Low back pain is a common problem seen in both atheletes and general population. The elite athlete losing significant playing time because of a back injury. Although an actual pain generator is not always found , the majority of athletes with low back injuries are likely to have pain from a benign source. These athletes will be expected to respond well to non operative treatment. However some athletes may experience pain from more severe stuructural sources such as fracture or tumor. In these cases, different management may be indicated. The clinician evaluating athletes with LBP must have overall understanding about back problems for making proper decision and therapeutic regimen. In this article, the authors discuss common back pain related injuries in the atheletic population, typical mechanisms of injury and the treatment methods include rehabilitation exercise for these problems.
Athletes ; Athletic Injuries ; Back Injuries ; Back Pain ; Hip ; Humans ; Low Back Pain ; Pelvis ; Spine ; Sports

Low back pain is a common problem seen in both atheletes and general population. The elite athlete losing significant playing time because of a back injury. Although an actual pain generator is not always found , the majority of athletes with low back injuries are likely to have pain from a benign source. These athletes will be expected to respond well to non operative treatment. However some athletes may experience pain from more severe stuructural sources such as fracture or tumor. In these cases, different management may be indicated. The clinician evaluating athletes with LBP must have overall understanding about back problems for making proper decision and therapeutic regimen. In this article, the authors discuss common back pain related injuries in the atheletic population, typical mechanisms of injury and the treatment methods include rehabilitation exercise for these problems.
Athletes ; Athletic Injuries ; Back Injuries ; Back Pain ; Hip ; Humans ; Low Back Pain ; Pelvis ; Spine ; Sports

This survey was performed to obtain the basic information for the prevention and management of occupational low back injury(LBI). The subjects of this survey were 952 workers(male, 892;female, 60) who had taken occupational LBI in some industries of Pusan area from January 1 to December 31, 1991. Observation period was 2.6 years from the beginning to the end of medical treatment. The obtained results were summarized as follows; 1. The proportion of LBI workers was 15.9% of the workers who had taken any occupational injuries and 0.32% of all workers in this surveyed area. 2. 8.0% of the workers had taken LBI on the 1st day of employment and 55.2% of the workers were within one year, 91.4% of the workers were within 10 years according to cumulative frequency distribution. 3. Handling of heavy objects was the most common cause of LBI(32.0%) and fall down(26.9%) and slip down(16.3%) were the next in order. 4. The most common causes of both lumbar sprain and HNP were handling of heavy objects and that of lumbar fracture was fall down. 5. The mean duration for medical treatment of LBI workers was 143 days. 6. The total direct compensation cost for LBI workers was 6,736 million Won and the proportion of medical, resting, disability compensation costs were 25.0%, 37.0%, 38.0% respectively. 7. The percentages of retreated workers and disabled workers were 11.9%(113 persons) and 22.9%(218 persons) of total LBI workers respectively.
Back Injuries* ; Busan* ; Compensation and Redress ; Employment ; Occupational Injuries ; Sprains and Strains

This study was done for identifying the factors which affect psychologic symptoms of low back(LBP) patients. The study subjects were 43 work-related low back pain patients, 28 work-related non-low back pain patients and 47 general low back injury patients. The study material is SCL 90-R for checking psychologic symptoms and questionnaire for obtaining general information about the subjects. The data were analyzed by model of analysis of covariance adjusted by several variables such as gender, age, education and marital status and then compared the least square means of symptom score between groups. To identify the factors that affect psychologic symptom, duration of suspension, return to work and interaction factor of these two variables were analyzed by multivariate model and we calculated partial correlation coefficient of these variables. As a result, work-related LBP patients showed higher score of symptoms in somatization, depression and psychosis than work-related non-LBP and non-work-related LBP. Duration of suspension and return to work were significant explanatory variables for psychologic symptom score of work-related LBP. Then, we may conclude that the treatment and rehabilitation programe for work-related LBP should cover the strategy of early return to work.
Back Injuries ; Back Pain ; Depression ; Education ; Humans ; Low Back Pain* ; Marital Status ; Psychometrics* ; Psychotic Disorders ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Rehabilitation ; Return to Work

