximately 42% of the participants reported their work status as “employee,” whereas the rest reported that they did not do manual work. Concerning educational level, the majority (42.9%) of participants had completed high school. The majority of participants (56.5%) were married (Table 1).

A total of 39.5% and 24.6% of participants reported low back pain and sciatica, respectively, in the past 6 months (Table 2). Moreover, 21.4% of participants consulted a physician because of low back pain or sciatica during the past 6 months. Plain radiographs were most often (12.5%) ordered by the treating physician, followed by magnetic resonance imaging (6.8%) and computed tomography (5%) (Table 2). Also, 14.7% of participants reporting low back pain and sciatica received medication during the past 6 months, and 9.7% of participants abstained from work during the same period. Tables 3 and 4 demonstrate pain severity prevalence plotted vs different parameters.

Low Back Pain

Participants older than 65 years reported 2.4 times more severe low back pain than participants aged 20 to 45 years (OR, 2.4; P=.006). Men reported 0.6 times less severe low back pain than women (OR, 0.6; P=.005). Housewives reported 3.5 times more severe low back pain than participants who worked outside the home (OR, 3.5; P=.001). Married participants reported 2.0 times more severe low back pain than unmarried participants (OR, 2.0; P=.001). Smokers reported 1.7 times higher low back pain intensity than non-smokers (OR, 1.7; P=.002). Participants diagnosed and treated for depression reported 2.3 times more severe low back pain than those without depression (OR, 2.3; P=.040.).

Sciatica

Participants aged older than 65 years reported 2.9 times more severe sciatic pain than participants aged 20 to 45 years (OR, 2.9; P=.004). Men reported 0.6 times less severe sciatic pain than women (OR, 0.6; P=.020). Increased sciatic pain intensity was 2.4 times more frequently reported by self-employed participants than by employees (OR, 2.4; P=.021).

Married participants reported 2.3 times higher sciatic pain intensity than unmarried participants (OR, 2.3; P=.001). Smokers reported 2.1 times higher sciatica intensity than nonsmokers (OR, 2.1; P=.000).

Discussion

Generally, the prevalence of chronic pain in the general population ranges from 10% to more than 40%, depending on the definition and the population studied. Low back pain and associated sciatica are considered major health problems in modern societies because they may cause significant disability and frequent use of health services. The reported prevalence of low back pain varies between 50% and 85%, with an annual prevalence of approximately 50%.25–32 Sciatica prevalence rates vary between 1.6% and 43%,33,34 likely because of the variable definitions of sciatica and differences between self-reported and clinically assessed symptoms.15

Because the prevalence of low back pain among the working population is high, several epidemiological studies have been conducted to assess different risk factors that may increase the risk of low back disorders.35–38 In addition, it has been suggested that individual characteristics (eg. height and weight), habits (eg, smoking), and psychosocial factors (eg, mental stress and poor job satisfaction) are plausible risk factors, but the evidence is less consistent.

The perception of low back pain and sciatica intensity is a matter of the mentality of each individual living in a given community.25–32 Most epidemiological studies of low back pain come from North America, Great Britain, and other countries in central or northern Europe; little information concerning low back pain prevalence and intensity comes from countries in southern Europe.39 Moreover, few studies report on sciatica, although some low back pain studies have included data on the prevalence, risk factors, and natural history of sciatica.

The current study, which focuses on low back pain and sciatica in a Mediterranean population, had some drawbacks. First, the sample population was neither random nor selected. The study was open to all adult inhabitants of a specific area, but the final sample comprised only those who responded. This is likely the reason for the slightly increased percentage of women (62.3%) in the final sample. It was assumed that women tend to respond more eagerly to medical surveys. Moreover, concern exists about the meaning and validity of retrospective recall ratings. Although the accuracy of pain memory has been investigated, most studies have failed to use appropriate statistical analyses for validity.40 Few studies support the single rating of pain “on average” as a valid and practical measure of a patient’s pain intensity over a period of time.41

