complementary health approaches and fear avoidance beliefs in …cj... · 2019-02-13 · adults...
TRANSCRIPT
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS
Complementary Health Approaches for Chronic Low Back Pain and the Role of Fear Avoidance
Beliefs in Worsening Physical Dysfunction.
Shirley Alexandra Gillies
Submitted in partial fulfillment
For the requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Northeastern University
Bouveʹ College of Health Sciences
School of Nursing
Boston, Massachusetts
2016
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVODIANCE BELIEFS ii
Sponsoring Committee: Dr Elizabeth Howard, Chairperson
Dr Robert Saper
Dr Karla Damus
Dr Susan Roberts
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVODIANCE BELIEFS iii
Copyright @ 2016 Shirley Gillies
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVODIANCE BELIEFS iv
Dedication
I would like to dedicate this to my mother, Bernice Wood (Gillies). She taught me how to love
and how to be a compassionate human being. Without her strong presence, endurance, love, and
guidance there would never have been an attempt at research.
I would like to acknowledge my committee, Drs Howard, Saper, Damus, and Roberts, you have
been amazing. Each of you has brought your own unique contribution to my scholarship and
research. I will be forever grateful. Namaste.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 1
Abstract
Chronic low back pain is a biopsychosocial disorder and a public health care issue. Despite rising
costs, disability rates have not improved. In addition, opioids are a common management
approach and their overuse has significant public health ramifications. The need for continued
research on how to effectively manage chronic low back pain has become apparent. This
dissertation will review some common complementary health approaches for back pain and their
effectiveness. In addition, it will review the influence fear avoidance beliefs have on worsening
physical dysfunction and suggest clinical treatment approaches. Finally, it will analyze data from
a randomized controlled trial to determine whether high fear avoidance beliefs are associated with
worsening physical dysfunction in a predominately minority population. It will identify whether a
group difference exists in a yoga, physical therapy or education intervention at influencing these
beliefs. It will also identify whether high fear avoidance beliefs scores at baseline are predictive of
treatment attendance rates.
Keywords: chronic low back pain, cost, opioids, physical function, treatment approaches.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 2
Table of Contents
List of Tables 4
List of Figures 5
Chapters
1. Introduction
Chapter 1 Complementary Health Approaches for Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain
Abstract 1
Introduction 2
Acupuncture 4
Treatment Efficacy 5
Massage 6
Treatment Efficacy 7
Spinal Massage 8
Treatment Efficacy 9
Yoga 9
Treatment Efficacy 10
Discussion 12
References 13
3. Chapter 2 Fear and its Affect on Chronic Low Back Pain
Introduction 2
Fear Avoidance Beliefs Model 3
Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire 3
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia 4
STarT Back Screening Tool 5
Clinical Implications 5
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 3
Clinical Approaches 6
Managing the Patient Encounter 8
Conclusion 9
References 10
Fear Avoidance Model 15
Use of Services over Time 16
Comparison of Education Approaches Table 17
4, Chapter 3 The Impact of Yoga, Physical Therapy, and Education on Fear
Avoidance Beliefs in Chronic Low Back Pain.
Introduction 1
Method 7
Data Analysis 8
Results 9
Discussion 10
Conclusions 14
5. Summary and Conclusions 5
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 4
List of Tables
Chapter 2
Table 1 Comparison of Handy Hints vs. the Back Book
Chapter 3
Table 1 Baseline Characteristics
Table 2 Pearson Correlation Table
Table 3 Regression Model 1: FABQPA as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 4 Regression Model 2: FABQPA as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 5 Regression Model 3: FABQPA as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 6 Regression Model 1: FABQW as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 7 Regression Model 2: FABQW as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 8 Regression Model 3: FABQW as independent variable with RMDQ as the dependent variable
Table 9 Regression Model with FABQPA and FABQW with Intervention Attendance Rates as the
dependent variable.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 5
List of Figures
1. Chapter 2 Fear Avoidance Beliefs Model
2. Chapter 2 Use of Back Treatment Services over Time
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS
Introduction
Despite the increasing use and cost of back pain treatments, disability rates are increasing. In
approximately 90 % of back pain cases, no anatomical cause can be identified. In addition, low
correlations exist between back pain severity and disability.
Back pain is well recognized as having biopsychosocial contributors. Current clinical guidelines
recommend the screening of psychosocial factors that increase the risk for developing chronic low
back pain. Fear of movement and fear of pain have been recognized as psychological risk factors that
worsen physical dysfunction. What is unknown is if fear influences worsening disability among a
minority population. It is also unknown if a difference exists in a yoga, physical therapy or education
intervention at reducing fear as it relates to movement and pain. Finally, no literature known exists
on whether fear adversely affects treatment adherence rates.
This dissertation includes three separate manuscripts. The first manuscript will review
complementary health approaches for back pain along with their efficacy. The second will discuss
the relationship of fear avoidance beliefs and worsening physical dysfunction and suggest ways to
clinically manage patients. The third manuscript is a secondary data analysis aimed at determining
whether a relationship exists between fear and worsening physical function in a minority population,
whether one intervention (yoga, physical therapy, or education) is more superiority than another at
reducing fear and whether a predictive relationship exists between fear and treatment attendance
rates. This research is guided by the biopsychosocial model of care that encompasses the biology,
psychological, and social attributes that contribute to human functioning.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 1
Chapter 1
Abstract
Back pain is the number one cause of global disability. Despite rising treatment costs in the
United States related to the use of medications, spinal injections, and surgery, disability rates
have not improved. Complementary health approaches are part of the recommended treatment
guidelines for the management of nonspecific chronic low back pain. The most commonly used
approaches: acupuncture, massage spinal manipulation, and yoga will be reviewed. Evidence
from systematic reviews to support their safety and efficacy will be presented. A discussion
will follow regarding recommendations for their use in the clinical area.
Keywords: Nonspecific chronic low back pain, complementary health approaches,
acupuncture, massage, spinal manipulation, yoga, treatment efficacy and safety.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 2
An Overview of Complementary Health Approaches for Nonspecific Chronic Low Back
Pain
Low back pain (LBP) is the number one cause of global disability (Hoy et al., 2014). Despite
the rising cost of back pain treatment related to the increased use of medication, spinal injections,
and surgery, functional disability in the United States (US) has not improved. A clinical approach
that examines the chronic nature of LBP while recognizing that treatment effectiveness relies on
eliciting patients as both partners in their healthcare and users of self-care strategies may prove
more beneficial than the use of mainstream services (Deyo, Mirza, Turner, & Martin, 2009).
Current guidelines from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society
recommend considering the use of non-pharmacological therapy which includes acupuncture,
massage, spinal manipulation, and yoga for chronic low back pain (cLBP) (Chou et al., 2007).
The purpose of this paper is to review current clinical guidelines for cLBP treatment. It will
review commonly used complementary health approaches (CHA) for the treatment of cLBP
including, acupuncture, massage, spinal manipulation, and yoga. Treatment efficacy and the
recommendations of systematic reviews (SR) published in the past five years will be reviewed.
Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain
Low back pain includes tension, stiffness, and or soreness in the lower back region, defined as
the area between the lower ribs and the gluteal folds (Hoy, et al., 2014). It is identified as non-
specific in approximately 90% of the presenting cases (Krismer, van Tulder, & 2007) when no
specific radiculopathy, spinal stenosis, or other specific spinal causes are identified (Swinkels-
Meewisse et al., 2006). Pain lasting for three months or longer is termed chronic; 20% of people
affected by acute back pain go on to develop cLBP with persistent pain remaining beyond a year
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 3
(National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 2014). Back pain has a life-time
prevalence reported to be as high as 84% (Balagué, Mannion, Pellisé, & Cedraschi, 2012) with an
overall direct and indirect economic burden of at least 100 billion dollars a year with 5% of the
patients that present with cLBP consuming 75% of the cost (Katz, 2006).
Management of Back Pain
Clinical recommendations from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain
Society, (2007) exist to aid in the management of patients suffering from LBP (Chou & Huffman,
2007). A focused patient history and physical exam along with identification of psychosocial risk
factors for developing chronic pain such as fear and depression should be performed. Patients with
LBP should be triaged into three categories: nonspecific LBP, back pain potentially associated
with radiculopathy or spinal stenosis, or pain potentially associated with another specific spinal
cause. The use of radiographic imaging or other diagnostic testing should be reserved for patients
with progressive neurological deficits or when a serious underlying condition is suspected on the
basis of the patient’s history and exam. An MRI (preferred) or CT scan is recommended for
radiculopathy or spinal stenosis if the potential exists for surgery or an epidural steroid injection.
Clinicians should provide patients with evidence based information regarding expected treatment
course, the need to remain active and effective self-care options.
A critical evaluation should be made regarding the severity of baseline pain, functional deficits,
and potential risks, benefits, and long-term efficacy of treatment choice. First line medication
options include acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. For patients who do not
improve with self-administered medications, non-pharmacological therapy with likely benefits
should be considered. Exercise therapy, intensive interdisciplinary rehabilitation, and
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 4
complementary alternative health approaches including acupuncture, massage therapy, spinal
manipulation, and yoga should be considered.
Complementary Health Approaches
A survey done by the National Institute of Health (NIH) reported that approximately 33 % of
adults living in the US have used some form of CHA (Clarke, Black, Stussman, Barnes, & Nahin,
2015) with 60% of the CHA users perceiving benefit (Kanodia, Legedza, Davis, Eisenberg, &
Phillips, 2010). Back pain is a common cause for the use of CHA (Kanodia, et al., 2010).
Acupuncture, massage, spinal manipulation, and yoga are some of the most commonly used
treatment approaches for LBP and can be used as components of an integrative approach or as a
standalone approach when self-care strategies and first line medications have not effectively
managed symptoms. This review summarizes existing literature concerning the origin of these
CHAs, mechanisms of action, and effectiveness with managing LBP.
Acupuncture
Acupuncture is one of the oldest medical procedures in the world, originating in China
approximately 2000 years ago. Multiple physiological models have been proposed to understand
why it works. Some theories implicate cytokines, hormones, biomechanical effects,
electromagnetic effects, the immune system, and the autonomic and somatic nervous systems, but
no model has been consistent enough to draw conclusions on exactly how acupuncture works
within the western medical model (Ahn, 2014).
Although diversified, acupuncture encompasses a large array of styles. The most frequently
used technique is the manual manipulation or electrical stimulation of thin, solid, metallic needles
inserted into the skin. The Eastern theory is based on three concepts: vital energy known as QI,
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 5
ying and yang (or the opposing forces of nature) and the five elements: wood, fire, earth, water,
and metal. The human body is depicted as a microcosmic reflection of the macrocosms of the
universe. In this scenario, the clinician’s goal is to diagnose and attempt to restore the harmonious
balance of the body with the external environment by the insertion of needles in defined points
along meridian channels, the pathway along which QI is believed to flow. This is done to correct
the disruption in harmony manifested through a particular symptom. It has been found to be a
generally safe intervention with complications comparable to that of any intervention that requires
the insertion of needles (Lao, Hamilton, Fu, & Berman, 2003). Insurance coverage is variable with
a trend toward increased coverage (The Kaiser Family Foundation, 2004).
Treatment Efficacy
Trigkilidas (2010) completed a SR done to determine the justification for recommendations
made by the England National Institute of Health and Clinical Guidelines to offer 10 to 12
acupuncture sessions as a baseline treatment option for cLBP (Trigkilidas, 2010). This review of 4
RCTs found evidence to suggest that acupuncture was superior to “usual” care or “no care,”
especially when patients had positive expectations regarding the use of acupuncture. Three out of
the four studies “invited” participants wanting to participate in an acupuncture trial, limiting the
study population to the people that felt acupuncture would help. In a systematic review (SR) of 18
RCTs (8 with low risk of bias), Rubinstein et al., (2010) suggested that acupuncture provided
favorable short-term clinical effects for pain reduction and improved function when compared to a
waiting list control or when used as an adjunct treatment to physical therapy, standard medical
care, or exercise (Rubinstein et al., 2010).
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 6
There was conflicting evidence to allow any firm conclusions to be drawn in the review of 7
RCTs by Hutchinson and colleagues (Hutchinson, Ball, Andrews, & Jones, 2012). Whether
acupuncture had any therapeutic value over other treatment modalities was confounded by the
wide age range of the participants in the trials, the duration of LBP, and the acupuncture methods
used. Despite these variances, there was evidence to suggest that acupuncture was more beneficial
when compared to no treatment. In a 32 RCT SR and meta-analysis conducted by Lam and Curry,
(2013) patients who had received acupuncture had statistically significant lower levels of pain and
improved activity post intervention when compared to the group that received no treatment or
medications such as analgesics, NSAIDS, or muscle relaxants (Lam & Curry, 2013). Patients who
received acupuncture in addition to usual care were found to have decreased pain and improved
function post intervention and at three months when compared to the “usual care” group.
