Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

FEAR AVOIDANCE AND PROGNOSIS IN BACK PAIN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS OF CURRENT EVIDENCE



Abstract

Purpose and Background: Despite widespread clinical belief, a previous systematic review found insufficient evidence to substantiate fear avoidance beliefs (FAB) as a risk factor for long-term problems in low back pain. This updated review explores whether there is stronger evidence supporting the role of fear avoidance in early stages of low back pain as a predictor of outcome. In addition, this evidence was examined in reference to current models and knowledge about fear avoidance.

Methods and Results: A systematic literature search for all prospective inception cohorts of low back pain that included psychological factors at baseline between 2000 and 2003 was made. We searched MEDLINE, psychINFO, AMED, CINAHL, Social Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index databases. Included studies had early recruitment of up to three weeks since onset of back pain and an absence of back pain in the previous three months. These studies were coded according to criteria adapted from Pincus et al (2002) blindly by two researchers. A sample of these was coded by a third blinded reviewer. An independent statistician performed statistical conversion of reported results to effect sizes. Out of the six included studies, four included valid and reliable measures of fear avoidance. There was only weak evidence implicating fear avoidance as a predictor of disadvantageous outcome.

Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the basic concept of fear avoidance as a risk factor for poor outcomes in low back pain. Experimental studies indicate that those with high FAB benefit from targeted intervention. To explain this we propose a model of FAB containing two distinct groups.

Correspondence should be addressed to SBPR c/o Royal college of Surgeons, 35 - 43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PN