In the current study, 24.6% of the participants reported sciatica according to the definition used in this study for sciatic pain. Comparing this result with other studies was not an easy task. Data collection methods, definitions of sciatica, population studies, and differing time frames of reported prevalence figures contribute to a wide range of reported sciatica prevalence. Deyo and Tsui-Wu34 considered sciatica present only if patients reported pain radiating to the leg lasting more than 2 weeks and made worse by coughing, sneezing, or taking a deep breath. Using these criteria, they reported a 1.6% point prevalence of sciatica.34 Thus, it is difficult to compare the current study’s data with those of other studies because only 2 other studies used symptom duration as a criterion for a positive case of sciatica using self-reported methods.42,43 Hofmann et al44 estimated the point prevalence of sciatica to be 4.6% in clerks and 13.4% in nurses using a self-reported questionnaire. Working populations, especially those in more manual jobs, report higher rates of sciatica prevalence.33,45,46 Few previously published studies used clinical examination to investigate sciatica and reported a low prevalence of sciatica, ranging between 4.8%47 and 1.2%.48 The prevalence of sciatica in the current study that was within the previously reported prevalence range was not assessed by means of physical examination, and the pain severity was objectively evaluated using the VAS. The age of the study population may have also contributed to the variability in prevalence. Age-specific data within a single study is required to investigate the relationship between sciatica and age; such data were not available from the studies in a previous review.49

Several previous studies reported controversial results suggesting an association between social and demographic characteristics and a prevalence of low back pain ranging between 12% and 33%, a 1-year prevalence between 22% and 65%, and a lifetime prevalence between 11% and 84%.26,31,50–53 In comparing low back pain prevalence derived from countries with similar sociocultural habits, the 6-month low back pain prevalence in Israel was 32%,54 similar to the prevalence in the current study. This similarity should theoretically exist due to the similarities in culture and mentality among Mediterranean countries.

Differences in low back pain prevalence were shown not only between different populations (northern vs southern countries), but also between studies derived from the same country.24,55 Possible explanations for these differences may be methodological differences among studies and different population ages, sampling methods, study periods, and definitions of low back pain and methods of collecting information. However, the prevalence of low back pain in the current study appears to be within the limits of other general population surveys.27,50,52,56–60

The Mediterranean population presents several social, economic, and mentality differences compared with other populations studied (eg, Nordic and North American populations). However, on the basis of the results of this study and those derived from the available literature, it is difficult to say how a higher prevalence of self-reported low back pain corresponds with a higher morbidity or reflects culturally different perceptions of pain.

Approximately half (55%) of the working population in the current study had nonmanual jobs. However, the previously reported prevalence of low back pain in workers does not differ dramatically from that of nonworkers. 61

Diversity exists in the literature regarding sex-related low back pain prevalence. In previously published series, men and women reported approximately the same prevalence of low back pain, although some large surveys in the United Kingdom62 and Sweden63 showed a higher prevalence in women. The current findings agree with these studies: women showed a higher prevalence of low back pain than men. The theoretical explanation for this difference is that women have a weaker muscle system and married women work hard at home, thus making them more prone to pain than men.15,29,31,64–69 Another interesting finding derived from the current study is that although low back pain was sex dependent, sciatica prevalence did not significantly differ between women (27.1%) and men (20.5%). The authors found no clear explanation for this finding.

In the current study, the prevalence and severity of low back pain were correlated with parameters such as work status, marital status, residence, smoking status, and antidepressive medication status. People who live in rural regions in the studied country are usually hard working. Manual work is also related to the risk of low back pain and sciatica in the studied population.

Clinical trials have shown that psychosocial factors have an important influence on the prognosis of low back pain, and a psychotherapeutic element in the treatment of low back pain is beneficial when conducted at the early stage of chronification.5 Psychosocial risk factors include stress, distress, anxiety, depression, cognitive functioning, pain behavior, job dissatisfaction, and mental stress at work.5

According to a recent systematic review that evaluated prospective studies of the psychological risk factors for back pain, mental stress plays an important role in the onset and development of neck and back disorders.70,71 However, results derived from a study by Miranda et al11 suggest that mental stress is an independent risk factor for sciatic pain, which agrees with the current study’s findings. Because studies of sciatic pain are lacking, no comparisons can be made.