In a meta-analysis by Xiu et al, (2013) acupuncture was found to be more effective at relieving
pain than no treatment at long term follow-up, ranging from 4 to 52 weeks.(Xu et al., 2013).
However, the effect diminished with the length of LBP chronicity. Overall, acupuncture was
found to be more effective than “other treatments” not specifically defined within the review. In
an overview of 7 SRs, Liu et al., (2015) found support for acupuncture being superior to no
treatment at short term follow-up for reducing pain and improving function (Liu, Skinner,
McDonough, Mabire, & Baxter, 2015). As an adjunct treatment to usual care such as medication,
exercise, and physical therapy, acupuncture was consistently found to improve pain and function.
Massage
Multiple types of massage have evolved over time from a variety of cultural traditions.
Generally, massage involves physical manipulation with varying intensity, direction, rate, and
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 7
rhythm applied to the soft tissues and fascia of the body in an attempt to loosen tight muscles
(Sagar, Dryden, & Wong, 2007). The kneading or squeezing of tissues stimulates deep muscles
and increases circulation. Myofascial techniques are performed to stretch and relax muscles that
are tense and in spasm. Chronically tense muscles restrict blood flow and cause fatigue. By
applying specific pressure to connective tissues and fascia, normal alignment and function can
often be restored and as a result, chronic pain felt from tense, stiff muscles is relieved.
A “deeper dive” into the physiology of how massage actually works was carried out by Crane
et al.,(Crane et al., 2012). No treatment or massage was applied to the quadriceps of 11 young
male participants after exercise induced muscle damage. Muscle biopsies were obtained at
baseline, immediately after 10 min massage treatment, and after a 2.5 hour period of recovery.
The massaged muscle was found to have activated signaling pathways potentiating mitochondrial
biogenesis, attenuated production of inflammatory cytokines, and reduced shock protein, thereby
lessening cellular stress resulting from injury.
Adverse events (AEs) from massage are rare. However, some documented serious events
occurred from “exotic” types of massage use (Ernst, 2003). Electric hand massage devices have
been associated with a high rate of serious AEs(Posadzki & Ernst, 2013). Most of massage
therapy cost is paid by the patient. However, a number of health insurance plans have assembled
“networks” of approved massage therapists which provide a 20 to 25 percent discount (Therapists,
2015).
Treatment Efficacy
In a SR of 13 RCTs, five of which were limited to participants with cLBP, Furlan and
colleagues found moderate evidence to suggest that massage had superior beneficial effects on
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 8
pain and physical function when trialed against acupuncture, relaxation, or education for cLBP
patients with benefits lasting up to one year (Furlan, Imamura, Dryden, & Irvin, 2009). A SR by
van Middelkoop et al (2010) identified three RCTs comparing massage to relaxation or
acupuncture, the pooled data, however, did not show a significant difference in pain intensity
between the massage vs. the control groups (van Middelkoop et al., 2011). In a SR that reviewed
five SRs on the effectiveness of massage for cLBP, Kumar et al., (2013) found an emerging body
of evidence to suggest that massage had a small beneficial effect on cLBP (Kumar, Beaton, &
Hughes, 2013). A recommendation for cautious interpretation was made due to the
methodological flaws in the primary research that informed the reviews. In addition to this, four
out of the five reviews analyzed within this SR had 3 or less RCTs included.
Spinal Manipulation
Spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) is a form of manual therapy used by chiropractors, physical
therapists, and osteopaths that involves movement of a joint near the end of its range of motion
(Shekellle, 2015). There are a variety of definitions that vary across the disciplines; the “umbrella”
definition includes variations on soft tissue techniques, mobilization, and thrust manipulation
(Maigne & Vautravers, 2003). The proposed hypotheses explaining benefits of manipulation
include: relaxation of hypertonic muscle by stretching, especially the psoas muscle and paraspinal
muscles often found to be tense and tender in the cLBP population, and by manipulation or thrust
disrupting an articular or periarticular lesion, thereby unblocking motion segments, changing pain
pathways, or stimulating reflexive muscle activation (Maigne & Vautravers, 2003; Millan,
Leboeuf-Yde, Budgell, & Amorim, 2012).
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 9
SMT is generally considered a safe procedure with minor complaints and rare AEs
(Shekellle, 2015). A SR of 5 prospective studies found transient adverse reactions, including
dizziness, light headedness, headache, and numbness in 50% of patients undergoing spinal
manipulation (Ernst, 2001). The most common serious AEs are vertebrobasilar accident, disk
herniation or cauda equina syndrome, with an incidence of 1 per 400,000 to 1 per 2 million
patients (Stevinson & Ernst, 2002). In a cohort study with Medicare B beneficiaries aged 66 to 99
years, the injury incidence was 40 per 100,000 subjects, with a likely increase of injury among
patients with chronic coagulation defects, long-term use of anticoagulation therapy, inflammatory
spondylopathy, osteoporosis, and aortic aneurysm. Most insurances pay part of the cost of SMT
(Jensen & 1997).
Treatment Efficacy
Walker et al., in a SR of twelve RCTs, (three trials specific to the cLBP population) found
no statistically significant group differences between the spinal manipulation group and the “other
therapies” for pain reduction or improved disability at short, medium or long term follow-up
(Walker, French, Grant, & Green, 2011). “Other therapies” was defined as intervention that
included, NSAIDS, strengthening, exercise, cold, ultrasound, and pain clinic visits. Two of these
three trials were scored as having low bias defined as a minimum score of “yes” given to
randomization, allocation concealment, and outcome assessor blinding
A SR of 26 RCTs done by Rubenstein et al., with a total of 6070 cLBP participants, found
high quality evidence to support a small statistical significance, but not a clinically relevant
difference for improved pain and functional status when SMT was compared to “other” forms of
interventions (Rubinstein, van Middelkoop, Assendelft, de Boer, & van Tulder, 2013). The other
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 10
interventions included usual care, education, physical therapy, acupuncture, massage, and
analgesics. Varying qualities of evidence support a short-term effect on pain relief and functional
status when SMT was added to other interventions. In a later smaller SR evaluating SMT vs.
prescribed exercise with a cLBP population, Merepeza found no conclusive evidence to favor
either SMT or exercise as a more effective therapeutic intervention for reducing pain or disability
in cLBP (Merepeza, 2014).
Yoga
Yoga is a mind body practice that is becoming increasingly popular for both health promotion
and as a treatment approach for a variety of conditions (Woodyard, 2011). There are numerous
schools of yoga; hatha yoga is the most popular form practiced in the United States. Hatha yoga
includes a variety of styles including Ashtanga, Bikram, Kundalini, Iyengar, and Viniyoga
(Health, 2014).
Although yoga’s ancient tradition is rooted in philosophical teachings, its modern practice
generally includes varying forms and different levels of intensity concerning the three main
components: postures (asanas), breath, and meditation (Evans, Sternlieb, Tsar, & Zettzer, 2009).
With its continued practice, there is a gradual loosening of the muscle and connective tissues
around the bones and joints (Woodyard, 2011). When joints are brought through their full range of
motion, there is squeezing and twisting of cartilage, bringing fresh blood with its nutrients and
oxygen to the area. It is through this process that conditions like arthritis and chronic pain are
understood as preventable (McCall, 2007).
Some theories suggest that increasing tissue flexibility brought on by stretching through the
different postures brings about a release of “feel good” endorphins through the control of breath
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 11
and meditation (Ulger & Yagli, 2010). The most common AEs from yoga include musculoskeletal
injuries and worsening and acute glaucoma. Orbital varices or orbital vein occlusion are the next
most common form of injury (Cramer, Krucoff, & Dobos, 2013). To date, no known insurance
coverage exists for yoga.
Treatment Efficacy
In 2011, a SR by Posadzki and Ernst found support for the use of yoga in cLBP for improving
pain severity and function in five out of the seven trials reviewed; the remaining two studies did
not have sufficient power to detect a group change (Posadzki & Ernst, 2011). The review found
the evidence inconclusive, however, because of the heterogeneity of the trials—there were varying
definitions of cLBP used in terms of pain duration ranging from greater than 3 months to greater
than 6 months to one episode over the past 18 months. There was also different core yoga
interventions used along with wide range of intervention duration, ranging from a one-week
intensive program to 24 weeks of two 90 minutes classes.
In a SR and meta-analysis of 10 RCTs with a total of 967 cLBP patients, Cramer et al., (2013),
found strong evidence to support yoga’s short and long-term effect on pain and strong evidence to
support short-term positive effects on disability and moderate evidence to support a long-term
positive effect on disability (Cramer, Lauche, Haller, & Dobos, 2013). The available data
precluded a definite judgment on whether yoga was inferior or superior to usual care or exercise.
However, yoga was found to be superior to education. Diaz et al., (2013) in a 11 RCT SR that
included 10 of the same RCTs used by Cramer and colleagues findings supported yoga as being
beneficial in the treatment of cLBP (Diaz et al., 2013). A definite judgment regarding yoga’s
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 12
superiority to usual care or PT could not be made, however, due to the conflicting results of the
RCTs. However, a recommendation for its use in addition to education and/or self-care was made.
Data from eight RCTs, a total of 743 patients, was combined and analyzed in a meta-analysis
done by Holtzman and Beggs (Holtzman & Beggs, 2013). Outcome data from trials using
education or a wait list control were used, limiting the generalizability of the findings to education
or to a no-treatment comparison. The post-yoga treatment effect size for functional disability and
pain were medium to large. Follow-up effect size was smaller but still statistically significant.
The Orwin fail safe “n” was 11, indicating it would take 11 studies with insignificant results for
yoga’s effect on pain to be reduced to a small effect. Despite the heterogeneity of the yoga
interventions used, the interventions yielded a statistically similar effect size. The authors
suggested that yoga’s general emphasis on strength, flexibility, breathing, and focused awareness
may be more important than the specific asanas or sequences used. There is agreement in the
literature that most of the yoga research done on cLBP has methodological concerns, limiting the
ability to develop firm conclusions about the type, duration, and frequency required for efficacy
(Cramer, Lauche, et al., 2013; Diaz, et al., 2013; Holtzman & Beggs, 2013).
Discussion
There is concern in the literature regarding the rising cost for back pain treatment, despite the
lack of improvement in disability rates (Deyo, et al., 2009). The solution to this issue may rest in
the need to treat persistent back pain as a chronic condition rather than an acute disorder. Patient
engagement in self-care strategies may be the most beneficial strategy in managing pain and
disability (Deyo, et al., 2009).
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 13
Back pain is the most common reason CHAs are used by consumers (Kanodia, et al., 2010).
However, in clinical practice, treatment recommendation should follow evidence based guidelines.
SRs can direct clinical guidelines but the strength of the review is dependent not only on its
methodology, but also on the methodology and rigor of the primary studies being reviewed (Garg,
Hackam, & Tonelli, 2008). Methodological concerns exist and the majority of the research done
does not allow firm conclusions to be made. However, there is an overall tendency to suggest a
potentially therapeutic role for these approaches as effective adjunct treatments for cLBP.
Along with treatment efficacy, consideration should be given to treatment safety. In order to
prevent serious AEs, overall health status and co-morbidities should be considered. When
massage, acupuncture, SMT and yoga are deemed appropriate treatments, patients should be
encouraged to use only licensed or in the case of yoga, well trained personnel. Patients should be
cautioned that research to date has yet to definitely confirm the benefit of CHAs, but they do hold
promise as another avenue to manage the chronic nature of back pain.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 14
References
Ahn, A. C. (2014). Acupuncture. UpToDate.
Balagué, F., Mannion, A. F., Pellisé, F., & Cedraschi, C. (2012). Non-specific low back pain. The
Lancet, 379(9814), 482-491.
Chou, & Huffman. (2007). Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a
review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians
clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med, 147, 492 - 504.
Chou, Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Casey, D., Cross, J., Shekelle, P., & Owens, D. (2007). Diagnosis
and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American
College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med, 147, 478 - 491.
Clarke, T. C., Black, L. I., Stussman, B. J., Barnes, P. M., & Nahin, R. L. (2015). Trends in the use
of complementary health approaches among adults: United States, 2002-2012. Natl Health
Stat Report, 10(79), 1-16.
Cramer, H., Krucoff, C., & Dobos, G. (2013). Adverse events associated with yoga: a systematic
review of published case reports and case series. PLoS One, 8(10).
Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Haller, H., & Dobos, G. (2013). A systematic review and meta-analysis of
yoga for low back pain. Clin J Pain, 29(5), 450-460.
Crane, J. D., Ogborn, D. I., Cupido, C., Melov, S., Hubbard, A., Bourgeois, J. M., & Tarnopolsky,
M. A. (2012). Massage Therapy Attenuates Inflammatory Signaling After Exercise-
Induced Muscle Damage. Science Translational Medicine, 4(119), 119ra113. doi:
10.1126/scitranslmed.3002882
Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., Turner, J. A., & Martin, B. I. (2009). Overtreating chronic back pain:
time to back off? J Am Board Fam Med, 22(1), 62-68.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 15
Diaz, A. M., Kolber, M. J., Patel, C. K., Pabian, P. S., Rothschild, C. E., & Hanney, W. J. (2013).