OBJECTIVES: To know the present conditions of industrial accidents in automobile factories in Korea and make the basic materials essential to prevention of industrial accidents METHODS: We reviewed and analyzed the records of industrial accidents occurred in an automobile factory in 1997 by time of occurrence, job categories(fixed production, skilled trades, mechanical material handling, and clerical 8r technical), type of injury, kind of accident, and location of injury. RESULTS: 1. By age groups, the accident rate was the highest in age 45-49(1.6 %o) followed by age 35-39(1.3 %), 40-44(0.9 %), 30-34(0.9 %), 25-29(0.6 %), and 20-24(0.4 %) and by working duration, it was highest in group of experience over 25 years, and so we could see that the more age or working duration increases the more accident rate increases. 2. By work time, the accident rate was the highest in 10-11 a.m. (21.4 %) followed by 2-3 p.m. (17.9%). By the day of the week, it was as follows, Friday(20.5%) Wednesday (17. 9%), Monday (16. 2 %), Thesday (15. 4 %), Saturday (12. 0 %), Thursday(11.1 %), Sunday(6.8 %) in order. By the month, it was high in May(17.9 %), March(11.1 %), and April(11.1 %) followed by August(10.3 %) and January(9.4 %), so we could see it was high in spring. 3. The most frequent injury was in the back by 41.0 % followed by 17 cases in fingers(14.5 %), legs(9.4 %), hands(7.7 %), head(6.0 %) in order. And by the type of injuries, the sprain was most frequent by 38. 5% followed by fracture(22. 2 %, lumbar HNP(11.1 %), and contusion(9.4 %) in order. The causes of accident were handling heavy materials(34.2 %), upset(17.1 %), stenosis(16.2 %), and falling(6.8 %) in order. CONCLUSIONS: By the above results, to prevent the industrial accidents in automobile factories in Korea, preventive activities for handling heavy materials and back injury, and continuous industrial education are necessary.
Accidents, Occupational* ; Automobiles* ; Back Injuries ; Education ; Humans ; Korea ; Sprains and Strains

Epidemilologic information about various syndromes in low back pain has been regarded by Vert Mooney as one of the important sources for establishing prognosis and providing a rationale for therapy. Several risk factors about low back pain and injuries were analyzed through a questionnaire filled out by 172 athletes of various kind of sports including students and professional players. The following results were obtained. 1. Types of sports were associated with the incidence of low back injuries and gymnastics were included in high risk groups (p<0.01). 2. Career is also associated with the incidence of low back injuries (p<0.05). 3. Pain pattern, such as anterior element pain or posterior element pain is also associated with the particular type of sport(p<0.001). 4. Over-use has been suspected as a main cause of sports injury in 37.8% of athletes. Neglect of warming-up, psychologic attitudes and chronic accumulation of micro-trauma have been also suspected (p<0.001). 5. Management of pain was expected to be received from physiotherapists by 34.2%, from coaches or fellow sportsmen by 24.6%, from an acupuncturist by 17.5%, from doctors by 9.7%, and from trainers by 14% of athletes. However 66.7% of the professional players wanted to receive management of pain from trainers (p<0.001).
Athletes ; Athletic Injuries ; Back Injuries ; Epidemiologic Studies ; Gymnastics ; Humans ; Incidence ; Low Back Pain ; Physical Therapists ; Prognosis ; Risk Factors ; Sports

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to confirm the risk factors for low back pain and injury to improve the prevention and treatment of lower back pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An epidemiologic study of low back pain and injury was performed with questionnaires distributed to 471 women working at Yeungnam university hospital. The differences in low back pain and injuries among various hospital departments were analyzed by a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the relevant factors included in the questionnaire were determined by a factor analysis. RESULTS: The frequency of low back pain in women in the department of diet and in the maintenance department was higher than among the other departments. The frequency of low back pain was mainly related to the frequency of psychosomatic symptoms. In addition, the low back pain was partially related to the frequency of psychosomatic symptoms and partially related to the frequency of pushing during the workday. The degree of disability from low back pain was increased by lifting and hard physical work and was related to the frequency of psychosomatic symptoms and the degree of work dissatisfaction. The frequency of low back injury was increased by increased standing time during work and hard physical work. The frequency of low back injury was related to advancing age and in part to psychosomatic symptoms. CONCLUSION: Lower back pain and its associated complications are related to psychosomatic factors and type of work. Lower back injury is related to physiological factors such as age. For the prevention and treatment of lower back pain, a multidisciplinary approach is required.
Back Injuries ; Diet ; Epidemiologic Studies* ; Female ; Hospital Departments ; Hospitals, General* ; Humans ; Lifting ; Low Back Pain* ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Risk Factors