In the current study, individuals older than 65 years reported 2.4 times more severe low back pain (P=.006). The previously reported prevalence of low back pain was highest between ages 55 and 64 years.67 The increased risk of sciatic pain with increased age derived from the current study is biologically plausible because age-related degeneration causes morphologic and functional changes in the intervertebral disks and the spinal canal.72,73

In the current study, individuals with low back pain often experienced a more physically heavy workload at work associated with low education (41.3% university vs 58.9% primary school). This is in accordance with previously published data.63,67,74 Authors have previously reported that severe low back pain is less prevalent among adults of higher socioeconomic status75; no differences were found in the current study.

Other socioeconomic influences on low back pain prevalence include social class and habitat.15 In a recent study, living in a major urban center was significantly associated with an increased risk for low back pain.15 This was not reflected in the current study for low back pain or sciatica because people who lived in rural areas reported more low back pain and sciatica than those living in urban areas.

Some authors reported that severe pain was associated with female sex (P<.0001), being divorced, being widowed or separated (P<.05), and having a lower education level (P<.0001).54 In the current study, unmarried women reported significantly less low back pain and sciatica than their married, divorced, and widowed counterparts. Unmarried women usually have no children and a small house; thus, they have less work at home and are less prone to low back pain and sciatica.

Conclusion

This 6-month cross-sectional observation of a sample of Mediterranean adults from a mainly urban population shows that low back pain affects married housewives, people older than 65 years, smokers, and people in treatment for depression with increased severity. A working married woman older than 65 years who smokes was more prone to severe sciatica.