The Efficacy of Yoga as an Intervention for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review
of Randomized Controlled Trials. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 7(6), 418-430.
doi: 10.1177/1559827613483440
Ernst, E. (2001). Prospective investigations into the safety of spinal manipulation. J Pain Symptom
Manage, 21(3), 238-242.
Ernst, E. (2003). The safety of massage therapy. Rheumatology, 42(9), 1101-1106.
Evans, S., Sternlieb, B., Tsar, J. C., & Zettzer, L. K. (2009). Using the biopsychosocia model to
understand the health benefits of yoga. Journal of Complementary Medicine, 6(1), 1-22.
Furlan, A. D., Imamura, M., Dryden, T., & Irvin, E. (2009). Massage for low back pain: an
updated systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group.
Spine, 34(16), 1669-1684.
Garg, A. X., Hackam, D., & Tonelli, M. (2008). Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: When One
Study Is Just not Enough. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 3(1),
253-260. doi: 10.2215/cjn.01430307
Health, N. C. f. C. a. I. (2014). Yoga.
Holtzman, S., & Beggs, R. T. (2013). Yoga for chronic low back pain: A meta-analysis of
randomized controlled trials. Pain Research & Management, 18(5), 267-272.
Hoy, D., March, L., Brooks, P., Blyth, F., Woolf, A., Bain, C., . . . Buchbinder, R. (2014). The
global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study.
Ann Rheum Dis, 73(6), 968-974.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 16
Hutchinson, A. J., Ball, S., Andrews, J. C., & Jones, G. G. (2012). The effectiveness of
acupuncture in treating chronic non-specific low back pain: a systematic review of the
literature. J Orthop Surg Res, 7(36), 7-36.
Jensen, G. A. M., R.D. Skekelle, P.G. and Cherkin, D.C. , & (1997). Chiropractic in the United
States: Training, Practice and Research Chiroweb.com (Ed.) Retrieved from
http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/ahcpr/uschiros.htm
Kanodia, A. K., Legedza, A. T., Davis, R. B., Eisenberg, D. M., & Phillips, R. S. (2010). Perceived
benefit of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for back pain: a national
survey. J Am Board Fam Med, 23(3), 354-362.
Katz, J. N. (2006). Lumbar Disc Disorders and Low-Back Pain: Socioeconomic Factors and
Consequences. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, 88(suppl_2), 21-24. doi:
10.2106/jbjs.e.01273
Krismer, M., van Tulder, M., & 2007. Low back pain (non-specific). Best Practice & Research
Clinical Rheumatology, 21(1), 77-91. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2006.08.004
Kumar, S., Beaton, K., & Hughes, T. (2013). The effectiveness of massage therapy for the
treatment of nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review of systematic reviews. Int J
Gen Med, 6, 733-741.
Lam, M., & Curry, P. (2013). Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Nonspecific Chronic Low Back
Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Spine, 38(24), 2124-2138. doi:
10.1097/01.brs.0000435025.65564.b7
Lao, L., Hamilton, G. R., Fu, J., & Berman, B. M. (2003). Is acupuncture safe? A systematic
review of case reports. Altern Ther Health Med, 9(1), 72-83.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 17
Liu, L., Skinner, M., McDonough, S., Mabire, L., & Baxter, G. D. (2015). Acupuncture for low
back pain: an overview of systematic reviews. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med,
328196(10), 4.
Maigne, J. Y., & Vautravers, P. (2003). Mechanism of action of spinal manipulative therapy. Joint
Bone Spine, 70(5), 336-341.
McCall, M. (2007). Yoga as Medicine. New York: Banton Dell A divison of Randon House Inc.
Merepeza, A. (2014). Effects of spinal manipulation versus therapeutic exercise on adults with
chronic low back pain: a literature review. Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic
Association, 58(4), 456-466.
Millan, M., Leboeuf-Yde, C., Budgell, B., & Amorim, M. A. (2012). The effect of spinal
manipulative therapy on experimentally induced pain: a systematic literature review.
Chiropr Man Therap, 20(1), 20-26.
Posadzki, & Ernst. (2011). Yoga for low back pain: a systematic review of randomized clinical
trials. Clin Rheumatol, 30(9), 1257-1262.
Posadzki, & Ernst. (2013). The safety of massage therapy: an update of a systematic review. Focus
on Alternative and Complementary Therapies, 18(1), 27-32. doi: 10.1111/fct.12007
Rubinstein, S. M., van Middelkoop, M., Assendelft, W. J., de Boer, M. R., & van Tulder, M. W.
(2013). Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low-back pain: an update of a Cochrane
review. Spine, 36(13).
Rubinstein, S. M., van Middelkoop, M., Kuijpers, T., Ostelo, R., Verhagen, A. P., de Boer, M. R., .
. . van Tulder, M. W. (2010). A systematic review on the effectiveness of complementary
and alternative medicine for chronic non-specific low-back pain. Eur Spine J, 19(8), 1213-
1228.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 18
Sagar, S. M., Dryden, T., & Wong, R. K. (2007). Massage therapy for cancer patients: a reciprocal
relationship between body and mind. Current Oncology, 14(2), 45-56.
Shekellle, P., Vernon, H., ritz, J>M>. (2015). Spinal Manipulation in the treatement of
musculoskeletal pain. UpToDate. Retrieved from
Stevinson, C., & Ernst, E. (2002). Risks associated with spinal manipulation. Am J Med, 112(7),
566-571.
Swinkels-Meewisse, I. E., Roelofs, J., Schouten, E. G., Verbeek, A. L., Oostendorp, R. A., &
Vlaeyen, J. W. (2006). Fear of movement/(re)injury predicting chronic disabling low back
pain: a prospective inception cohort study. Spine, 31(6), 658-664.
The Kaiser Family Foundation, H. R. a. E. T. (2004). Employer Health benefits 2004 Annual
Survey. . Kaiser Family Foundation.
Therapists, A. B. a. M. (2015). Does Insurance Cover It? Retrieved July 1, 2015, from
http://www.massagetherapy.com/media/experienceinsurance.php#insurance
Trigkilidas, D. (2010). Acupuncture therapy for chronic lower back pain: a systematic review.
Annals Of The Royal College Of Surgeons Of England, 92(7), 595-598. doi:
10.1308/003588410x12699663904196
Ulger, O., & Yagli, N. V. (2010). Effects of yoga on the quality of life in cancer patients.
Complement Ther Clin Pract, 16(2), 60-63.
van Middelkoop, M., Rubinstein, S. M., Kuijpers, T., Verhagen, A. P., Ostelo, R., Koes, B. W., &
van Tulder, M. W. (2011). A systematic review on the effectiveness of physical and
rehabilitation interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain. Eur Spine J, 20(1), 19-
39.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACHES 19
Walker, B. F., French, S. D., Grant, W., & Green, S. (2011). A cochrane review of combined
chiropractic interventions for low-back pain. Spine, 36(3), 230-242.
Woodyard, C. (2011). Exploring the therapeutic effects of yoga and its ability to increase quality
of life. Int J Yoga, 4(2), 49-54.
Xu, M., Yan, S., Yin, X., Li, X., Gao, S., Han, R., . . . Lei, G. (2013). Acupuncture for Chronic
Low Back Pain in Long-Term Follow-Up: A Meta-Analysis of 13 Randomized Controlled
Trials. American Journal of Chinese Medicine, 41(1), 1-19. doi:
10.1142/s0192415x13500018
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 1
Chapter 2
Abstract
Back Pain is a multidimensional disorder with global effects on disability. Its clinical assessment
requires a critical investigation into the confounding biopsychosocial contributors. Fear has been
identified as one of the psychological risk factors that can worsen disability from chronic low back
pain. Fear of pain and fear of movement have been found to adversely affect outcomes for patients
with low back pain. This paper suggests ways to identify fear and its consequences. In addition it
will review ways to clinically manage patients who present with fear of pain and movement.
Keywords: back pain, biopsychosocial contributors, fear, clinical management
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 2
Fear and its Impact on Chronic Low Back Pain
Back pain is a significant health care problem (Kamper et al., 2014). It is well recognized as
having physiological, psychological and social contributing factors (Chou & Shekelle, 2010;
Kamper, et al., 2014). What can be easily overlooked in the clinical area, however, is that pain
severity is not the only contributor to functional decline, variables with psychological and social
underpinnings impact disability and need to be addressed early during patient encounters (Chou &
Huffman, 2007; Crombez, Vlaeyen, Heuts, & Lysens, 1999; Wertli et al., 2014).
When the patient history and examination rule out the “red flags”--symptoms suggestive of
systemic causes—disk herniation, spinal stenosis, osteoporotic compression fracture, inflammatory
arthropathies, cancer, infections, caudal equine syndrome or visceral disorders, clinicians should
screen for psychosocial risk factors or “yellow flags,” that increase the risk for chronic disabling
back pain (Chou & Huffman, 2007). The “yellow flags” include the presence of psychological co-
morbidities, poor coping ability, poor general health, limited functional ability, obesity, tobacco
use, higher physical work demands, workman’s compensation or pending litigation (Chou &
Shekelle, 2010).
Two psychological risk factors frequently identified as contributing to low back pain (LBP)
and its chronicity are pain related fear and fear of re-injury (Rainville et al., 2011). The
psychological experience of fear and how it relates to movement has been conceptualized through
the Fear Avoidance Model (FAM) and is termed Fear Avoidance Beliefs (FABs) (Lethem, Slade,
Troup, & Bentley, 1983). Swinkels-Meewisse and colleagues (2006) found that baseline fear of
movement and re-injury were stronger predictors of perceived disability than baseline pain,
disability, age, gender and level of education in a acute back pain population (Swinkels-Meewisse
et al., 2006). Numerous studies implicate fear as a cause of chronic disability with back pain
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 3
patients (Boersma & Linton, 2005; Crombez, et al., 1999; Guclu, Guclu, Ozaner, Senormanci, &
Konkan, 2012; Meyer, Tschopp, Sprott, & Mannion, 2009; Wertli, et al., 2014; Woby, Watson,
Roach, & Urmston, 2004; S. R. Woby, P. J. Watson, N. K. Roach, & M. Urmston, 2004). The
purpose of this paper is to review the concept of fear through the FAM, its application and
relevance in the clinical area among patients with a complaint of non-specific LBP.
Conceptualization of the Fear Avoidance Model
Lethem and colleagues (1983) identified the term fear avoidance as experienced in chronic
low back pain (cLBP) through a multidisciplinary approach that conceptualized the adaptive and
maladaptive experience of pain (Lethem, et al., 1983). Adaptive and non-adaptive responses were
identified with adaptive mechanisms leading to restorative function while the mal-adaptive
strategies caused an exaggerated pain experience and avoidance of painful activities. It is through
the exaggerated responses to the actual pain, the asynchrony between pain and the response, that
disability was theorized to occur.
Vlaeyen et al., (2000) graphically expanded Lethem’s model depicting two avenues of patient
responses that determined the course of back pain, both pivoting on the concept of fear versus no
fear (Vlaeyen & Linton, 2000). No fear is depicted as the adaptive course with resolution of
symptoms. Negative emotions, anxiety and worry contribute and are moderators of pain-related
fear leading to disuse, depression, and disability (See Figure 1).
The FAM has been applied using the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK). Another instrument that has applied these concepts is the
SIarT Back Screening Tool (SBST). Developed and used mostly in the United Kingdom, the
SBST it is a risk factor rating “tool” for clinicians to use as to guide clinical decision making (Hill
et al., 2008).
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 4
The Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
To screen for people at risk for developing fear related disability, Waddell et al., (1993)
developed the FABQ (Waddell, Newton, Henderson, Somerville, & Main, 1993). It was based on
the FAM and the consequence related to avoidance of movement and how beliefs regarding pain
and re-injury affect physical activity and work. It is a sixteen item self-administered Likert scale
survey consisting of two subscales, the physical activity (FABQPA) and the work subscale
(FABQW). Higher scores indicate high FABs.
Findings from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) found that pain anticipation adversely
affected performance in subjects warned to anticipate pain, compared to members of a control
group who learned that additional movement would not increase pain (Pfingsten et al., 2001). The
study used FABQ, the pain intensity index, performance parameters, and visual analogues and
found that the anticipation of pain led to significantly lower levels of behavioral performances,
increased pain intensity and fear.
The FABQ has been used as an outcome measure in multiple studies exploring functional
disability attributed to LBP. In a descriptive study done by Fritz and George, (2002), with 78
acute low back pain patients, the FABQW was found to be predictive of return to work status
(Fritz & George, 2002). A positive likelihood ratio (LR) of 3.33 of not returning to work was
found for patients scoring >34 on the FABQW, a negative LR was found for patients scoring <29.