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PURPOSE: To verify the association of hamstring tightness and range of motion in anterior pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar motion (LM), and trunk flexion (TF) during forward bending. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Increased hamstring stiffness could be a possible contributing factor to low back injuries. Clinical observations have suggested that hamstring tightness influences lumbar pelvic rhythm. Movement restrictions or postural asymmetry likely lead to compensatory movement patterns of the lumbar spine, and subsequently to increased stress on the spinal soft tissues and an increased risk of low back pain (LBP). METHODS: Hamstring muscle tightness was measured using the self-monitored active knee extension (AKE) test. A bubble inclinometer was used to determine the range of motion of PT, LM, and TF during forward bending. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, comparisons between groups and a correlation between hamstring tightness (AKE) and anterior PT, TF, and regional LM with p< or =0.05. RESULTS: The LBP group was composed of 36 participants, and the asymptomatic group consisted of 32 participants. The mean for PT in the control group was 66.7degrees, 64.5degrees for LM and 104.6degrees for TF. Respective values in the symptomatic group were 57.0degrees, 79.8degrees, and 82.2degrees. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with LBP showed restriction in the pelvis and TF range of motion, but had higher amplitudes in the lumbar spine during forward bending.
Back Injuries ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Knee ; Low Back Pain* ; Muscle Tonus ; Pelvis ; Range of Motion, Articular* ; Spine ; Volunteers*

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical trial. PURPOSE: To compare the multidisciplinary educational program versus physiotherapy education among Iranian nurses. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Low back pain (LBP) can accompany significant occupational injuries in the nursing profession. There is no agreement on the most effective educational practice. METHODS: This study was conducted from August 17, 2014 to September 22, 2014 in Tehran, Iran. Eligible nurses with chronic mechanical LBP (n=136) were classified into an intervention group (n=66) or the control group (n=70). The intervention group received physiotherapy education for 120-minutes followed by a 120-minute health education session based on predictive constructs of social cognitive theory (SCT). The control group received the 120-minute physiotherapy education. Disability rate, pain severity and back pain prevention behavior were measured at initially and 3 months after intervention using visual analogue scale, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire and nursing low back pain preventive behaviors questionnaire. RESULTS: The two groups were the same in terms of all studied variables at the initiation of the study. At the 3-month follow up, predictive constructs of LBP preventive behaviors of participants in the intervention were improved (p<0.001). Significant decreases were evident at 3 months in pain severity (p=0.03) and disability (p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The designed multidisciplinary educational intervention could decrease chronic mechanical LBP in nurses.
Back Pain ; Education* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Health Education ; Humans ; Iran* ; Low Back Pain* ; Nursing ; Nursing Staff ; Occupational Injuries

BACKGROUNDSeated workplaces have greatly increased in China. Many researchers have found that seated work is a risk factor in the development of low-back pain. Backrest can reduce the load on the lower back by transmitting more of the weight from the upper body to the floor via the backrest so as to prevent low-back pain. To design a suitable chair backrest for seated office work, some backrest parameters must be optimized. In this study, the role of backrest density on lumbar load and comfort were investigated. The goal of the study was to help establish criteria with which backrests that alleviate and prevent low back pain during seated office work can be designed and selected.

METHODSTwenty volunteers (10 men and 10 women) were seated in three backrest conditions (10 kg/m(3), 25 kg/m(3), and 40 kg/m(3)). Pressure data, including contact pressure (CP), peak contact pressure (PCP) and contact area were collected during 15-minute trial. Subjective data were collected after each pressure test.

RESULTSBackrest density had a significant effect on backrest pressure variables. CP and PCP increased with increasing backrest density. Contact area decreased with increased density. In terms of user preference, the backrest with low density was most highly rated.

CONCLUSIONSBackrest density plays an important role in lumbar load and comfort during seated work. During designing and selecting backrests, backrest density should be focused on so as to alleviate and prevent low-back pain during seated office work. Backrest density at 10 kg/m(3) got the lowest CP and PCP and largest contact area. Backrest with low density can reduce lumbar pressure and increase support contact area, which could raise comfort feeling. Backrest density at 10 kg/m(3) is better to maintain a balance between providing effective support and alleviating excess lordosis.

Back Injuries ; prevention & control ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Female ; Humans ; Interior Design and Furnishings ; Low Back Pain ; prevention & control ; Male ; Regression Analysis