References

  1. Van Tulder M, Koes B, Bombardier C. Low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2002; 16:761–775. doi:10.1053/berh.2002.0267 [CrossRef]
  2. Watson KD, Papageorgiou AC, Jones GT, et al. Low back pain in schoolchildren: occurrence and characteristics. Pain. 2002; 97:87–92. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00008-8 [CrossRef]
  3. Taimela S, Kujala UM, Salminen JJ, Viljanen T. The prevalence of low back pain among children and adolescents: a nationwide, cohort-based questionnaire survey in Finland. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22:1132–1136. doi:10.1097/00007632-199705150-00013 [CrossRef]
  4. Balague F, Troussier B, Salminen JJ. Nonspecific low back pain in children and adolescents: risk factors. Eur Spine J. 1999; 8:429–438. doi:10.1007/s005860050201 [CrossRef]
  5. Anderson GBJ. The epidemiology of spinal disorders. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1997:93–141.
  6. Andersson GBJ, Pope MH, Frymoyer JW, et al. Epidemiology and cost. In: Pope MH, Andersson GBJ, Frymoyer JW, eds. Occupational Low Back Pain: Assessment, Treatment and Retention. Chicago, IL: Mosby-Year Book; 1991:95–113.
  7. Andersson GBJ, Svensson HO, Oden A. The intensity of work recovery in low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983; 8:880–884. doi:10.1097/00007632-198311000-00011 [CrossRef]
  8. Nykvist F, Hurme M, Alaranta H, et al. Severe sciatica: a 13-year follow-up of 342 patients. Eur Spine J. 1995; 4:335–338. doi:10.1007/BF00300292 [CrossRef]
  9. Selim AJ, Ren XS, Fincke G, et al. The importance of radiating leg pain in assessing health outcomes among patients with low back pain. Results from the Veteran Health Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23:470–474. doi:10.1097/00007632-199802150-00013 [CrossRef]
  10. Balague F, Nordin M, Sheikhzadeh A, et al. Recovery of severe sciatica. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24:2516–2524. doi:10.1097/00007632-199912010-00014 [CrossRef]
  11. Miranda H, Viikari-Juntura E, Martikainen R, et al. Individual factors, occupational loading, and physical exercise as predictors of sciatic pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002; 27:1102–1109. doi:10.1097/00007632-200205150-00017 [CrossRef]
  12. Tubach F, Beaute J, Leclerc A. Natural history and prognostic indicators of sciatica. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004; 57:174–179. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00257-9 [CrossRef]
  13. Spitzer WO, LeBlanc FE, DuPuis et al. Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. Report of the Quebeck Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987; 12(suppl 1):37.
  14. Waddel G. Biopsychological analysis of low back pain. Baillere’s Clin Rheumatol. 1992; 6:523–557. doi:10.1016/S0950-3579(05)80126-8 [CrossRef]
  15. Skovron LM, Szpalski M, Mordin M, et al. Sociocultural factors and back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19:129–137. doi:10.1097/00007632-199401001-00002 [CrossRef]
  16. Bergenudd H, Johnell O. Somatic versus nonsomatic shoulder and back pain experience in middle age in relation to body build, physical fitness, bone mineral content, gamma-glutamyltransferase, occupational workland, and psychosocial factors. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991; 16:1051–1055. doi:10.1097/00007632-199109000-00007 [CrossRef]
  17. Bergenudd H, Nilsson B. Back pain in middle age; occupational workload and psychologic factors: an epidemiologic survey. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 13(1):58–60. doi:10.1097/00007632-198801000-00014 [CrossRef]
  18. Bigos SJ, Battie MC, Spengler DM, et al. A prospective study of work perceptions and psychosocial factors affecting the report of back injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991; 16:1–6. doi:10.1097/00007632-199101000-00001 [CrossRef]
  19. Burton AK, Tillotson KM, Troup JDG. Prediction of low back trouble frequency in a working population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989; 14(9):939–946. doi:10.1097/00007632-198909000-00005 [CrossRef]
  20. Damkot DK, Pope MH, Lord J, et al. The relationship between work history, work environment and low back pain in men. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1984; 9:395–399. doi:10.1097/00007632-198405000-00012 [CrossRef]
  21. Gynrelberg F. One-year incidence of low back pain among male residents of Copenhagen aged 40–59. Dan Med Bull. 1974; 21:30–36.
  22. Svensson HO, Anderson GBJ. Low back pain in 40- to 47-year-old men: work history and work environment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983; 8:272–276. doi:10.1097/00007632-198304000-00007 [CrossRef]
  23. Mechanic D, Angel RJ. Some factors associated with the report and evaluation of back pain. J Health Soc Behav. 1987; 28:131–139. doi:10.2307/2137127 [CrossRef]
  24. Stranjalis G, Tsamandouraki K, Sakas D, Alamanos Y. Low back pain in a representative sample of Greek population: analysis according to personal and socioeconomic characteristics. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004; 29:1355–1361. doi:10.1097/01.BRS.0000127181.59012.1C [CrossRef]
  25. Cassidy JD, Carroll LJ, Cote P. The Saskatchewan health and back pain survey: the prevalence of low back pain and related disability in Saskatchewan adults. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23:1860–1806. doi:10.1097/00007632-199809010-00012 [CrossRef]
  26. Lebouef-Yde C, Kyvik KO. At what age does low back pain become a common problem? A study of 29,424 individuals aged 12–41 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23:228–234. doi:10.1097/00007632-199801150-00015 [CrossRef]