A secondary analysis done by George and colleagues, (2008), supported these findings: scores of >
29 FABQW was found to predict disability and explain 24 % of the variance in disability in the
final regression model (George, Fritz, & Childs., 2008). Woby et al., (2004) used the FABQ in 83
patients to investigate how their adjustment to cLBP was influenced by FAB (Woby, et al., 2004).
The findings supported the ability of the FABPA to predict the amount of self reported disability
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 5
after adjusting for age, sex and pain intensity. Chan and Chi (2008) found similar findings (Chan
& Chiu, 2008).
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia
The Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) is a screening tool used to measure fear of
movement. Its initial unpublished 17 item self-administered 4 point Likert scale has been modified
and translated in multiple languages. It has been found to be a reliable and valid instrument in the
clinical setting to measure pain related fear with higher scores indicating higher fear of movement
(de Moraes Vieira, de Goes Salvetti, Damiani, & de Mattos Pimenta, 2013; Monticone et al., 2013;
Swinkels-Meewisse, Swinkels, Verbeek, Vlaeyen, & Oostendorp, 2003). Picavet et al., (2002)
found the TSK predictive of disability at six months, controlling for pain severity and disability at
baseline (Picavet, Vlaeyen, & Schouten, 2002).
STarT Back Screening Tool
The SBST is a relatively new prognostic screening used mostly in the UK (Hill, et al., 2008).
It is based on the domains of larger questionnaires that predict non-recovery from LBP (Kongsted,
Johannesen, & Leboeuf-Yde, 2011). It guides clinical decision making and helps determine who is
at risk for developing cLBP and which patients require more intensive follow-up. Low scores are
indicative of low risk and can be confidently managed with education and analgesia. Moderate
and high risk requires referral beyond the primary care setting.
Clinical Implications
Back pain is one of the most common symptom related reasons for health care visits and the
leading cause of global disability (Hoy et al., 2014). It has a reported lifetime prevalence rate of
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 6
84% (Balague, Mannion, Pellise, & Cedraschi, 2012) with direct and indirect costs of $100 billion
per year (Crow & Willis, 2009).
In most patients, the cause of LBP cannot be identified and is termed non-specific (Manek &
MacGregor, 2005). It is identified as non-specific in approximately 90% of the presenting cases
(Krismer, van Tulder, & 2007) when no specific radiculopathy, spinal stenosis, or specific spinal
causes are identified (Swinkels-Meewisse, et al., 2006). A low correlation exists between pain
severity and disability; some people with high pain severity have low levels of disability while
others with low pain severity experience high functional impairment (Takahashi et al., 2006).
Clinical practice guidelines from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain
Society (2007) recommend against routine imaging unless there is neurological compromise or a
serious underlying condition is suspected (Chou et al., 2007). Recommendations regarding the use
of acetaminophen or NSAID as “first line drugs,” the importance of staying active and self options
should be encouraged. For patients with non-specific acute LBP, that has not improved with the
self care options, the use of spinal manipulation is suggested. For sub-acute and cLBP, an
intensive interdisciplinary approach, exercise therapy, yoga, massage, acupuncture, spinal
manipulation, cognitive behavior therapy and progressive relaxation are recommended. Despite
these published clinical guidelines, imaging, opioids, injections and lumbar fusion rates have
increased while self reported functional, mental and social limitations are on the increase (Deyo,
Mirza, Turner, & Martin, 2009) (See Figure 2).
Clinical Approaches
Eighty to ninety percent of patients who present with LBP will recover within 6 to 8 weeks
regardless of therapy (Chou & Shekelle, 2010). For patients with excessive FABs, successful
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 7
outcomes are achieved when fears are addressed (Wertli, et al., 2014). Initial screening for fear of
pain, injury and movement can provide prognostic information regarding potential barriers to
recovery and whether a referral is required. Education, exercise therapy and other
multidisciplinary approaches are common treatment avenues for the fear avoidant patient.
Education
For the patient who presents with non-specific LBP, reassurance regarding its self limiting
nature, the stability of the spine and the unnecessary need for further diagnostics should be
communicated. The clinical importance of the continuation of usual activity along with the use of
acetaminophen or NSAIDS are aligned with current practice guidelines (Chou & Huffman, 2007).
Burton and colleagues (1999) in a double blind RCT recruited 162 participants from a primary
care setting. The Back Book was used as the experimental intervention with the traditional,
biomedical booklet “ Handy Hints” as the control (Burton, Waddell, Tillotson, & Summerton,
1999) (See Table 1). Questionnaires measuring pain, FAB, disability, and consequences of back
trouble were used. The Back Book intervention group was found to have statistically significant
improved FABs and improved pain scale rating at 2 weeks and at 3 months. Patients who received
the Back Book were 2.5 times more likely to have reduced FAB and improved disability scores at 3
months. Godges et al., (2008) found similar benefits to counseling and education among acute
LBP patients with a work related injury and high FABs (Godges, Anger, Zimmerman, & Delitto,
2008). Using a return to work status as an outcome measure, the group that received counseling,
education along with physical therapy was able to return to work at a faster rate than the control
group that had received only physical therapy.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 8
Physical Therapy
Physical therapy is commonly prescribed for LBP patients (Freburger, Carey, & Holmes,
2005). A Cochrane Systematic review of 61 RCTs (2005) concluded that exercise was as
effective as no treatment or conservative treatment for patients with acute LBP (Hayden, van
Tulder, & Tomlinson, 2005). There was some evidence to suggest that graded exercise improved
work absenteeism for the sub acute population and that exercise therapy was slightly effective at
improving pain and function among the cLBP population.
There is limited research on the benefit of graded activity and exposure to fear producing
activity among the population of patients with high FABs. Graded activity is based on operant
conditioning. It uses positive reinforcement of healthy behaviors in a time contingent manner to
achieve functional goals despite pain. Graded exposure, on the other hand, is achieved through the
hierarchal identification of the least to most feared activities. Once the least feared activity has
been successfully “mastered,” the patient progresses to the next level.
A systematic review done by Macedo et al.,(2010), did not support the use of graded activity
or exposure to feared activities versus other exercises (Macedo, Smeets, Maher, Latimer, &
McAuley, 2010). The authors concluded that most studies reviewed were of low quality with
varying outcome measures which limited the interpretation of the data. Leween et al., (2007),
found no superiority at improving functional ability using either a graded activity or a graded
exposure to feared activities in a RCT done with moderately fearful patients who scored greater
than 33 on the TSK (Leeuw et al., 2007). In a study done by Woods et al., (2008), graded
exposure to feared activity was found to be more effective than graded activity at impacting fear
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 9
but the findings did not reach statistical significance on the disability scale (Woods &
Asmundson, 2008).
Multidisciplinary Approach
The use of a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MDR) program uses the
expertise of a variety of healthcare providers including primary care providers, psychologists and
therapists. In a RCT, Monticone et al, (2013), in a parallel group design, 90 LBP patients were
randomized to either an exercise only or a psychologist led multidisciplinary group that consisted
of exercise therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) (Monticone, et al., 2013). The CBT
consisted of patient education focusing on pain as a self-managed entity rather than a serious
disease that required vigilant protection. The patients were guided through the graded exposure of
activities that were previously identified as dangerous. They were encouraged to transfer their
attention from fear of movement to increasing their level of activity. The TSK , the Roland Morris
Disability Questionnaire, pain scale and the Short Form Quality of Life Health Survey (SF-36)
were used at baseline, 5, 12 and 52 weeks post-intervention. Compared to exercise only, MDR
was superior at reducing disability, FAB, pain and quality of life with effects that lasted for at least
one year. The MDR approach was also supported in a systematic review using 41 RCTs (Kamper,
et al., 2014). The review findings supported MDR as more effective than usual care or PT at
reducing pain and disability and also supported a positive effect on return to work status.
Managing the Patient Encounter
Once a patient exam rules out for “the red flags” suggestive of a neurological or systematic
disorder, a clinical assessment identifying risk factors.--- high maladaptive coping behaviors, the
presence of nonorganic signs, functional impairment, poor health status and psychiatric co-
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 10
morbidities should be screened for (Chou & Shekelle, 2010). In a review on how fear relates to
chronicity and disability Turk and Wilson (2010) outline a stepwise approach to treatment. (Turk
& Wilson, 2010)
Step 1: Assess fear beliefs in general or use one of the standardized measures.
Step 2: Address fears through reassurance “pain does not equal harm”. For low fear patients
education from the primary care provider may be adequate. For high fear patients
referral to a MDR program may be indicated.
Step 3: Help patients set realistic expectations—individualized to the patient
Step 4: Gradually increase activity starting at a level that is appropriate and acceptable to a
patient. Consider the use of graphs so that patients can monitor their activity and
progress toward goals. For low fear patients self monitored gradual increase in activity
maybe adequate, for high fear patients therapists (physical therapist and psychologist)
guided and graded exposure to feared and avoided activity may be indicated.
Step 5. Encourage patient self monitoring in order to stay on target, provide a form of
reinforcement to encourage continuation and observe progress, encourage self
monitoring as a way to increase self efficacy and decrease catastrophizing beliefs.
The clinician should consider a cost-benefit analysis in decision making. Referrals to a MBR
program should be made for patient with indicators of a high psychosocial risks (Kamper, et al.,
2014). A high FAB would suggest a timely referral to an intervention that addresses and impacts
the psychological contributor to cLBP.
Conclusions
Fear has an unfavorable effect on LBP outcome and addressing it leads to more successful
patients outcomes (Wertli, et al., 2014). Clinicians should screen for excessive fear of pain,
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 11
movement and self-limiting activity restrictions. Initial interventions should include education
regarding the structural soundness of the spine, the undesirable effects of restricting activity, and
the self limiting nature of non-specific LBP.
When excessive fears are identified, patient specific treatment strategies may include closer
follow-up, structured exercise programs that focus on patient specific fears and or a
multidisciplinary approach. Addressing the psychosocial aspect of LBP with all patients that
present to the office can contribute to decreasing what is now the number one global cause of
disability.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 12
References
Balague, F., Mannion, A. F., Pellise, F., & Cedraschi, C. (2012). Non-specific low back pain.
Lancet, 379(9814), 482-491.
Boersma, K., & Linton, S. J. (2005). Screening to identify patients at risk: profiles of
psychological risk factors for early intervention. Clin J Pain, 21(1), 38-43.
Burton, A. K., Waddell, G., Tillotson, K. M., & Summerton, N. (1999). Information and advice to
patients with back pain can have a positive effect. A randomized controlled trial of a novel
educational booklet in primary care. Spine, 24(23), 2484-2491.
Chan, H. L., & Chiu, T. T. W. (2008). The correlations among pain, disability, lumbar muscle
endurance and fear-avoidance behaviour in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of
Back & Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 21(1), 35-42.
Chou, & Huffman. (2007). Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a
review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians
clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med, 147, 492 - 504.
Chou, Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Casey, D., Cross, J., Shekelle, P., & Owens, D. (2007). Diagnosis
and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American
College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med, 147, 478 - 491.
Chou, & Shekelle, P. (2010). Will this patient develop persistent disabling low back pain? JAMA,
303(13), 1295-1302.
Crombez, G., Vlaeyen, J. W., Heuts, P. H., & Lysens, R. (1999). Pain-related fear is more
disabling than pain itself: evidence on the role of pain-related fear in chronic back pain
disability. Pain, 80(1-2), 329-339.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 13
Crow, W. T., & Willis, D. R. (2009). Estimating Cost of Care for Patients With Acute Low Back
Pain: A Retrospective Review of Patient Records. JAOA: Journal of the American
Osteopathic Association, 109(4), 229-233.
de Moraes Vieira, E. B., de Goes Salvetti, M., Damiani, L. P., & de Mattos Pimenta, C. A. (2013).
Self-Efficacy and Fear Avoidance Beliefs in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: Coexistence
and Associated Factors. Pain Manag Nurs, 24(13), 00036-00032.
Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., Turner, J. A., & Martin, B. I. (2009). Overtreating chronic back pain:
time to back off? J Am Board Fam Med, 22(1), 62-68.
Freburger, J., Carey, T., & Holmes, G. (2005). Physician referrals to physical therapists for the
treatment of spine disorders. Spine J, 5, 530 - 541.
Fritz, J., & George, S. (2002). Identifying psychosocial variables in patients with acute work-
related low back pain: the importance of fear-avoidance beliefs. Phys Ther, 82, 973 - 983.
George, Fritz, & Childs. (2008). Investigation of elevated fear-avoidance beliefs for patients with
low back pain: a secondary analysis involving patients enrolled in physical therapy clinical
trials. The Journal Of Orthopaedic And Sports Physical Therapy, 38(2), 50-58. doi:
10.2519/jospt.2008.2647
Godges, Anger, Zimmerman, & Delitto. (2008). Effects of education on return-to-work status for
people with fear-avoidance beliefs and acute low back pain. Phys Ther, 88(2), 231-239.
