Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?

Differences between the psychosocial risk factors of low back pain (LBP) patients in primary and secondary care are under-investigated. Similarly, differences in the psychosocial profile of people classified into STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) subgroups in primary and secondary care settings have n...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Morsø, L., Kent, Peter, Albert, H., Manniche, C.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Churchill Livingstone 2013
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54781
_version_ 1848759459422142464
author Morsø, L.
Kent, Peter
Albert, H.
Manniche, C.
author_facet Morsø, L.
Kent, Peter
Albert, H.
Manniche, C.
author_sort Morsø, L.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Differences between the psychosocial risk factors of low back pain (LBP) patients in primary and secondary care are under-investigated. Similarly, differences in the psychosocial profile of people classified into STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) subgroups in primary and secondary care settings have not been investigated. The aim of the study was to determine: (1) if movement-related fear, catastrophisation, anxiety and/or depression in LBP patients are different between primary and secondary care settings, and (2) if those differences are retained when stratified by SBT subgroup. This study was a cross-sectional comparison of LBP patients in Danish primary settings (405 general practitioner or physiotherapy patients) and a secondary care setting (311 outpatient spine centre patients). Psychosocial factors were measured with the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (catastrophisation subscale), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. There were significantly higher scores in secondary care for movement-related fear (1.3 points (95%CI .1-2.5) p = .030) and catastrophisation (2.0 (95%CI 1.0-3.0) p < .000), lower scores on anxiety (-1.0 (95%CI -1.0-2.0) p < .000) but no difference for depression. These differences in psychosocial scores were broadly retained when stratified by SBT subgroup. However, questionnaire-specific reported thresholds for important difference scores indicate the size of these differences between the care settings were unlikely to be clinically important from a patient perspective. Longitudinal studies are required to investigate the predictive ability of SBT in secondary care settings and whether treatment targeted to SBT subgroups is effective in secondary care.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T10:00:13Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-54781
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T10:00:13Z
publishDate 2013
publisher Churchill Livingstone
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-547812017-09-13T16:11:34Z Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care? Morsø, L. Kent, Peter Albert, H. Manniche, C. Differences between the psychosocial risk factors of low back pain (LBP) patients in primary and secondary care are under-investigated. Similarly, differences in the psychosocial profile of people classified into STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) subgroups in primary and secondary care settings have not been investigated. The aim of the study was to determine: (1) if movement-related fear, catastrophisation, anxiety and/or depression in LBP patients are different between primary and secondary care settings, and (2) if those differences are retained when stratified by SBT subgroup. This study was a cross-sectional comparison of LBP patients in Danish primary settings (405 general practitioner or physiotherapy patients) and a secondary care setting (311 outpatient spine centre patients). Psychosocial factors were measured with the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (catastrophisation subscale), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. There were significantly higher scores in secondary care for movement-related fear (1.3 points (95%CI .1-2.5) p = .030) and catastrophisation (2.0 (95%CI 1.0-3.0) p < .000), lower scores on anxiety (-1.0 (95%CI -1.0-2.0) p < .000) but no difference for depression. These differences in psychosocial scores were broadly retained when stratified by SBT subgroup. However, questionnaire-specific reported thresholds for important difference scores indicate the size of these differences between the care settings were unlikely to be clinically important from a patient perspective. Longitudinal studies are required to investigate the predictive ability of SBT in secondary care settings and whether treatment targeted to SBT subgroups is effective in secondary care. 2013 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54781 10.1016/j.math.2012.07.002 Churchill Livingstone restricted
spellingShingle Morsø, L.
Kent, Peter
Albert, H.
Manniche, C.
Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title_full Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title_fullStr Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title_full_unstemmed Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title_short Is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in Danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
title_sort is the psychosocial profile of people with low back pain seeking care in danish primary care different from those in secondary care?
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54781