  27. Leino PI, Berg MA, Puska P. Is back pain increase? Results from national surveys in Finland during 1968/9-1992. Scand J Rheumatol. 1994; 269–276. doi:10.3109/03009749409103728 [CrossRef]
  28. McKinnon EM, Vickers RM, Ruddock MV. Community studies of the health service implication of low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22:2161–2166. doi:10.1097/00007632-199709150-00014 [CrossRef]
  29. Picavet HS, Schouten JS, Smit HA. Prevalence and consequences of low back problems in The Netherlands, working vs. non-working population, the MORGEN study: monitoring project on risk factors for chronic disease. Public Health. 1999; (113):73–77. doi:10.1038/sj.ph.1900529 [CrossRef]
  30. Schochat T, Jackel WH. Prevalence of low back pain in the population. Rehabilitation (Stutgg). 1998; 37:216–223.
  31. Waxman R, Tennat A, Helliwell P. Community survey of factors associated with consultation for low back pain. Br Med J. 1998; (317):1564–1567. doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7172.1564 [CrossRef]
  32. Waxman R, Tennat A, Helliwell P. A prospective follow-up study of low back pain in the community. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25:2085–2090. doi:10.1097/00007632-200008150-00013 [CrossRef]
  33. Videman T, Nurminen T, Tola S, et al. Low back pain in nurses and some loading factors at work. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1984; 9:400–404. doi:10.1097/00007632-198405000-00013 [CrossRef]
  34. Deyo RA, Tsui-Wu YJ. Descriptive epidemiology of low back pain and its related medical care in the United States. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987; 12:264–268. doi:10.1097/00007632-198704000-00013 [CrossRef]
  35. Bernard BP, Fine LJ. Musculoskeletal Disorders and Workplace Factors: A Critical Review of Epidemiologic Evidence for Work-Related Disorders of the Neck, Upper Extremity, and Low Back. Cincinnati, OH: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health; 1997.
  36. Burdorf A, Sorock G. Positive and negative evidence of risk factors for back disorders. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997; 23:243–256. doi:10.5271/sjweh.217 [CrossRef]
  37. Hoogendoorn WE, van Poppel MN, Bongers PM, et al. Physical load during work and leisure time as risk factors for back pain. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1999; 25:387–403. doi:10.5271/sjweh.451 [CrossRef]
  38. Riihimaki H, Viikari-Juntura E. Back and limb disorders. In: McDonald C, ed. Epidemiology of Work-Related Diseases. 2nd ed. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group; 1999.
  39. The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care. Back Pain, Neck Pain. Vol I. Stockholm, Sweden: SB Offset AB; 2000.
  40. Broderick JE, Stone AA, Calvanese P, Schwartz JE, Turk DC. Recalled pain ratings: a complex and poorly defined task. J Pain. 2006; 7(2):142–149. doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2005.09.012 [CrossRef]
  41. Bolton JE. Accuracy of recall of usual pain intensity in back pain patients. Pain. 1999; 83(3):533–539. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00161-X [CrossRef]
  42. Miranda H, Viikari-Juntura E, Martikainen R, et al. Physical exercises and musculo-skeletal pain among forest industry workers. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2001; 11:239–246. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0838.2001.110408.x [CrossRef]
  43. Takeyachi Y, Konno S, Otani K, et al. Correlation of low back pain with functional status, general health perception, social participation, subjective happiness, and patient satisfaction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28:1461–1467. doi:10.1097/01.BRS.0000067091.88283.B6 [CrossRef]
  44. Hofmann F, Stossel U, Michaelis M, et al. Low back pain and lumbago-sciatica in nurses and a reference group of clerks: results of a comparative prevalence study in Germany. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2002; 75:484–490. doi:10.1007/s00420-002-0332-6 [CrossRef]
  45. Riihimaki H, Tola S, Videman T, et al. Low back pain and occupation. A cross-sectional questionnaire study of men in machine operating, dynamic physical work, and sedentary work. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989; 14:204–209.
  46. Nayha S, Videman T, Laakso M, et al. Prevalence of low back pain and other musculoskeletal symptoms and their association with work in Finnish reindeer herders. Scand J Rheumatol. 1991; 20:406–413. doi:10.3109/03009749109096819 [CrossRef]
  47. Heliovaara M, Impivaara O, Sievers K, et al. Lumbar disc syndrome in Filand. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1987; 41:251–258. doi:10.1136/jech.41.3.251 [CrossRef]
  48. Savettieri G, Salemi G, Rocca WA, et al. For the Sicilian NeuroEpidemiologic Study (SNES) Group. Prevalence of lumbosacral radiculopathy in two Sicilian municipalities. Acta Neurol Scand. 1996; 93:464–469. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0404.1996.tb00027.x [CrossRef]
  49. Konstantinou K, Dunn MK. Sciatica. Review of epidemiological studies and prevalence estimates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33:2464–2472. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318183a4a2 [CrossRef]
  50. Lebouef-Yde C, Klougart N, Lauritzen T. How common is low back pain in the Nordic population? Data from a recent study on a middle-aged general Danish population and four surveys previously conducted in the Nordic countries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21:1518–1526. doi:10.1097/00007632-199607010-00005 [CrossRef]
  51. Macfarlane GJ, Thomas E, Papageorgiou AC, et al. Employment and physical work activities as predictors of future low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22:1143–1149. doi:10.1097/00007632-199705150-00015 [CrossRef]
  52. Papageorgiou AC, Macfarlane GJ, Thomas E, et al. Psychosocial factors in the workplace: do they predict new episodes of low back pain? Evidence from the South Manchester Back Pain Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22:1137–1142. doi:10.1097/00007632-199705150-00014 [CrossRef]
  53. Walker BF. The prevalence of low back pain: a systematic review of the literature from 1966 to 1998. J Spinal Disord. 2000; 13:205–217. doi:10.1097/00002517-200006000-00003 [CrossRef]
  54. Neville A, Peleg R, Singer Y, et al. Chronic pain: a population-based study. IMAJ. 2008; 10:676–680.
  55. Alamanos Y, Tsamandouraki K, Tountas Y. Assessing health status and service utilization in Athens: the implication for policy and planning. Health Promot Int. 1993; 8:263–270. doi:10.1093/heapro/8.4.263 [CrossRef]
  56. Papageorgiou AC, Croft PR, Ferry S, et al. Estimating the prevalence of low back pain in the general population: evidence from the South Manchester Back Pain Survey. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995; 20:1889–1894. doi:10.1097/00007632-199509000-00009 [CrossRef]
  57. Lawrence RC, Helmick CG, Arnett FC, et al. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and selected musculoskeletal disorders in the United States. Arthritis Rheum. 1998; 41:778–799. doi:10.1002/1529-0131(199805)41:5<778::AID-ART4>3.0.CO;2-V [CrossRef]
  58. Palmer K, Walsh K, Bendall H, et al. Back pain in brain: comparison of two prevalence surveys at an interval of 10 years. Br Med J. 2000; 320:1577–1578. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1577 [CrossRef]
  59. Volinn E. The epidemiology of low back pain in the rest of the world: a review of surveys in low and middle-income countries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22:1747–1754. doi:10.1097/00007632-199708010-00013 [CrossRef]
  60. Zitting P, Rantakallio P, Vanharanta H. Cumulative incidence of lumbar disc diseases leading to hospitalization up to the age of 28 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998; 23:2337–2343. doi:10.1097/00007632-199811010-00017 [CrossRef]
  61. Nachemson AL, Waddel G, Norlund AI. Epidemiology of neck and low back pain. In: Nachmenson AL, Johnson E, eds. Neck and Back Pain: The Scientific Evidence of Causes, Diagnosis and Treatment. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000:165–188.
  62. Waddell G. The Back Pain Revolution. Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone; 1998.
  63. Vingård E. Rörelseorganens sjukdomar. In: The National Public Health Report 2005. Stockholm, Sweden: Edita Norstedts Tryckeri; 2005:154–165.
  64. Alcouffe J, Manillier P, Bechier M, et al. Analysis by sex of low back pain among workers from small companies in the Paris area: severity and occupational consequences. Occup Environ Med. 1999; 56:696–701. doi:10.1136/oem.56.10.696 [CrossRef]
  65. Hemingway H, Shipley M, Stansfeld S, et al. Sickness absence from back pain, psychosocial work characteristics and employment grade among office workers. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997; 23:121–129 doi:10.5271/sjweh.189 [CrossRef]
  66. Neville A, Peleg R, Singer Y, et al. Chronic pain. IMAJ. 2008; 10:676–680.
  67. Bjorck-van Dijken C, Fjellman-Wiklund A, Hildingsson C. Low back pain, lifestyle factors and physical activity: a population-based study. J Rehabil Med. 2008; 40:864–869.
  68. Santos-Eggimann B, Wietlisbach V, Rickenbach M, Paccaud F, Gutzwiller F. One-year prevalence of low back pain in two Swiss regions. Estimates from the population participating in the 1992–1993 MONICA project. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 20:2473–2479. doi:10.1097/00007632-200010010-00009 [CrossRef]
  69. Harkness EF, Macfarlane GJ, Silman AJ, McBeth J. Is musculoskeletal pain more common now than 40 years ago? Two population-based cross-sectional studies. Rheumatology. 2005: 44(7):890–895. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keh599 [CrossRef]
  70. Schiltenwolf M, Buchner M, Heindl B, et al. Comparison of a biopsychosocial therapy with a conventional biomedical therapy of subacute low back pain in the first episode of sick leave: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J. 2006; 15:1083–1092. doi:10.1007/s00586-005-0008-5 [CrossRef]
  71. Linton SJ. A review of psychological risk factors in back and neck pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25:1148–1156. doi:10.1097/00007632-200005010-00017 [CrossRef]
  72. Blair SN, Kohl HW, Goodyear NN. Rates and risks for running and exercise injuries: studies in three populations. Res Q Exercise Sport. 1987; 58:221–228.
  73. Boos N, Rieder R, Schade V, et al. 1995 Volvo Award in clinical sciences: the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging, work perception, and psychosocial factors in identifying symptomatic disc herniations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995; 20:2613–2625. doi:10.1097/00007632-199512150-00002 [CrossRef]
  74. Alkherayf F, Agbi C. Cigarette smoking and chronic low back pain in the adult population. Clin Invest Med. 2009; 32:E360–E367.
  75. Latza U, Kohlmann T, Deck R, Raspe H. Influence of occupational factors on the relation between socio-economic status and self-reported back pain in a population-based sample of German adults with back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25:1390–1397. doi:10.1097/00007632-200006010-00011 [CrossRef]