Guclu, D. G., Guclu, O., Ozaner, A., Senormanci, O., & Konkan, R. (2012). The relationship
between disability, quality of life and fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with chronic low
back pain. Turk Neurosurg, 22(6), 724-731.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 14
Hayden, J., van Tulder, M., & Tomlinson, G. (2005). Systematic review: strategies for using
exercise therapy to improve outcomes in chronic low back pain. Ann Intern Med, 142, 776
- 785.
Hill, J. C., Dunn, K. M., Lewis, M., Mullis, R., Main, C. J., Foster, N. E., & Hay, E. M. (2008). A
primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment.
Arthritis Rheum, 59(5), 632-641.
Hoy, D., March, L., Brooks, P., Blyth, F., Woolf, A., Bain, C., . . . Buchbinder, R. (2014). The
global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study.
Ann Rheum Dis, 73(6), 968-974.
Kamper, S. J., Apeldoorn, A. T., Chiarotto, A., Smeets, R. J., Ostelo, R. W., Guzman, J., & van
Tulder, M. W. (2014). Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low
back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2(9).
Kongsted, A., Johannesen, E., & Leboeuf-Yde, C. (2011). Feasibility of the STarT Back Screening
Tool in chiropractic clinics: A cross-sectional study of patients with low back pain.
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 19, 1-23. doi: 10.1186/2045-709x-19-10
Krismer, M., van Tulder, M., & 2007. Low back pain (non-specific). Best Practice & Research
Clinical Rheumatology, 21(1), 77-91. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2006.08.004
Leeuw, M., Goossens, M., Linton, S., Crombez, G., Boersma, K., & Vlaeyen, J. (2007). The fear-
avoidance model of musculoskeletal pain: current state of scientific evidence. J Behav
Med, 30, 77 - 94.
Lethem, J., Slade, P., Troup, J., & Bentley, G. (1983). Outline of a Fear-Avoidance Model of
exaggerated pain perception--I. Behav Res Ther, 21, 401 - 408.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 15
Macedo, L. G., Smeets, R. J. E. M., Maher, C. G., Latimer, J., & McAuley, J. H. (2010). Graded
Activity and Graded Exposure for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic
Review. Physical Therapy, 90(6), 860-879. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20090303
Manek, N., & MacGregor, A. (2005). Epidemiology of back disorders: prevalence, risk factors,
and prognosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol, 17, 134 - 140.
Meyer, K., Tschopp, A., Sprott, H., & Mannion, A. F. (2009). Association between catastrophizing
and self-rated pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of
Rehabilitation Medicine (Stiftelsen Rehabiliteringsinformation), 41(8), 620-625. doi:
10.2340/16501977-0395
Monticone, M., Ferrante, S., Rocca, B., Baiardi, P., Farra, F. D., & Foti, C. (2013). Effect of a
long-lasting multidisciplinary program on disability and fear-avoidance behaviors in
patients with chronic low back pain: results of a randomized controlled trial. Clin J Pain,
29(11), 929-938.
Pfingsten, M., Leibing, E., Harter, W., Kröner-Herwig, B., Hempel, D., Kronshage, U., &
Hildebrandt, J. (2001). Fear-Avoidance Behavior and Anticipation of Pain in Patients With
Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Study. Pain Medicine, 2(4), 259-266.
Picavet, H. S. J., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., & Schouten, J. S. A. G. (2002). Pain Catastrophizing and
Kinesiophobia: Predictors of Chronic Low Back Pain. American Journal of Epidemiology,
156(11), 1028-1034. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwf136
Rainville, J., Smeets, R. J., Bendix, T., Tveito, T. H., Poiraudeau, S., & Indahl, A. J. (2011). Fear-
avoidance beliefs and pain avoidance in low back pain--translating research into clinical
practice. Spine J, 11(9), 895-903.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 16
Swinkels-Meewisse, Roelofs, J., Schouten, E. G. W., Verbeek, A. L. M., Oostendorp, R. A. B., &
Vlaeyen, J. W. S. (2006). Fear of movement/(re)injury predicting chronic disabling low
back pain: a prospective inception cohort study. Spine, 31(6), 658-664.
Swinkels-Meewisse, Swinkels, R. A. H., Verbeek, A. L. M., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., & Oostendorp, R.
A. B. (2003). Psychometric properties of the Tampa Scale for kinesiophobia and the fear-
avoidance beliefs questionnaire in acute low back pain. Manual Therapy, 8(1), 29-36.
Takahashi, N., Kikuchi, S., Konno, S., Morita, S., Suzukamo, Y., Green, J., & Fukuhara, S. (2006).
Discrepancy between disability and the severity of low back pain: demographic,
psychologic, and employment-related factors. Spine, 31(8), 931-939.
Turk, D. C., & Wilson, H. D. (2010). Fear of pain as a prognostic factor in chronic pain:
conceptual models, assessment, and treatment implications. Curr Pain Headache Rep,
14(2), 88-95.
Vlaeyen, J., & Linton, S. (2000). Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal
pain: a state of the art. Pain, 85, 317 - 332.
Waddell, G., Newton, M., Henderson, I., Somerville, D., & Main, C. (1993). A Fear-Avoidance
Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back
pain and disability. Pain, 52, 157 - 168.
Wertli, M. M., Rasmussen-Barr, E., Held, U., Weiser, S., Bachmann, L. M., & Brunner, F. (2014).
Fear-avoidance beliefs-a moderator of treatment efficacy in patients with low back pain: a
systematic review. Spine J, 12(14), 00234-00234.
Woby, Watson, Roach, & Urmston. (2004). Adjustment to chronic low back pain--the relative
influence of fear-avoidance beliefs, catastrophizing, and appraisals of control. Behav Res
Ther, 42(7), 761-774.
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 17
Woby, S. R., Watson, P. J., Roach, N. K., & Urmston, M. (2004). Are changes in fear-avoidance
beliefs, catastrophizing, and appraisals of control, predictive of changes in chronic low
back pain and disability? European Journal of Pain, 8(3), 201-210. doi:
10.1016/j.ejpain.2003.08.002
Woods, M. P., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2008). Evaluating the efficacy of graded in vivo exposure
for the treatment of fear in patients with chronic back pain: A randomized controlled
clinical trial. Pain, 136(3), 271-280. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2007.06.037
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 18
Figure 1 Fear Avoidance Beliefs Model
Vlaeyen, J., & Linton, S. (2000)
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 19
Figure 2 Increases of use for Various Services for Low Back Pain
Deyo, Mirza, Turner, & Martin, (2009)
FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 20
TABLE 1 Comparison of the Main Messages Given in the Control and Experimental Groups
• Handy Hints ( Control Booklet) • The Back Book (Experimental
Intervention)
• Traditional biomedical concepts of
spinal anatomy, injury and damage
(implicit messages that the spine is
easily damaged and that medicine
should diagnose and treat the
problem, but that there is often
permanent damage.
• There is no sign of serious
disease
• The spine is strong, There is no
suggestion of any permanent
damage. Even when is it very
painful, that does not meant
there is any serious damage to
your back” hurt does not mean
harm.
• Avoid activity when in pain: your
general practitioner may adivse bed
rest
• Back pain is a symptom that your
back is simply not moving and
working quite as it should. It is
unfit or out of condition.
• Describes further investigations and
surgery. (Reinforces the message
that back pain is a medical problem,
and that there is little the patient can
do.)
• There are a number of
treatments that can help to
control the pain, but lasting relief
then depends on your own
effort.
• Concentrates on pain rather than
activity. (Implicit message that
restoring activity and function must
await relief of pain.)
• Recovery depends on getting
your back moving and working
again and restoring normal
function and fitness. The sooner
you get active, the sooner your
back will feel better.
• Encourages patient to be positive • Positive attitudes are important.
Do not let your back take over
your life. “Coopers” suffer less at
the time, get better quicker and
have less trouble in the long
term.
Burton, Waddell, Tillotson, & Summerton, N. (1999)
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 1
Chapter 3
Abstract
Low back pain, the number one cause of global disability, is a multidimensional disorder
with physical, psychological, and social influences. Fear avoidance beliefs, and their influence
on pain and the avoidance of movement, is an important determinant for back pain intervention
outcomes. There is, however, a limited translation of this knowledge into the clinical setting.
Identifying these beliefs as significant barriers to recovery, along with establishing the
superiority of one treatment approach over another at affecting high fear avoidance beliefs, paves
the way for greater clinical application. This secondary analysis of data from a randomized
clinical trial comparing yoga, physical therapy, and educational interventions for chronic low
back pain aims to identify the role of fear avoidance beliefs and treatment approaches for low
back pain in a predominantly minority population.
Keywords: Low Back pain, disability, fear avoidance beliefs, treatment effectiveness
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 2
The Impact of Yoga, Physical Therapy and Education on Fear Avoidance Beliefs in Chronic
Low Back Pain
Low back pain (LBP) is the number one cause of global disability (Hoy et al., 2014) with a
lifetime prevalence reported to be as high as 84% (Balagué, Mannion, Pellisé, & Cedraschi,
2012) and a direct economic burden of 100 billion dollars a year with 5% of the patients
consuming 75% of the cost (Katz, 2006). Low back pain includes tension, stiffness, and/or
soreness in the lower back region, defined as the area between the lower ribs and the gluteal
folds (Hoy, et al., 2014). It is identified as non-specific in approximately 90% of the presenting
cases (Krismer, van Tulder, & 2007) when no specific radiculopathy, spinal stenosis, or specific
spinal causes are identified (Swinkels-Meewisse et al., 2006).
The term “chronic” is used to describe back pain lasting for 3 months or longer. Twenty
percent of people affected by acute back pain go on to develop chronic back pain with persistent
pain lasting up to one year (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 2014).
Despite the rising costs of back pain treatment related to the increased use of medications
(including acetaminophen, non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids), spinal injections
and surgery, functional disability from this problem in the United States (US) has not improved
(Deyo, Mirza, Turner, & Martin, 2009). These rising costs without improved disability rates
along with the opioid epidemic support the need for additional research into back pain treatment
approaches.
There has been growing recognition that pain is a complex experience influenced by a range
of factors that include biological, psychological, and sociological attributes (Turk & Okifuji,
2002). Psychosocial factors have been deemed important determinants to the response to therapy
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 3
in chronic pain patients (Burton, Tillotson, Main, & Hollis, 1995). These factors have been
implicated as predictors of the chronicity and the prolonged disability from LBP (Nagarajan &
Nair, 2010; Nicholas, Linton, Watson, Main, & Group, 2011; Turk & Okifuji, 2002). Current
clinical guidelines from the American College of Physicians and American Pain Society
recommend identification of relevant psychosocial factors in order to recognize patients at risk
for developing disability from LBP (Chou et al., 2007).
Kendall and colleagues termed psychosocial risks factors as “yellow flags”. These
“yellow flags” identify risk factors that prolong both disability and return to work status (Kendal,
Linton & Main, 1997). It was later suggested that the term “yellow flags” be used only to
identify those features of a person that involve thoughts, feelings, and behaviors which adversely
affect recovery from back pain. The terms “black” and “blue” flags should be used to identify
issues that impact return to work status, like employee perception of workplace stress, an
unsupportive workplace environment, or issues that surround the compensation system for work
place injuries (Nicholas, et al., 2011).
Fear has been identified as one of the “yellow flag” psychological risk factors that may
become more disabling than the pain itself (Crombez, Vlaeyen, Heuts, & Lysens, 1999). The
level of fear together with baseline function are most predictive of recovery from an acute
episode of LBP (Chou & Shekelle, 2010). Fear, and the belief that physical activity will result
in worsening pain or injury, has been termed fear avoidance beliefs (FAB). FAB is identified as
a significant variable among patients who go on to develop chronic low back pain (cLBP) (Davis
et al., 2013; Elfving, Andersson, & Grooten, 2007; Fritz, George, & Delitto, 2001; Rainville et
al., 2011). Fear and its consequences have been conceptualized through the Fear Avoidance
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 4
Model. The Fear Avoidance Beliefs Model (FAM) delineates a predictive approach concerning
how pain-related fear leads to disability (Vlaeyen & Linton, 2000). The authors postulated that:
(1) Negative appraisals about pain and its consequences, such as catastrophic thinking, is
considered a potential precursor of pain-related fear. (2) Fear is characterized by escape and
avoidance behaviors, of which the immediate consequences are that daily activities (expected to
produce pain) are not accomplished anymore. Avoidance of daily activities results in functional
disability. (3) Because avoidance behaviors occur in anticipation of pain rather than as a
response to pain, these behaviors may persist because there are fewer opportunities to correct the
(wrongful) expectancies and beliefs about pain as a signal of threat of physical integrity. (4)
Longstanding avoidance and physical inactivity has a detrimental impact on the musculoskeletal
and cardiovascular systems, leading to the so-called ‘disuse syndrome’ which may further
worsen the pain problem (Vlaeyen & Linton, 2000, pp. 319). The FAM describes two avenues
of pain responses that range from avoidance to confrontation. Patients presenting with pain-
related fear tend to avoid activity and as a result develop disuse syndrome, or disability not
necessarily associated with back pathology or pain severity. The “no fear” avenue leads to
confrontation and recovery (See Appendix A).
