Quality of Life and Functional Status of Patients with Lumbar Radiculopathy
Abstract
Background: Quality of life (QL) of patients with lumbar radiculopathy (LR) stands for personal experience of the functional effect of the ailment and therapy applied to the patient. We aimed to evaluate the QL in patients with LR before the start of treatment, as well as three and six months following the start of medical rehabilitation, that was prescribed and implemented.
Methods: The research was conducted at the Special Hospital for Progressive Muscular and Neuromuscular Diseases in Novi Pazar, Serbia, from 2014 to 2016. A stratified, randomized sample included fifty patients with LR. All patients had an educational training program in ergonomics, physical therapy procedures, and kinetic and ergonomic therapeutic procedures as part of the conservative treatment. We employed two standardized questionnaires, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the SF-36, to evaluate the patients' condition, their QL, and the effectiveness of rehabilitation treatment.
Results: In terms of SF-36 - PCS, SF-36 - MCS, and ODI, the lowest values were noted at the start of rehabilitation (PCS:35.5; MCS:37.8; ODI:51.5%). Three months later, there was a significant improvement in the scores (PCS:42.8; MCS:45.2; ODI:38.9%), and six months later, the scores were somewhat higher (PCS:49.2; MCS:40.6; ODI:23.7%) (P<0.01).
Conclusion: When comparing the conditions, the QL and functional status of patients with LR are significantly improved. They were better at three and six months compared to the start of rehabilitation and at six months compared to the condition at three months.
2. Mahmutović E, Doder R, Dolićanin Z, et al (2018). The quality of life of patients af-ter lumbar microdiscectomy. Srp Arh Celok Lek, 146 (9-10): 554-60.
3. Samant P, Tawde P, Tawde DN (2024). Un-derstanding How Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy Make Sense of and Cope With Their Symptoms. Cureus, 16 (3): e56987.
4. Bouhassira D, Attal N (2019). The multiple challenges of neuropathic pain. Neurosci Lett, 702: 6-10.
5. Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI (2021). The Spitzer Quality-of-Life Index: its performance as a measure. In: Effect of cancer on quality of life, pp. 169-84.
6. Elera-Fitzcarrald C, Fuentes A, González LA, et al (2018). Factors affecting quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: important considerations and potential interventions. Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 14 (11): 915-31.
7. Homayouni K, Jafari SH, Yari H (2018). Sensitivity and specificity of modified Bragard test in patients with lumbosa-cral radiculopathy using electrodiagno-sis as a reference standard. J Chiropr Med, 17 (1): 36-43.
8. Bhavsar MD (2021). The Effect of Back Ex-tension Exercise on H Reflex in Patients with Lumbosacral Radiculopathy. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther, 15 (3): 54.
9. Vučinić N, Erić M, Tomašević-Todorović S, et al (2018). Application of algometry in patients with cervical and lumbar radiculopathy. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 31 (3): 567-75.
10. Chon J, Kim HS, Lee JH, et al (2017). Asymmetric atrophy of paraspinal mus-cles in patients with chronic unilateral lumbar radiculopathy. Ann Rehabil Med, 41 (5): 801.
11. Kanaan T, Abusaleh R, Abuasbeh J, et al (2020). The efficacy of therapeutic selec-tive nerve block in treating lumbar radiculopathy and avoiding surgery. J Pain Res, 13: 2971.
12. Telli H, Hüner B, Kuru Ö (2020). Determi-nation of the prevalence from clinical diagnosis of sacroiliac joint dysfunction in patients with lumbar disc hernia and an evaluation of the effect of this com-bination on pain and quality of life. Spine, 45 (8): 549.
13. Kim YK, Kang D, Lee I, et al (2018). Dif-ferences in the incidence of symptomat-ic cervical and lumbar disc herniation according to age, sex and national health insurance eligibility: a pilot study on the disease’s association with work. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 15 (10): 2094.
14. Charalampidis A, Canizares M, Kalsi PS, et al (2022). Differentiation of pain-related functional limitations in surgical pa-tients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) using the Oswestry Disability Index: a Canadian Spine Outcomes and Re-search Network (CSORN) study. Spine J, 22 (4): 578-86.
15. Aubry C, Nüesch C, Fiebig O, et al (2021). Accelerometry-based physical activity, disability and quality of life before and after lumbar decompression surgery from a physiotherapeutic perspective: An observational cohort study. N Am Spine Soc J, 8: 100087.
16. Amjad F, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Gilani SA, et al (2022). Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Urdu version of rand Short Form 36-item survey (SF-36) among patients with lumbar radiculopathy. J Bodyw Mov Ther, 32: 176-82.
17. Ko S, Chae S (2017). Correlations between the SF-36, the Oswestry-Disability Index and Rolland-Morris Disability Ques-tionnaire in patients undergoing lumbar decompression according to types of spine origin pain. Clin Spine Surg, 30 (6): E804-8.
18. Bošković K (2009). Lumbalna radikulopatija i kvalitet života. Novi Sad: Medicinski fakultet Novi Sad (in Serbian).
19. Van Bogaert W, Putman K, Coppieters I, et al (2022). Health-related quality of life deviations from population norms in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: as-sociations with pain, pain cognitions, and endogenous nociceptive modula-tion. Qual Life Res, 31 (3): 745-57.
20. Yao M, Xu BP, Li ZJ, et al (2020). A com-parison between the low back pain scales for patients with lumbar disc her-niation: validity, reliability, and respon-siveness. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 18 (1): 175.
21. Kamper SJ (2015). Multidisciplinary bi-opsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: Cochrane systematic re-view and meta-analysis. BMJ, 350: h444.
22. Lall MP, Restrepo E (2017). The biopsycho-social model of low back pain and pa-tient-centered outcomes following lum-bar fusion. Orthop Nurs, 36 (3): 213-21.
23. Vereckei E, Susanszky E, Kopp M, et al (2013). Psychosocial, educational, and somatic factors in chronic nonspecific low back pain. Rheumatol Int, 33 (3): 587-92.
24. Sterud T, Tynes T (2013). Work-related psy-chosocial and mechanical risk factors for low back pain: a 3-year follow-up study of the general working population in Norway. Occup Environ Med, 70: 296-302.
25. Bakker EWP, Verhagen PA, van Trijffel E, et al (2009). Spinal Mechanical Load as a Risk Factor for Low Back Pain: A Sys-tematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies. Spine, 34 (8): 281-93.
26. Golabchi A, Chao A, Tavakoli M (2022). A Systematic Review of Industrial Exo-skeletons for Injury Prevention: Efficacy Evaluation Metrics, Target Tasks, and Supported Body Postures. Sensors, 22 (7): 2714.
27. Hegmann KT, Travis R, Belcourt RM, et al (2019). Diagnostic tests for low back disorders. J Occup Environ Med, 61 (4): e155-68.
28. Brodke DS, Goz V, Voss MW, et al (2017). PROMIS PF CAT outperforms the ODI and SF-36 physical function domain in spine patients. Spine, 42 (12): 921.
29. Koç M, Bayar B, Bayar K (2018). A compar-ison of Back pain functional scale with Roland Morris disability questionnaire, Oswestry disability index, and short form 36-health survey. Spine, 43 (12): 877-82.
Files | ||
Issue | Vol 53 No 8 (2024) | |
Section | Original Article(s) | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v53i8.16289 | |
Keywords | ||
Lumbar radiculopathy Quality of life Functional status Serbia |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |