Back pain

K. Mounce

Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Trust, Forest Dene Unit, Fairmile Road, Christchurch, Dorset BH23 2JX, UK

Disabling low back pain in industrialized societies has become the focus of wide-ranging research over the last 15 yr. The importance of its social and financial impact is not reflected in the current UK health provision agenda. The economic impact of days lost from work, invalidity benefit and health service utilization as a result of chronic back pain is enormous, having risen rapidly since the mid 1970s [1]. Benefit payments have plateaued in the last 3 yr [2]. The cause is unclear, but may be due to the ‘All work’ test and the use of acute back pain guidelines.

The 1-month prevalence of low back pain is 35–37%, with a slightly higher female prevalence. Lifetime prevalence is estimated at 59%, with peak prevalence between 45 and 59 yr of age [3]. Around 10% of back pain episodes lead to consultation with a general practitioner, and 90% of patients have improved at 1 month [4]. Although patients stop seeking care, the majority continue to be symptomatic at 1 yr, with only 21 and 25% completely recovered with reference to pain and disability respectively. This suggests a chronic fluctuating symptom course with intermittent flares [5].

Psychological distress factors are associated with back pain, being more prevalent in sufferers [6], a strong predictor of outcome in chronic patients [7] and appearing to influence the development of new back pain symptoms [8]. Risk factors for back pain include mechanical strain on the spine from heavy lifting, repetitive lifting, twisting and vibration, including driving. Static work postures, prolonged standing or walking, road traffic accidents and falls also show a link. The link with obesity is tenuous but smoking is a consistent factor, as is a previous history of back pain and parity [913]. Other psychosocial features are poor social and educational status, and previous sexual or physical abuse [1416].

Risk factors for chronicity of low back pain include high levels of psychological distress in the episode, premorbid association with dissatisfaction with employment or work status, unemployment, poor self-rated health and low levels of physical activity. During an episode of pain, poorer outcome is linked with reported widespread pain, radiating leg pain, poor spinal movement and a longer duration of symptoms before consultation [17]. Not surprisingly, a favourable outcome is associated with fit males with a short episode of back pain who are happily employed [18].

Psychosocial risk factors (‘yellow flags’) for chronic symptoms and disability have been developed as part of the assessment for patients who are not improving. They are not exclusive to physical risk factors and identify people who need a different approach in preventing fear of movement, illness behaviour and prolonged distress [19, 20].

Clinical guidelines for back pain management were first made in the report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Conditions 1989 [21]. It highlighted the lack of evidence for many physical treatments, recommended against bed rest and suggested a chronological treatment plan including psychosocial assessment in non-resolving pain. The subsequent US AHCPR back pain guidelines recommended a detailed conservative approach but produced considerable backlash in the USA. The UK CSAG report places more emphasis on early activity and exercise, the Dutch defer manipulative treatment to 4 weeks and promote self-help, whilst Israel places emphasis on multidisciplinary assessment and avoids manipulation in its guidelines given as the ‘Ten Commandments’ [1, 20, 2326].

Despite the considerable time and effort invested in these documents, there is little evidence of their use or impact. Circulation to the relevant practitioners has been poor, and there are implementation difficulties in changing practice and the availability of necessary services [27, 28].

Back pain ‘triage’ is the medical model of diagnosis used to exclude serious pathology. History and examination are used to identify diseases of an inflammatory, neoplastic, infective or metabolic nature, in addition to specific causes of mechanical pain, symptomatic disc prolapse, stenosis and instability. This remains the best diagnostic tool despite poor observer reliability [29]. The sensitivity of the standard clinical history and examination is low, with no standard symptom complexes emerging from critical evaluation despite eminent texts on the subject [3032]. ‘Red flag’ symptoms and signs are indicators of serious pathology [33, 34]. Around a third of patients report a risk factor, and 1–10% of these patients will have pathology [35]. Reassessment of these symptoms and signs is of high importance at each patient review [29].

The proportion of patients with identifiable causes of back pain varies according to the attribution of symptoms to degenerative change, but most groups confirm a low incidence, of 25% or less [21, 36]. There is little correlation between X-ray degenerative change and symptoms [3739].

Specific causes of mechanical low back pain may respond to conservative treatment and in selected cases to surgery. Sciatic pain has multiple potential causes but the most common is nerve compression. The mechanisms of sciatic pain include mechanical injury, inflammatory response [4042] and obstruction to epidural veins leading to perineural fibrosis [43]. The natural history of disc prolapse is one of spontaneous resorption over time [41, 42] and epidural anaesthesia gives temporary pain relief but does not improve outcome [44]. Where imaged pathology corresponds with symptoms, the results of surgery are better than those of conservative management at 1 yr. Patients with lesser symptoms have a similar benefit with surgery or conservative treatment [45].

Spinal symptoms due to central or lateral canal stenosis are similar. There is poor correlation between symptoms and the severity of findings on imaging [46]. The condition frequently has a slow or static course and there is no detriment to the patient in delaying surgery [47]. Mechanical sacroiliac joint pain is identified as a cause of low back pain, differentiated only in that it may cause referred pain in the groin [48]. Mechanical facet joint syndrome remains unproven in terms of reliable history, examination findings and treatment [49].

Once a suspicion of significant disease is aroused, then imaging is appropriate. X-ray is useful in determining inflammatory sacroiliitis, vertebral fracture and mobile spondylolisthesis. Bone scan may confirm low-grade inflammatory change, infection, tumour or sacral fracture. MRI is essential for viewing nerve or cord compression, the extent of infection (e.g. paraspinal collection) and some tumours, particularly myeloma [50].

The vast majority of patients will have non-specific low back pain with no identifiable cause of their low back pain. Patient triage should be used to determine both the physical characteristics of the pain and the psychosocial factors, including patient cognitions. Once serious pathology has been excluded, the majority of patients will need to develop ways of coping with pain and impairment on a long-term basis, thus participating in their recovery process.

This may conflict with the patient's expectation of an exact diagnosis, specific treatment and complete relief of pain. Failure to provide this model results in the patient believing their pathology has been missed or that their symptoms are doubted by their doctor, and thus that their symptoms have not been given legitimacy [5153]. Attempts to provide a more specific diagnosis e.g. ‘arthritis’ or ‘worn disc’, lead to more chronic symptoms, expectations of specific treatments and patients using jargon in an idiosyncratic way [54]. Unsuccessful treatments add to the belief that the cause of their pain is not known and contribute to the psychological distress of chronic pain [55].

Engaging the patient in his or her own recovery is of utmost importance. It requires the clinician to listen to and educate the patient [56]. The patient presents in the context of their psychosocial stresses, fears and beliefs. For many doctors this is a step beyond their training to identify and treat specific disease [57]. Patients have to be encouraged to find pain relief strategies whilst becoming more active. They need to be convinced of the lack of association between pain on activity and further damage to the spine [58]. These fear-avoidance beliefs mediate the relationship between pain and impairment [59].

A proportion of back pain patients develop increasing impairment and disability. These small numbers of people use the majority of the financial and health-care resources devoted to back pain. Less than 50% of back related disability is related to physical impairment, and a significant proportion is related to psychological distress and illness behaviour [59]. Psychological emotional distress (anxiety and depression) is expressed as heightened awareness of bodily symptoms and increases with the duration of symptoms and the number of specialists seen. Depressive symptoms are of an atypical reactive type and respond poorly to psychotropic drugs [60].

Waddell described the illness behaviour that chronic back pain patients demonstrated as ‘inappropriate symptoms and signs’. These are a further indicator of distress and do not indicate malingering [61]. Women tend to inappropriate symptoms and men to signs when back pain is associated with depression and medicolegal proceedings. The illness behaviour may add to the disability and become counterproductive [60, 61].

The reasons why and when patients seek help and why individuals react so differently to pain require further research. General practitioner consultation is associated with the level of pain in the first 2 weeks of an episode. In the following weeks the level of disability is important, but by 3 months depression is the most important variable for consultation [62].

In managing a patient with non-specific low back pain, a confident practitioner [63], after routine triage, should reassure the person that there is no serious disease. Recommended management is to remain as active as possible and avoid bed rest [64], and this should be backed up by written information, e.g. The Back Book [58].

Routine imaging is not recommended. X-rays show structural degenerative changes, but these should not be given clinical significance as similar degenerative changes are seen in asymptomatic individuals [3739]. MRI scans similarly do not show correlation with back pain in relation to disc bulging and protrusion. However, severe disc protrusion or extrusion is rarely found in asymptomatic individuals, and neural compromise is the best predictor of symptomatic disc protrusion. Disc bulge is found in 25% of 20- to 30-yr-old asymptomatic individuals and in 60% of 40- to 50-yr-olds, and disc protrusion is found in 20 and 30% of the two groups respectively [65, 66].

Pain is managed by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, analgesics and muscle relaxants as appropriate to the severity of pain [67]. The patient is reassessed at 7–10 days and referred for physical therapy, i.e. manipulation, if failing to improve [1, 20]. If the patient is not improving on review after physical treatment, further specialist assessment is recommended, including the evaluation of psychosocial risk factors [1, 20].

The evidence for further treatment is variable and there is no highly effective treatment for non-specific low back pain. Supervised exercises as a fitness programme are beneficial [68]. Behavioural therapy brings additional benefit [69]. Intensive physical retraining programmes are expensive but reduce sickness payments [70]. Manipulation in chronic back pain lacks convincing evidence and trials are under way [71]. Lumbar supports do not have a role in the primary or secondary prevention of back pain. There is insufficient evidence to recommend a support as a treatment [72]. Traction does not show benefit [73].

Pain relief with medication on a long-term basis is unacceptable to many patients. These medications have side-effects on prolonged use and if patients are to remain as active as possible, they need to understand the use of these drugs [67]. Low-dose tricyclic antidepressants have a role in pain modulation and sleep. They are more effective in nerve root compression [74].

There is some evidence of benefit from transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and from steroid injections in tender points, but at present there is no evidence for any beneficial effect of acupuncture on spinal pain [75, 76, 77]. Medical interventions appear to have little effect on work resumption, pain or back function in those who are not working because of back pain [78].

For those who remain incapacitated, there are a variety of pain management programmes that rely on the cognitive behavioural approach by a multidisciplinary team. Overall, they have a positive effect on pain and pain behaviour but a smaller effect on function. They require the patient to be actively engaged in their own management and not seeking other treatments [79, 80].

These programmes are currently used late in the course of symptoms, and as yet the effects of this type of intervention in those early in the back pain episode are not known. Guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary programme before 6 months of work has been missed [1].

The management and treatment of non-specific low back pain remain a challenge. Some treatments are of benefit, and new treatments for degenerative disc are in the early stages of development. Current back pain guidelines promote early activity and treatment, with multidisciplinary management that uses a biopsychosocial model for those patients developing disability as a result of back pain. The practitioners who deliver the back pain service of the future will need to be good communicators, conversant with psychological and social issues and able to engage the patient in their own management.