Fear avoidance beliefs (FAB) is measured through a validated questionnaire: the Fear
Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) (See Appendix B) (Waddell, Newton, Henderson,
Somerville, & Main, 1993). Elevated levels of FAB have been found to be more predictive of
long term disability than clinical findings and imaging studies (Carragee, Alamin, Miller, &
Carragee, 2005; Fritz & George, 2002). The role of FAB has been identified as having a
negative influence on people that develop cLBP. However, it is not known if this effect exists
within a predominantly minority population or whether one treatment over another is more
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 5
effective with patients that present with high FAB. It is also unknown if there is a relationship
between treatment compliance and fear of pain or re-injury.
This research project is a secondary analysis of data generated from the Back to Health
Study which is a randomized controlled trial of an urban, predominantly minority population that
compared yoga, physical therapy, and education cLBP (Saper et al., 2014). A brief description
of the Back to Health study follows as the detailed study protocol has been previously published
(Saper et al., 2014). Eligible adults with chronic non-specific low back pain were recruited from
Boston Medical Center and its community health clinic affiliates. Inclusion criteria consisted of:
current non-specific low back pain persisting for greater than 12 weeks, mean low back pain
intensity over the previous week equal to 4 or greater on an 11 point numerical rating scale,
English fluency sufficient to follow treatment instructions and to answer survey questions, and
the willingness to list comprehensive contact information. The exclusion criteria were: used
yoga or physical therapy in the previous 6 months, had read the Back Pain Helpbook or the Back
Book in the previous 6 months, had previously participated in the study team’s previous yoga or
physical therapy research trials, had new cLBP treatment started within the previous month or
anticipated to begin in the next 12 months, were unable to understand English, or were
knowingly pregnant. Participants with active or planned worker’s compensation, disability or
personal injury claims, active substance or alcohol abuse, plans to move out of the area in the
next 12 months, perceived religious conflict with the yoga intervention, or a lack of consent were
also excluded. People with known significant physical pathology that included spinal stenosis,
severe scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, ankylosing spondylitis, large herniated disk, sciatica pain
equal to or greater than back pain, previous back surgery, history of vertebral fracture, active or
recent malignancy, active or recent constitutional symptoms, rheumatoid arthritis, severe
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 6
fibromyalgia, severe or progressive neurological deficits, or other severe disabling chronic
medical or psychiatric co-morbidities (e.g., severe heart failure, lung disease active treatment
hepatitis B or C, psychosis) deemed by the principal investigator to prevent safe and/or adequate
participation in the study were also excluded.
A total of 320 subjects were randomized into a 12-week, 3-arm controlled study comparing
yoga, physical therapy and education. These three treatment approaches have been found to be
effective in the treatment of chronic low back (Albaladejo, Kovacs, Royuela, del Pino, &
Zamora, 1976; Cramer, Lauche, Haller, & Dobos, 2013; Freburger, Carey, & Holmes, 2005;
Freburger, Holmes, & Carey, 2003; Tekur, Nagarathna, Chametcha, Hankey, & Nagendra, 2012;
Udermann et al., 2004; Williams et al., 2005). After the 12-week active treatment phase, the
yoga and physical therapy groups were re-randomized within their respective group into a 40-
week structured vs. non-structured home maintenance phase. The education group participants
continued the maintenance phase without re-randomization.
At baseline, socio-demographics characteristics, expectations, and preferences, other back
pain treatments, and co morbidities were collected. The primary outcomes pain scores and back
function measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores also were
obtained. Secondary outcomes included pain medication use, work productivity, health-related
quality of life, (SF-36), (Ware, 2000), global improvement, and satisfaction with treatment were
obtained. Exploratory outcomes and potential covariates obtained at baseline included: a history
of alcohol or drug use or smoking, height and weight, FABQ (Waddell, et al., 1993), Pain Self
Efficacy (PSE), (Anderson, Dowds, Pelletz, Edwards, & Peeters-Asdourian, 1995), Pittsburgh
Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (Buysse, Reynolds, Monk, Berman, & Kupfer, 1989), Depression,
(PHQ-8), (Lowe, Kroenke, Herzog, & Grafe, 2004), Anxiety, (GAD-7), (Spitzer, Kroenke,
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 7
Williams, & Lowe, 2006), Coping Strategies, (CSQ), (Utne et al., 2009) and Perceived Stress
Scale,(PSS), (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983). Data from the primary and secondary
outcomes, along with the FABQ and other back pain treatments, and exercise history were
obtained at 6, 12, 26, 40, and 52 weeks. The remainder of the exploratory outcomes was
measured again at 12 and 52 weeks.
The Back to Health primary outcome measures included pain measured on an 11-point
numerical rating scale and back specific function measured by the 23-point RMDQ (Patrick et
al., 1995). For this secondary data analysis, the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ),
the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and treatment (yoga and physical therapy)
attendance rates were used.
The hypotheses for this study are: 1) There will be a positive linear relationship between
baseline fear avoidance beliefs and disability as measured by the Roland Morris Disability
Questionnaire. 2) Yoga is more effective than physical therapy or education at affecting high
FABs scores; and 3) There will be a negative linear relationship between baseline fear avoidance
beliefs and treatment adherence. Approval for this secondary data analysis was obtained
through Northeastern University’s Office of Human Subject Research Protection, Boston, MA
and Boston University Medical Campus Institutional Review Board, Boston, MA.
Method
Study Design
This is a secondary data analysis.
Variables
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 8
The FABQ is a 16-item measure scored on a 7-point Likert scale with greater values
representing a higher level of fear avoidance beliefs. Two subscales exist: the FABQ physical
activity (FABQPA) (range 0-24) and the FABQ work (FABQW) (range 0-24) scale (Waddell, et
al., 1993) (See Appendix B). The modified RMDQ is a 23-item measure of physical function
related to low back pain with higher scores indicating worse function (See Appendix C) (Roland
& Fairbank, 2000). Participant attendance was recorded for both the yoga and physical therapy
groups and an attendance rate percentage variable was created.
Data Analysis
Chi-square tests and analysis of variance were used to compare baseline characteristics
among the groups. Multiple regression analysis was used to control for the confounding
variables. Correlations were done at baseline. To test the first hypothesis concerning the
relationship between the FABQ and the dependent variable RMDQ, a regression model was
created based on FAM theory and existing literature that supported variables of a confounding
nature (Basler, Luckmann, Wolf, & Quint, 2008; Chou & Shekelle, 2010; Woby, Watson,
Roach, & Urmston, 2004). To test the second hypothesis, analysis of variance (ANOVA), using
least squares means, was used to determine whether there was any significant differences among
the three different intervention groups for affecting FAB scores at 12 weeks. To test the third
hypothesis, concerning whether a negative linear relationship exists between high FABQ scores
and intervention attendance rates, a regression analysis model was created using the FABQ as a
predictor variable for attendance rates. Confounders identified in the literature as barriers to
treatment adherence were used in the regression model (Jack, McLean, Moffett, & Gardiner,
2010).
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 9
Results
At baseline there were no statistical or clinical differences among the groups except for the
RMDQ scores ( p = 0.03) (See Table 1). Pearson correlation coefficients at baseline are reported
in Table 2. As expected the FABQPA and the FABQW were significantly correlated with each
other, r = .29, p = <.0001. The FABQPA and the FABQW were significantly correlated with
the RMDQ (r = .26, p = <.001 and r = .32, p = <.0001, respectively).
For the first hypothesis: there will be a positive linear relationship between FAB and
disability measured by the RMDQ, a hierarchical regression analysis was used. The RMDQ was
used as the dependent variable in the regression model and separate models were created for both
the FABQPA and the FABQW. When the FABQPA, gender, age, income and race variables
were entered into the model, 20% of the variance for disability was explained (See Table 3).
When the pain scale was entered, the variance increased from 20 to 30% (See Table 4). When
the pain self efficacy scale (PSEQ) and the depression scale (PHQ-8) were entered 45% of the
variance in disability was explained (See Table 5). In the final model, FABQPA was predictive
of disability with a ß = .11, p = .001. Along with the FABQPA, the depression scale (PHQ-8),
pain self efficacy (PSEQ), age, and pain intensity were statistically significant with pain being
the strongest predictor with a ß = .97, p = .001 (See Table 5). The same hierarchical method was
applied using the FABQW scale. The FABQW was a less significant predictor of disability
with ß = .06, p = .004. Female gender became a significant predictor in the FABQW model with
a ß = .99, p = .04; pain was the next most significant predictor with a ß = .95, p = .0001 (See
Tables 6-8).
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 10
The second hypothesis: yoga is more effective than physical therapy or education at
impacting fear avoidance beliefs was not supported. Adjusting for the baseline RMDQ, there
were no group differences in 12 week FABQPA scores among the yoga and physical therapy
groups (p = .41), yoga and education groups (p = .96) or between the PT and education groups (p
= .39). Similar findings were found with the FABQW scores among the yoga and physical
therapy groups (p = .43), yoga and education groups (p = .98) and between the PT and education
groups, (p = .67).
The linear regression model results did not support the third hypothesis of a negative linear
relationship between FAB and treatment adherence. The model included both FABQ subscales,
pain, depression (PHQ-8), pain self efficacy (PSEQ), baseline physical dysfunction (RMDQ),
treatment effect, age, gender, income and race. There was a 13% explained variance for
attendance rate/adherence (See Table 9). Neither the FABQPA (p = .76) nor the FABQW (p =
.76) reached statistical significance. Race, gender, and age reached statistical significance but
had “weak” predictive ability [ (ß = .15, p = .007), (ß = .11, p = .02), and (ß = .006, p = .0008),
respectively].
Discussion
It was anticipated that high FAB scores would be associated with worse physical dysfunction.
Both FABQPA and FABQW were predictive of disability at baseline. This is supported by
Crombez et al, (1999) and George et al., (2010) findings that both subscales are predictors of
disability while controlling for socio-demographics (Crombez, et al., 1999; George, Valencia, &
Beneciuk, 2010). These findings were not supported by Cleland et al., (2010), however, in a
retrospective review of electronic data from 5 PT clinics (Cleland, Fritz, & Brennan, 2008).
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 11
Despite higher FABQPA scores (14.6 SD 5.9) than reported in this study (13.1 ± 6.6), the
FABQPA was not found to be predictive.
Thus, the literature reports varying and contradictory results despite some commonalities
among baseline FABQ scores, populations, and methodology. As the FABQ consists of 2
subscales measuring physical activity or activity related to work, they are commonly viewed
separately and often have different percentages of explained variance and predictive ability for
disability. Some studies report positive findings with both the FABQPA and the FABQW,(Barr,
2008; George, et al., 2010; Waddell, et al., 1993) while others support only the FABQPA
(Grotle, Vollestad, Veierod, & Brox, 2004; Werneke et al., 2009; Woby, Watson, Roach, &
Urmston, 2004). Still others support the FABQW’s predictive power (George, Fritz, & Childs.,
2008). Some research suggest that no subscale of the FABQ supports a predictive relationship
with the disability scale (Kovacs et al., 2005; Wertli, Rasmussen-Barr, Weiser, Bachmann, &
Brunner, 2014). One study reported low fear avoidance scores predictive of increased levels of
physical activity among an older adult population at 52 weeks (Larsson, Ekvall Hansson,
Sundquist, & Jakobsson, 2016)). In a systematic review, Wertli et al., (2014) did not find
support for the FABQPA or FABQW as predictors of disability in a cLBP population (Wertli et
al., 2014). The predictive ability of FABQ subscales beyond baseline data are not accounted for
in this research.
These overall contradictory results may indicate the presence of a mediator influencing the
relationship between FAB and disability. In a cross-sectional study, 102 cLBP patients
completed questionnaires on pain, disability, pain-related fear, and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy
was found to mediate the relationship between pain-related fear and disability. Findings
suggested that when self-efficacy is high, elevated pain-related fear may not lead to greater pain
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 12
or disability. In contrast, when self-efficacy is low, pain-related fear may increase pain and
disability (Woby, Urmston, & Watson, 2007). These findings are supported in a cross-sectional
study done to assess the relationship between FAB and self-efficacy. Low self-efficacy and high
fear avoidance levels were related to increased levels of disability in cLBP patients (de Moraes
Vieira, de Goes Salvetti, Damiani, & de Mattos Pimenta, 2013).
In a mediator predictive model explaining 61% of the variance in disability, Sherman et al.,
(2013) reported self-efficacy, improved sleep, and amount of previous back exercise as the most
significant variables accounting for over 56% of the variance in the disability scores. The
remaining 5% variance was shared among three variables, one of which was FAB (Sherman,
Wellman, Cook, Cherkin, & Ceballos, 2013). These findings were supported in a longitudinal
study where improved self-efficacy was found to mediate/improve the relationship between pain
and disability with no evidence to support a role for FAB (Costa Lda, Maher, McAuley,
Hancock, & Smeets, 2011). Denison et al., (2004), found similar results to support self-efficacy
as a more important determinant than fear avoidance beliefs (Denison, Asenlof, & Lindberg,
2004). This supports the findings of Mannion et al., (2001), that self-efficacy beliefs over
control of pain and fear of pain represent different dimension of pain cognitions (Mannion et al.,
2001).
This is an area that requires more research on possible mediating variables and other
instruments that include a wider range of cognitions. The STarT Back Screening Tool is one
such measure that may aid in clinical decision-making. This primary care prognostic screening
tool identifies biomedical, psychological, and social risk factors and categorizes patients as either
low, medium, or high-risk with a matched treatment plan (Hill et al., 2008).
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 13
There was no evidence to suggest the superiority of one intervention over another at
influencing FAB scores. In addition, there was no evidence to support FAB as a predictor to
treatment attendance rates. One would intuitively expect that FAB, fear of pain, and re-injury
may have a negative impact on participating with “active” interventions. Coombs’ (2014)
finding that people with fear of movement may be less likely to participate in a pain therapy that
involves physical movement was not supported here as FAB subscales were not a significant
predictor or contributor to the small amount of variance obtained in the regression model
predicting attendance rates (Combs & Thorn, 2014).
This analysis’ strength included data generated from a randomized controlled trial. It used
a theory and research-based approach to identify confounding variables that impact back pain
dysfunction. Because this was a secondary data analysis, it allowed an efficient method to
answer these research questions. The Back to Health data base had a number of exploratory
variables that were of interest. It also identified contradictory research on FAB and a possible
mediator to its relationship with disability.
Some limitations in this research exist. Although all outcomes measures have adequate
validity and reliability, self-reported measures can often have validity issues in regard to
participants not understanding what is being asked, difficulty with the ability to “rate” how one
feels on a Likert scale, and response bias. The employment rates were low in this population,
which may have altered the validity of the FABQ work subscale as this scale is specific to one’s
fear concerning work related activity. Lastly, the research participants were recruited from a
predominantly minority urban population, limiting its generalizability to a predominately white
population with higher socioeconomic status.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 14
Conclusions
Chronic low back pain is a public health care issue. Despite rising costs, disability rates
have not improved. In addition, opioids are a common management approach and their overuse
has significant public health ramifications. The need for continued research on how to
effectively manage cLBP has become apparent.
Back pain has been found to have biopsychosocial contributors and FAB has been found to
be one of the variables associated with worsening low back pain disability. There is
contradictory evidence, however, in the literature regarding its contribution to disability.
However, there is enough support from our research and the literature to suggest FAB has a role
in poor physical function. Further research is warranted. Future research should include both
the FABQ and the pain self-efficacy scale to better understand their roles in affecting disability
outcomes from low back pain.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 15
References
Albaladejo, C., Kovacs, F. M., Royuela, A., del Pino, R., & Zamora, J. (1976). The efficacy of a
short education program and a short physiotherapy program for treating low back pain in
primary care: a cluster randomized trial. Spine, 35(5), 483-496.
Anderson, K., Dowds, B., Pelletz, R., Edwards, W., & Peeters-Asdourian, C. (1995).
Development and initial validation of a scale to measure self-efficacy beliefs in patients
with chronic pain. Pain, 63, 77 - 84.
Balagué, F., Mannion, A. F., Pellisé, F., & Cedraschi, C. (2012). Non-specific low back pain.
The Lancet, 379(9814), 482-491.
Barr, J. T., Schumacher, G.E., Freeman, S., LeMoine, M. Bakst, A.W. & Jones, P.W. (2008).
American Translation, Modification and Validation of the Saint George's Respiratory
Questionnaire. Clinical Therapeutics, September 22(9), 793-800.
Burton, A. K., Tillotson, K. M., Main, C. J., & Hollis, S. (1995). Psychosocial predictors of
outcome in acute and subchronic low back trouble. Spine, 20(6), 722-728.
Buysse, D., Reynolds, C., Monk, T., Berman, S., & Kupfer, D. (1989). The Pittsburgh Sleep
Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res, 28,
193 - 213.
Carragee, E. J., Alamin, T. F., Miller, J. L., & Carragee, J. M. (2005). Discographic, MRI and
psychosocial determinants of low back pain disability and remission: a prospective study
in subjects with benign persistent back pain. Spine J, 5(1), 24-35.
Chou, & Shekelle, P. (2010). Will this patient develop persistent disabling low back pain?
JAMA, 303(13), 1295-1302.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 16
Cleland, J. A., Fritz, J. M., & Brennan, G. P. (2008). Predictive validity of initial fear avoidance
beliefs in patients with low back pain receiving physical therapy: is the FABQ a useful
screening tool for identifying patients at risk for a poor recovery? Eur Spine J, 17(1), 70-
79.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. J
Health Soc Behav, 24(4), 385-396.
Combs, M. A., & Thorn, B. E. (2014). Barriers and facilitators to yoga use in a population of
individuals with self-reported chronic low back pain: a qualitative approach. Complement
Ther Clin Pract, 20(4), 268-275.
Costa Lda, C., Maher, C. G., McAuley, J. H., Hancock, M. J., & Smeets, R. J. (2011). Self-
efficacy is more important than fear of movement in mediating the relationship between
pain and disability in chronic low back pain. European Journal of Pain, 15(2), 213-219.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2010.06.014
Cramer, H., Lauche, R., Haller, H., & Dobos, G. (2013). A systematic review and meta-analysis
of yoga for low back pain. Clin J Pain, 29(5), 450-460.
Crombez, G., Vlaeyen, J. W., Heuts, P. H., & Lysens, R. (1999). Pain-related fear is more
disabling than pain itself: evidence on the role of pain-related fear in chronic back pain
disability. Pain, 80(1-2), 329-339.
Davis, D. S., Mancinelli, C. A., Petronis, J. J., Bensenhaver, C., McClintic, T., & Nelson, G.
(2013). Variables associated with level of disability in working individuals with nonacute
low back pain: a cross-sectional investigation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 43(2), 97-104.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 17
de Moraes Vieira, E. B., de Goes Salvetti, M., Damiani, L. P., & de Mattos Pimenta, C. A.
(2013). Self-Efficacy and Fear Avoidance Beliefs in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients:
Coexistence and Associated Factors. Pain Manag Nurs, 24(13), 00036-00032.
Denison, E., Asenlof, P., & Lindberg, P. (2004). Self-efficacy, fear avoidance, and pain intensity
as predictors of disability in subacute and chronic musculoskeletal pain patients in
primary health care. Pain, 111(3), 245-252.
Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., Turner, J. A., & Martin, B. I. (2009). Overtreating chronic back pain:
time to back off? J Am Board Fam Med, 22(1), 62-68.
Elfving, B., Andersson, T., & Grooten, W. J. (2007). Low levels of physical activity in back pain
patients are associated with high levels of fear-avoidance beliefs and pain
catastrophizing. Physiother Res Int, 12(1), 14-24.
Freburger, J., Carey, T., & Holmes, G. (2005). Physician referrals to physical therapists for the
treatment of spine disorders. Spine J, 5, 530 - 541.
Freburger, J., Holmes, G., & Carey, T. (2003). Physician referrals to physical therapy for the
treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 84, 1839 - 1849.
Fritz, J. M., & George, S. Z. (2002). Identifying psychosocial variables in patients with acute
work-related low back pain: the importance of fear-avoidance beliefs. Phys Ther, 82(10),
973-983.
Fritz, J. M., George, S. Z., & Delitto, A. (2001). The role of fear-avoidance beliefs in acute low
back pain: relationships with current and future disability and work status. Pain, 94(1), 7-
15.
George, Fritz, & Childs. (2008). Investigation of elevated fear-avoidance beliefs for patients with
low back pain: a secondary analysis involving patients enrolled in physical therapy
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 18
clinical trials. The Journal Of Orthopaedic And Sports Physical Therapy, 38(2), 50-58.
doi: 10.2519/jospt.2008.2647
George, Valencia, & Beneciuk. (2010). A psychometric investigation of fear-avoidance model
measures in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports
Physical Therapy, 40(4), 197-205. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2010.3298
Grotle, M., Vollestad, N., Veierod, M., & Brox, J. (2004). Fear-avoidance beliefs and distress in
relation to disability in acute and chronic low back pain. Pain, 112, 343 - 352.
Hill, J. C., Dunn, K. M., Lewis, M., Mullis, R., Main, C. J., Foster, N. E., & Hay, E. M. (2008).
A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial
treatment. Arthritis Rheum, 59(5), 632-641.
Hoy, D., March, L., Brooks, P., Blyth, F., Woolf, A., Bain, C., . . . Buchbinder, R. (2014). The
global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study.
Ann Rheum Dis, 73(6), 968-974.
Jack, K., McLean, S. M., Moffett, J. K., & Gardiner, E. (2010). Barriers to treatment adherence
in physiotherapy outpatient clinics: a systematic review. Man Ther, 15(3), 220-228.
Katz, J. N. (2006). Lumbar Disc Disorders and Low-Back Pain: Socioeconomic Factors and
Consequences. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, 88(suppl_2), 21-24. doi:
10.2106/jbjs.e.01273
Kovacs, F. M., Muriel, A., Abriaira, V., Medina, J. M., Castillo Sanchez, M. D., & Olabe, J.
(2005). The influence of fear avoidance beliefs on disability and quality of life is sparse
in Spanish low back pain patients. Spine, 30(22), E676-682.
Krismer, M., van Tulder, M., & 2007. Low back pain (non-specific). Best Practice & Research
Clinical Rheumatology, 21(1), 77-91. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2006.08.004
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 19
Larsson, C., Ekvall Hansson, E., Sundquist, K., & Jakobsson, U. (2016). Impact of pain
characteristics and fear-avoidance beliefs on physical activity levels among older adults
with chronic pain: a population-based, longitudinal study. [journal article]. BMC
Geriatrics, 16(1), 1-8. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0224-3
Lowe, B., Kroenke, K., Herzog, W., & Grafe, K. (2004). Measuring depression outcome with a
brief self-report instrument: sensitivity to change of the Patient Health Questionnaire
(PHQ-9). J Affect Disord, 81, 61 - 66.
Mannion, A. F., Junge, A., Taimela, S., Muntener, M., Lorenzo, K., & Dvorak, J. (2001). Active
therapy for chronic low back pain: part 3. Factors influencing self-rated disability and its
change following therapy. Spine, 26(8), 920-929.
Nagarajan, M., & Nair, M. R. (2010). Importance of fear-avoidance behavior in chronic non-
specific low back pain. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 23(2), 87-95.
Nicholas, M. K., Linton, S. J., Watson, P. J., Main, C. J., & Group, t. D. o. t. F. W. (2011). Early
Identification and Management of Psychological Risk Factors (“Yellow Flags”) in
Patients With Low Back Pain: A Reappraisal. Physical Therapy, 91(5), 737-753. doi:
10.2522/ptj.20100224
Patrick, D., Deyo, R., Atlas, S., Singer, D., Chapin, A., & Keller, R. (1995). Assessing health-
related quality of life in patients with sciatica. Spine, 20, 1899 - 1909.
Rainville, J., Smeets, R. J., Bendix, T., Tveito, T. H., Poiraudeau, S., & Indahl, A. J. (2011).
Fear-avoidance beliefs and pain avoidance in low back pain--translating research into
clinical practice. Spine J, 11(9), 895-903.
Roland, M., & Fairbank, J. (2000). The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the
Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine, 25, 3115 - 3124.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 20
Saper, Sherman, K., Delitto, A., Herman, P., Stevans, J., Paris, R., . . . Weinberg, J. (2014). Yoga
vs. physical therapy vs. education for chronic low back pain in predominantly minority
populations: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials, 15(1), 67.
Sherman, K. J., Wellman, R. D., Cook, A. J., Cherkin, D. C., & Ceballos, R. M. (2013).
Mediators of Yoga and Stretching for Chronic Low Back Pain. Evidence-Based
Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2013, 11. doi: 10.1155/2013/130818
Spitzer, R., Kroenke, K., Williams, J., & Lowe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing
generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med, 166, 1092 - 1097.
Swinkels-Meewisse, I. E., Roelofs, J., Schouten, E. G., Verbeek, A. L., Oostendorp, R. A., &
Vlaeyen, J. W. (2006). Fear of movement/(re)injury predicting chronic disabling low
back pain: a prospective inception cohort study. Spine, 31(6), 658-664.
Tekur, P., Nagarathna, R., Chametcha, S., Hankey, A., & Nagendra, H. (2012). A comprehensive
yoga programs improves pain, anxiety and depression in chronic low back pain patients
more than exercise: an RCT. Complement Ther Med, 20, 107 - 118.
Turk, D. C., & Okifuji, A. (2002). Psychological factors in chronic pain: evolution and
revolution. Journal Of Consulting And Clinical Psychology, 70(3), 678-690.
Udermann, B. E., Spratt, K. F., Donelson, R. G., Mayer, J., Graves, J. E., & Tillotson, J. (2004).
Can a patient educational book change behavior and reduce pain in chronic low back pain
patients? Spine J, 4(4), 425-435.
Utne, I., Miaskowski, C., Bjordal, K., Cooper, B., Valeberg, B., & Rustoen, T. (2009).
Confirmatory factor analysis of the coping strategies questionnaire-revised in samples of
oncology outpatients and inpatients with pain. Clin J Pain, 25, 391 - 400.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 21
Waddell, G., Newton, M., Henderson, I., Somerville, D., & Main, C. (1993). A Fear-Avoidance
Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back
pain and disability. Pain, 52, 157 - 168.
Ware, J. E., Jr. (2000). SF-36 health survey update. Spine, 25(24), 3130-3139.
Werneke, M., Hart, D., George, S., Stratford, P., Matheson, J., & Reyes, A. (2009). Clinical
outcomes for patients classified by fear-avoidance beliefs and centralization
phenomenon. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 90, 768 - 777.
Wertli, M. M., Rasmussen-Barr, E., Held, U., Weiser, S., Bachmann, L. M., & Brunner, F.
(2014). Fear-avoidance beliefs-a moderator of treatment efficacy in patients with low
back pain: a systematic review. Spine J, 12(14), 00234-00234.
Wertli, M. M., Rasmussen-Barr, E., Weiser, S., Bachmann, L. M., & Brunner, F. (2014). The
role of fear avoidance beliefs as a prognostic factor for outcome in patients with
nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review. Spine J, 14(5), 816-836.
Williams, K., Petronis, J., Smith, D., Goodrich, D., Wu, J., Ravi, N., . . . Steinberg, L. (2005).
Effect of Iyengar yoga therapy for chronic low back pain. Pain, 115, 107 - 117.
Woby, Urmston, & Watson. (2007). Self-efficacy mediates the relation between pain-related fear
and outcome in chronic low back pain patients. Eur J Pain, 11(7), 711-718.
Woby, Watson, Roach, & Urmston. (2004). Adjustment to chronic low back pain--the relative
influence of fear-avoidance beliefs, catastrophizing, and appraisals of control. Behav Res
Ther, 42(7), 761-774.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 22
Table 1
Baseline Characteristics of Participants
Treatment Groups
Characteristics Yoga PT Education
(N = 127) (N = 129) (N = 64)
Mean Age, years (SD) 46.4±10.4 46.4±11.0 44.2±10.8
Female- no. (%) 72 (56.7) 90 (69.8) 42 (65.3)
Race or ethnic group- no. (%)
Non-Hispanic-white 26 (20.5) 20 (15.5) 11 (17.3)
Non-Hispanic-black 71 (55.9) 73 (56.6) 39 (60.9)
Hispanic 18 (14.2) 19 (14.7) 7 (10.9)
Other 12 (9.4) 17 (13.2) 7 (10.9)
US born no. (%) 91 (71.7) 84 (65.1) 51 (79.7)
College degree or more (%) 38 (29.9) 30 (23.3) 25 (39.1)
Employed (%) 60 (47.2) 53 (41.4) 30 (46/9)
Annual Income ≤ 30,000 (%) 76 (58.8) 71 (55.0) 41 (64.1)
Mean RMDQ score (±SD)* 13.9±5.6 15.6±5.7 15.0±5.0
Pain intensity previous week mean (SD) 7.1 (1.5) 7.2 (1.5) 7.0 (1.4)
Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
Physical Activity (SD) 13.2 (7) 13.3 (6.4) 12.4 (6.5)
Work (SD) 14.2 (11.8) 16.6 (11.8) 14.4 (12.2)
Depression (PHQ-8) (SD) 7.8 (6.0) 8.7 (5.9) 8.3 (5.6)
Anxiety (GAD 7) (SD) 6.9 (6.0) 7.2 (5.9) 7.3 (5.7)
Pain Self Efficacy (PSEQ) 37.3 (14.8) 35.9 (13.6) 38.5 (11.8)
* p = .03
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 23
Table 2
Pearson Correlation Matrix (N=303)
1. FABQPA: Fear Avoidance Beliefs Physical Activity Subscale. 2. FABQW: Fear Avoidance Beliefs Work Subscale 3. RMDQ: Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire 4. LBP: Low back pain scores on 11 point scale. 5. PHQ8: Patient Health Questionnaire: instrument for screening diagnosing, monitoring and measuring the severity of Depression 6. PSEQ: Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire. * p-value <0.05 ** p-value <0.0001
Variable
FABQPA
FABQ
W
RMDQ
LBP
PHQ
8
PSEQ
1.FABQPA
2.FABQW .29**
3.RMDQ .26** ,32**
4.LBP .09 .12* .36**
5.PHQ8 .13* .35** .40**
.22**
6.PSEQ -.12* .26** -.46** -.14* -.42**
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 24
Table 3
Regression Model 1: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQPA as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=319) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQPA (Baseline) 0.20 0.17 0.09 0.253 <.0001
Gender (Female vs. Male) 0.86 -0.25 1.98 0.13
Age at Baseline 0.14 0.9 0.19 <.0001
Household income (> $30,000 vs. <
$30,000)
-2.36 -3.51 -1.20 <.0001
Race (White vs. Non-White) -1.22 -2.6 0.17 0.09
Table 4
Regression Model 2: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQPA as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=319) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQPA (Baseline) 0.30 0.16 0.08 0.23 <.0001
LBPSCORE (Baseline) 1.2 0.87 1.60 <.0001
Age at Baseline 0.13 0.08 0.17 <.0001
Household income (> $30,000 vs. <
$30,000)
-1.20 -2.34 -0.06 0.04
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 25
Table 5
Regression Model 3: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQPA as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=319) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQPA (Baseline) 0.45 0.11 0.04 0.18 .001
LBPSCORE (Baseline) 0.97 0.63 1.30 <.0001
PHQ8 (Baseline) 0.16 0.07 0.25 .0003
PSEQ (Baseline) -0.11 -0.15 -0.08 <.0001
Age at Baseline 0.14 0.09 0.18 <.0001
Table 6
Regression Model 1: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQW as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=315) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQW (Baseline) 0.25 0.14 0.09 0.18 <.0001
Gender: (Female vs. Male) 1.4 0.31 2.53 0.01
Age at Baseline 0.13 0.08 0.18 <.0001
Household income (> $30,000 vs. <
$30,000)
-1.7 -2.82 -0.50 0.005
Race (White vs. Non-White) -1.2 -2.59 0.14 0.08
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 26
Table 7
Regression Model 2: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQW as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=315) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQW (Baseline) 0.33 0.12 0.08 0.17 <.0001
LBPSCORE (Baseline) 1.17 0.80 1.53 <.0001
Gender: (Female vs. Male) 1.19 0.14 2.24 0.03
Age at Baseline 0.12 0.08 0.17 <.0001
Table 8
Regression Model 3: Predicting baseline RMDQ with FABQW as the independent variable
Independent Measures
(N=315) R Square
Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQW (Baseline) 0.45 0.06 0.02 0.11 .004
LBPSCORE (Baseline) 0.95 0.61 1.29 <.0001
PHQ (Baseline) 0.14 0.05 0.23 .003
PSEQ (Baseline) -0.11 -0.15 -0.08 <.0001
Gender: (Female vs. Male) 0.99 0.03 1.95 .04
Age at Baseline 0.13 0.09 0.18 <.0001
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 27
Table 9
Multivariate Analysis determining the relationship of FABQW and FABQPA baseline scores with
attendance rates for Physical Therapy and Yoga at 12 weeks
Independent Measures (N=252) R Square Regression
Coefficient (ß) Lower CI Upper CI p Value
FABQW (Baseline) 0.13 -.0006 -0.0048 0.0035 0.76
FABQPA (Baseline) 0.0010 -0.0056 0.0077 0.76
LBPSCORE (Baseline) 0.0076 -0.0245 0.0397 0.64
PHQ8 ( Baseline) -.0025 -0.0110 0.0059 0.56
PSEQ (Baseline) 0.0027 -0.0010 0.0063 0.15
RMDQ Score (Baseline) -.0057 -0.0160 0.0047 0.28
Treatment Arm (PT vs. Yoga) -.0607 -0.1450 0.0236 0.16
Gender: (Female vs. Male) 0.1073 0.0187 0.1959 0.02
Age at Baseline 0.0056 0.0014 0.0098 0.009
Household income (> $30,000 vs.<
$30,000)
0.0341 -0.0603 0.1285 0.48
Race (White vs. Non-White) 0.1524 0.0424 0.2624 0.007
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 28
Appendix A
Fear Avoidance Beliefs Model
Vlaeyen, J., & Linton, S. (2000)
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 29
Appendix B
Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) for Patients with Back Pain
Overview:
The Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) can help measure how much fear and avoidance are affecting a patient with low back pain. This can help identify those patients for whom psychosocial interventions may be beneficial. The authors are from the Western Infirmary in Glasgow (Scotland) and the Hope Hospital in Salford (England).
NOTE: This scale can be modified to apply to patients with other types of chronic pain. Only items 3 and 11 mention "back".
Instructions: Here are some of the things which other patients have told us about their pain. For each statement please circle the number from 0 to 6 to say how much physical activities such as bending lifting walking or driving affect or would affect your back pain.
Statements:
(1) My pain is caused by physical activity.
(2) Physical activity makes my pain worse.
(3) Physical activity might harm my back.
(4) I should not do physical activities which (might) make my pain worse.
(5) I cannot do physical activities which (might) make my pain worse.
The following statements are about how your normal work affects or would affect you back pain:
(6) My pain was caused by my work or by an accident at work.
(7) My work aggravated my pain.
(8) I have a claim for compensation for my pain.
(9) My work is too heavy for me.
(10) My work makes or would make my pain worse.
(11) My work might harm my back.
(12) I should not do my normal work with my present pain.
(13) I cannot do my normal work with my present pain.
(14) I cannot do my normal work till my pain is treated.
(15) I do not think that I will be back to my normal work within 3 months.
(16) I do not think that I will ever be able to go back to that work.
IMPACT OF YOGA, PHYSICAL THERAPY AND EDUCATION ON FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 30
Appendix C
Roland–Morris disability questionnaire 23-item version
When your back or leg hurts, you may find it difficult to do some things you normally do. This list contains sentences that people have used to describe themselves when they have back pain or sciatica. When you read them, you may find that some stand out because they describe you today. As you read the list, think of yourself today. When you read a sentence that describes you today, put a check in the ‘yes’ column. If the sentence does not describe you today, you check the ‘no’ column.
Yes No
1. I stay at home most of the time because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
2. I change position frequently to try to get my back or leg comfortable.
3. I walk more slowly than usual because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
4. Because of my back problem, I am not doing any of the jobs that I usually do around the house.
5. Because of my back problem, I use a handrail to get upstairs.
6. Because of my back problem, I have to hold on to something to get out of an easy chair.
7. I get dressed more slowly than usual because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
8. I only stand for short periods of time because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
9. Because of my back problem, I try not to bend or kneel down.
10. I find it difficult to get out of a chair because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
11. My back or leg is painful almost all the time.
12. I find it difficult to turn over in bed because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
13. I have trouble putting on my socks (or stockings) because of the pain in my back or leg.
14. I only walk short distances because of my back problem or leg pain (sciatica).
15. I sleep less well because of my back problem.
16. I avoid heavy jobs around the house because of my back problem.
17. Because of my back problem, I am more irritable and bad tempered with people than usual.
18. Because of my back problem, I go upstairs more slowly than usual.
19. I stay in bed most of the time because of my back or leg pain (sciatica).
20. Because of my back problem, my sexual activity is decreased.
21. I keep rubbing or holding areas of my body that hurt or are uncomfortable.
22. Because of my back problem, I am doing less of the daily work around the house than I would usually do.
23. I often express concern to other people over what might be happening to my health.
COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH APPROACH AND FEAR AVOIDANCE BELIEFS 6
Conclusion
Back pain is a public health issue and a leading cause of global disability. Despite the
rising cost of treatment, disability rates have not improved. The need for additional research has
become apparent. Understanding the contributing factors that worsen outcomes is foundational
to exploring treatment options.
Fear of movement and fear of re-injury are variables that influence recovery from an
episode of back pain. Improving awareness among clinicians regarding the negative impact fear
has on physical function may have an effect on patient outcomes. Patient education regarding
the soundness of the spine, the consequences of immobility, and the importance of movement
empower patients’ journey towards wellness. Empowering patients with self-care techniques
and promoting their ability to take “ownership” of their health may make the difference in a
“disease” treatment model that currently does not support recovery from back pain.