Anthropometric and General Data Affecting LBP and Sciatica (N=674)

ParameterNo. (%)ParameterNo. (%)
DemographicSocioeconomic
  Sex  Residence
    Female420 (62.3)    Rural170 (25.2)
    Male254 (37.7)    Urban504 (74.8)
  Age, y  Marital status
    20–45408 (60.5)    Unmarried251 (37.2)
    46–65209 (31.0)    Married381 (56.5)
    >6557 (8.5)    Divorced/widowed42 (6.3)
  Nationality  Education
    Greek665 (98.7)    Primary school112 (16.6)
    Other9 (1.3)    Junior high school46 (6.8)
Employment    High school289 (42.9)
  Work status    College67 (9.9)
    Employee286 (42.4)    University160 (23.7)
    Self-employed71 (10.5)  Annual income, €
    Housewife61 (9.1)    <7000201 (29.8)
    Agricultural worker28 (4.2)    7000–14,000209 (31.0)
    Retired45 (6.7)    >14,000264 (39.2)
    Student162 (24.0)Health related
    Multiple jobs21 (3.1)  Smoking
  Work type    No444 (65.9)
    Not manual371 (55.0)    Yes230 (34.1)
    Manual158 (23.5)  Antidepressive medication
    Combination145 (21.5)    No648 (96.1)
    Yes26 (3.9)

LBP and Sciatica Data and Medical Sequences (N=674)

ParameterNo. (%)ParameterNo. (%)
Reported LBP in past 6 moExamination
  None510 (75.7)
  No408 (60.5)  Plain radiographs84 (12.5)
  Yes266 (39.5)  CT scan34 (5.0)
Reported sciatica in past 6 mo  MRI46 (6.8)
Medication
  No508 (75.4)  No575 (85.3)
  Yes166 (24.6)  Yes99 (14.7)
LBP intensity, VAS    Medication duration, d
  No pain408 (60.5)      1–1056 (56.6)
  115 (2.2)      11–3034 (34.3)
  220 (3.0)      45–1809 (9.1)
  334 (5.0)Physical therapy
  427 (4.0)  No632 (93.8)
  540 (5.9)  Yes42 (6.2)
  635 (5.2)Bed rest in past 6 mo
  726 (3.9)  No597 (88.6)
  827 (4.0)  Yes77 (11.4)
  920 (3.0)    Time in bed, d
  1022 (3.3)      1–746 (59.7)
Sciatica intensity, VAS      8–3028 (36.4)
  No pain508 (75.4)      31–603 (3.9)
  120 (3.0)Abstain from work
  219 (2.8)  No609 (90.3)
  316 (2.4)  Yes65 (9.7)
  421 (3.1)    Time abstained from work, d
  516 (2.4)      1–3056 (86.2)
  619 (2.8)      31–608 (12.3)
  713 (1.9)      61–1201 (1.5)
  819 (2.8)Hospital admission in past y
  99 (1.3)  No656 (97.4)
  1014 (2.1)  Yes18 (2.6)
Medical help requestedSurgery for LBP or sciatica
  No530 (78.6)  No661 (98.1)
  Yes144 (21.4)  Yes13 (1.9)

Parameters Affecting Low Back Pain Intensity (N=674)