References

  1. Clinical Standards Advisory Group 1994. Back Pain. Report of a CSAG committee on back pain. London: HMSO.
  2. Breen A, Pincus T, Underwood M. Barriers to the implementation of guidelines for low back pain: impact of guidelines. 2001 Symposium. Annual scientific meeting, The Pain Society. British Chapter IASP.
  3. Papageorgiou AC, Croft PR, Ferry S, Jayson MIV, Silman AJ. Estimating the prevalence of low back pain in the general population. Evidence from the South Manchester Back Pain Survey. Spine1995;20:1889–94.[ISI][Medline]
  4. Coste J, Delecoeuillerie G, Cohen de Lara, Le Parc JM, Paolaggi JB. Clinical course and prognostic factors in acute low back pain: an inception cohort study in primary care practice. Br Med J1994;308:577–80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Croft PR, Macfarlane GJ, Papageorgiou AC, Thomas E, Silman AJ. Outcome of low back pain in general practice: a prospective study. Br Med J1998;316:1356–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Magni G, Caldeiron C, Rigatti-Luchini S, Mersky H. Chronic musculoskeletal pain and depressive symptoms in the general population. An analysis of the first National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. Pain1990;43:299–307.[ISI][Medline]
  7. Main CJ, Wood PLR, Hollis S, Spanswick CC, Wadell G. The Distress and Risk Assessment Method. A simple patient classification to identify distress and evaluate risk of poor outcome. Spine1992;17:42–5.[ISI][Medline]
  8. Croft PR, Papageorgiou AC, Ferry S, Thomas E, Jayson M, Silman A. Psychological distress and low back pain. Evidence from a prospective study in the general population. Spine1995;20:2731–7.[ISI][Medline]
  9. Lebeouf-Yde C. Body weight and low back pain: a systematic literature review of 56 journal articles reporting on 65 epidemiological studies. Spine2000;25:226–37.[ISI][Medline]
  10. Andersson GBJ. Epidemiological aspects of low back pain in industry. Spine1981;6:53–60.[ISI][Medline]
  11. Macfarlane GJ, Thomas E et al. Employment and physical work activities as predictors of future low back pain. Spine1997;22:1143–9.[ISI][Medline]
  12. Walsh K, Cruddas M, Coggon D. Risk of low back pain on people admitted to hospital for traffic accidents and falls. J Epidemiol Community Health1992;46:231–3.[Abstract]
  13. Frank AO, De Souza LH. Conservative management of low back pain. Int J Clin Pract2001;55:21–31.[ISI][Medline]
  14. Linton S. A population based study of the relationship between sexual abuse and back pain. Pain1997;73:47–53.[ISI][Medline]
  15. Croft PR, Rigby A. Socioeconomic influences on back problems in the community in Britain. J Epidem Community Health1994;48:166–70.[Abstract]
  16. Heliovaara M. Risk factors for low back pain and sciatica. Ann Med1989;21:257–64.[Medline]
  17. Thomas E, Silman AJ, Croft PR, Papageorgiou AC, Jayson MI, Macfarlane GJ. Predicting who develops chronic low back pain in primary care: a prospective study. Br Med J1999;318:1662–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Macfarlane GJ, Thomas E, Croft PR, Papageorgiou AC, Jayson M, Silman A. Predictors of early improvement in low back pain amongst consulters to general practice: the influence of premorbid and episode-related factors. Pain1999;80:113–9.[ISI][Medline]
  19. Kendall NAS, Linton SJ, Main CJ 1997. Guide to assessing psychosocial yellow flags in acute low back pain: risk factors for long-term disability. Wellington, New Zealand: Accident Rehabilitation & Compensation Insurance Corporation of New Zealand and the National Health Committee.
  20. Royal College of General Practitioners 1999. Clinical guidelines for the management of acute low back pain. London: Royal College of General Practitioners.
  21. Spitzer WO, LeBlanc FE, Dupuis M et al. Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Spine1987;12:7S.
  22. New Zealand acute low back pain guide. Wellington, New Zealand: Accident Rehabilitation & Compensation Insurance Corporation of New Zealand and the National Health Committee.
  23. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research 1994. Acute low-back problems in adults. Clinical Practice Guideline Number 14. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.
  24. Dutch College of General Practitioners [NHG] 1996. NHG practice guideline ‘Low back pain’. Utrecht: NHG–Dutch College of General Practitioners.
  25. Borkan J, Reis S, Ribak J 1995. Guidelines for the treatment of low back pain in primary care. Tel Aviv: Israeli Low Back Pain Guidelines Group.
  26. Little P, Smith L, Cantrell T, Chapman J, Langridge J, Pickering R. General practitioners’ management of acute back pain: a survey of reported practice compared with guidelines. Br Med J1996;312:485–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Barnett AG, Underwood MR, Vickers MR. Effect of UK national guidelines on services to treat patients with acute low back pain: a follow up questionnaire. Br Med J1999;318:919–20.[Free Full Text]
  28. Teasell RW, White K. Clinical approaches to low back pain. Part 1. Epidemiology, diagnosis and prevention. Can Fam Physician1994;40:481–6.[ISI][Medline]
  29. Roach KE, Brown M, Ricker E et al. The use of patient symptoms to screen for serious back problems. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther1995;21:2–6.[ISI][Medline]
  30. Dreyer SJ, Dreyfuss PH. Low back pain and the zygapophyseal joints. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1996;77:290–300.[ISI][Medline]
  31. Borenstein DG. Chronic low back pain. Rheum Dis Clin N Am1996;22:439–56.[ISI][Medline]
  32. Bigos S, Bowyer O, Brean G et al. Acute low back problems in adults. Clinical practice guideline no. 14. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office; AHCPR Publication no. 95-0642. 1994.
  33. van den Hoogen HMM, Koes BW, van Eijk JT, Bouter LM. On the accuracy of history, physical examination, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate in diagnosing low pain in general practice. A criteria-based review of the literature. Spine1995;20:318–27.[ISI][Medline]
  34. Wipf JF, Deyo RA. Low back pain. Med Clin N Am1995;79:231–46.[ISI][Medline]
  35. Dwyer AP. Backache and its prevention. Clin Orthop Relat Res1987;222:35–43.[Medline]
  36. Splithoff CA. Lumbosacral junction: roentographic comparison of patients with and without backaches. J Am Med Assoc1953;152:1610–3.[ISI]
  37. Fullenlove TM, Williams AJ. Comparative roentgen findings in symptomatic and asymptomatic backs. J Am Med Assoc1957;168:572–4.
  38. Magora A, Schwartz A. Relation between low back pain syndrome and X-ray findings. 1. Degenerative osteoarthritis. Scand J Rehabil Med1976;8:115–25.[ISI]
  39. Kawakami M, Weinstein JN. Associated neurogenic and nonneurogenic pain mediators that probably are activated and responsible for nociceptive input. In: Low back pain: a scientific and clinical overview. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons199;6:209–13.
  40. Komori H, Okawa A, Haro H et al. Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in conservative management of lumbar disc herniations. Spine1998;22:67–73.
  41. Haro H, Crawford HC, Fingelton B et al. Matrix metalloproteinase-7-dependent release of tumour necrosis factor alpha in a model of herniated disc resorption. J Clin Invest2000;105:143–50.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Jayson M. Mechanisms underlying chronic back pain: studies are looking at the brain and spinal cord. Br Med J1994;314:1639–40.[Free Full Text]
  43. Carette S, Leclaire R, Marcoux S et al. Epidural steroid injections for sciatica due to herniated nucleus pulposus. N Engl J Med1997;336:1634–40.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Atlas SJ, Deyo RA, Keller RB et al. The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part 2. 1-year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of sciatica. Spine1996;21:1777–86.[ISI][Medline]
  45. Amundsun T, Weber H, Lilleas F et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis—clinical and radiological features. Spine1995;20:1178–86.[ISI][Medline]
  46. Johnsson KE, Uden A, Rosen I. The effect of decompression on the natural course of spinal stenosis. A comparison of surgically treated and untreated patients. Spine1991;16:615–9.[ISI][Medline]
  47. Schwarzer AC, Aprill CN, Bogduk N. The sacroiliac joint in chronic low back pain. Spine1995;20:31–7.[ISI][Medline]
  48. Dreyer SJ, Dreyfuss PH. Low back pain and the zygapophyseal joints. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1996;77:290–300.[ISI][Medline]
  49. Pertuiset E, Bellaiche L et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine in plasma cell dyscrasias. A review. Rev Rhum1996;63:837–45.[ISI]
  50. May CR, Rose MJ, Johnstone FC. How patients account for non-specific low back pain. J Psychosom Res2000;49:223–5.[ISI][Medline]
  51. Klaber Moffet JA, Newbronner E, Waddell G et al. Public perceptions about low back pain and its management: a gap between expectations and reality. Health Expect2000;3:161–8.[Medline]
  52. Borkan JM, Reis S, Hermoni D, Biderman A. Talking about pain: a patient centred study of low back pain in primary care. Soc Sci Med1995;40:977–88.[ISI][Medline]