ParameterVAS Pain Score, n
Average LBP Prevalence, %
01–34–78–10
Sex
  Female24145815342.6
  Male16724471634.3
Age, y
  20–4527737603432.1
  45–6511524442645.0
  >6516824971.9a
Nationality
  Greek404671276739.2
  Other421255.6a
Residence
  Urban31350924937.9
  Rural9519362044.1
Work status
  Employee17926493237.4
  Self-employed401015643.7
  Housewife315111449.2
  Agricultural work6711478.6a
  Retired20416555.6a
  Student1261319422.2
  Multiple jobs647471.4a
Education
  Primary school4615312058.9
  Junior high school21512854.3a
  High school2092942927.7
  College38716643.3
  University9413272641.3
Marital status
  Unmarried18422341127.0
  Married20443845050.0
  Divorced/widowed20410852.4a
Annual income, €
  <700011826372041.3
  7000–14,00012913402738.3
  >14,00016130512239.0
Smoking
  No28044873336.9
  Yes12825413644.3
Antidepressive medication
  No397681236038.7
  Yes1115957.7a

Parameters Affecting Sciatica Pain Intensity (N=674)

ParameterVAS Pain Score, n
Average Sciatica Prevalence, %
01–34–78–10
Sex
  Female30635522727.1
  Male20220171520.5
Age, y
  20–4533032301619.1
  45–6514917291428.7
  >65296101249.1*
Nationality
  Greek50155684124.7
  Other701122.2a
Residence
  Urban38741492723.2
  Rural12114201528.8
Work status
  Employee21629261524.5
  Self-employed51510528.2
  Housewife4327929.5
  Agricultural work1079264.3a
  Retired2926835.6a
  Student1466919.9
  Multiple jobs1342238.1a
Education
  Primary school669181941.1
  Junior high school3525423.9
  High school23022261120.4
  College4968426.9
  University1281612420.0
Marital status
  Unmarried2181315513.1
  Married26438463330.7
  Divorced/widowed2648438.1a
Annual income, €
  <70001579231221.9
  7000–14,00015418201726.3
  >14,00019728261325.4
Smoking
  No35131431920.9
  Yes15724262331.7
Antidepressive medication
  No48951643823.8
  Yes1945440.6a

Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

VariableORSDzP>[z]95% CI
Age, y
  46–651.10.20.68.4900.8–1.7
  >652.40.82.75.0061.3–4.5
Male0.60.1−2.78.0050.5–0.9
Work status
  Self-employed1.70.61.54.1230.9–3.5
  Housewife3.51.43.21.0011.6–7.6
Marital status
  Married2.00.43.42.0011.4–3.0
  Divorced/widowed1.40.70.72.4700.6–3.5
Smoking, yes1.70.33.16.0021.2–2.4
Antidepressive medication, yes2.30.92.04.0401.0–5.0

Ordered Univariate Logistic Regression for LBP Intensity

VariableORSDzP>[z]95% CI
Age, y
  46–651.70.33.15.0021.2–2.4
  >654.01.05.53.0002.5–6.7
Male0.70.2−2.40.0160.5–0.9
Work status
  Self-employed3.01.03.45.0011.6–5.7
  Housewife3.01.22.91.0041.4–6.6
Marital status
  Married2.50.45.29.0001.8–3.5
  Divorced/widowed2.00.91.61.1000.9–4.9
Smoking, yes1.50.22.47.0141.1–2.1
Antidepressive medication, yes3.21.32.95.0031.5–6.9

Ordered Multivariate Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

VariableORSDzP>[z]95% CI
Age, y
  46–651.20.30.64.520.7–1.8
  >652.91.02.90.0041.4–5.9
Male0.60.1−2.32.0200.4–0.9
Work status
  Self-employed2.40.92.32.0211.1–5.0
  Housewife2.21.01.75.0810.9–5.4
Marital status
  Married2.30.63.23.0011.4–3.8
  Divorced1.70.91.03.3020.6–4.9
  Widowed2.41.31.57.1150.8–6.9
Smoking, yes2.10.43.74.0001.4–3.1

Univariate (Unadjusted) Logistic Regression for Sciatica Intensity

VariableORSDzP>[z]95% CI
Age, y
  46–651.80.42.94.0031.2–2.6
  >654.81.45.50.0002.7–8.4
Male0.70.1−1.96.0500.5–1.0
Work status
  Self-employed4.11.44.21.0002.1–7.9
  Housewife1.90.81.48.1380.8–4.6
Marital status
  Married2.90.64.97.0001.9–4.5
  Divorced2.71.41.92.0551.0–7.2
  Widowed6.53.04.10.0002.7–15.9
Smoking, yes1.70.33.07.0021.2–2.5

10.3928/01477447-20121120-24

Sign up to receive

Journal E-contents