  53. Abehheim L, Rossignol M, Gobeille D. The prognostic consequences in the making of the initial medical diagnosis of work-related injuries. Spine1995;20:791–5.[ISI][Medline]
  54. Waddell G, Main CJ et al. Chronic low-back pain, psychologic distress and illness behaviour. Spine1984;9:209–13.[ISI][Medline]
  55. Armstrong D. What do patients want. Br Med J1991;303:261–2.[ISI][Medline]
  56. von Korff M, Barlow W, Cherkin D, Deyo RA. Effects of practice style in managing back pain. Ann Intern Med1994;121:187–95.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Anon. The back book. London: The Stationery Office, 1996.
  58. Waddell G, Newton M, Hendreson I, Somerville D, Main CJ. A fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain1993;52:157–68.[ISI][Medline]
  59. Main CJ, Spanswick CC. Pain: Psychological and psychiatric factors. Br Med Bull1991;47:732–42.[Abstract]
  60. Waddell G. How patients react to low back pain. Acta Orthop Scand1993;6421–3.
  61. Thomas KB. General practice consultations: Is there any point in being positive. Br Med J1987;294:1200–2.[ISI][Medline]
  62. Waxman R, Tennant A, Helliwell P. Community survey of factors associated with consultation for low back pain. Br Med J1999;318:170.
  63. Malmivaara A et al. The treatment of acute low back pain—bed rest, exercises, or ordinary activity. N Engl J Med1995;332:351–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  64. Jensen MC, Brant-Zawadzki MN et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in people without back pain.1994;331:69–73.
  65. Boos N, Dreier D, Hilfiker E et al. Volvo Award in Clinical Sciences. The factors in identifying symptomatic disc herniations by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. Spine1995;20:2613–25.[ISI][Medline]
  66. Deyo R. Drug therapies for back pain: which drugs help patients. Spine1996;21:2840–50.[ISI][Medline]
  67. Klaber-Moffett J, Torgerson D, Bell-Syer S. Randomised controlled trial of exercise for low back pain: clinical outcomes, costs and preferences. Br Med J1999;319:279–83.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  68. Turner J, Clancy S, McQuade K, Cardenas D. Effectiveness of behavioural therapy for chronic low back pain: a component analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol1990;58:573–9.[ISI][Medline]
  69. Mitchell R, Carmen G. The functional restoration approach to the treatment of chronic pain in patients with soft tissue and back injuries. Spine1994;19:633–42.[ISI][Medline]
  70. Koes BW, Willem JJ, Assendelft MD et al. Spinal manipulation for low back pain. An updated systematic review of randomised clinical trials. Spine1996;21:2860–73.[ISI][Medline]
  71. Jellema P, van Tulder MW, van Poppel MN, Nachemson AL, Bouter LM. Lumbar supports for prevention and treatment of low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine2001;26:377–86.[ISI][Medline]
  72. van der Heijden G, Beurskens A, Koes B et al. The efficacy of traction for back and neck pain: a systematic blinded review of randomised clinical trial methods. Phys Ther1995;75:93–104.[ISI][Medline]
  73. McQuay H, Moore R. Antidepressants and chronic pain. Br Med J1997;314:763–4.[Free Full Text]
  74. Gadsby JG, Flowerdew MW. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and acupuncture-like transcutaneous nerve stimulation for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2000;(2):CD000210. Review.[Medline]
  75. van Tulder MW, Cherkin DC, Berman B, Lao L, Koes BW. Acupuncture for low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2000;(2):CD001351. Review.[Medline]
  76. Nelemans PJ, de Bie RA, de Vet HC, Sturmans F. Injection therapy for subacute and chronic benign low back pain. Spine2001;26:501–15.[ISI][Medline]
  77. Hansson TH, Hansson EK. The effects of common medical interventions on pain, back function and work resumption in patients with chronic low back pain: A prospective 2 year cohort study. Spine2000;25:3055–64.[ISI][Medline]
  78. van Tulder MW, Ostelo RW, Vlaeyen JW, Linton SJ, Morley SJ, Assendelft WJ. Behavioural treatment for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2000;(2):CD002014. Review.[Medline]
  79. Booker CK, Cooper RG. Management of the chronic pain patient in primary and tertiary care. Reports on Rheumatic Diseases, 1999. ARC Publication No. 16. ARC, 1999.




This Article
Full Text (PDF)
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Disclaimer
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Mounce, K.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Mounce, K.
Related Collections
Other Rheumatology