The DOI matches its Crossref record.
1987 Volvo Award in Clinical Sciences: A New Clinical Model for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain
Abstract
Because there is increasing concern about low-back disability and its current medical management, this analysis attempts to construct a new theoretic framework for treatment. Observations of natural history and epidemiology suggest that low-back pain should be a benign, self-limiting condition, that low back-disability as opposed to pain is a relatively recent Western epidemic, and that the role of medicine in that epidemic must be critically examined. The traditional medical model of disease is contrasted with a biopsychosocial model of illness to analyze success and failure in low-back disorders. Studies of the mathematical relationship between the elements of illness in chronic low-back pain suggest that the biopsychosocial concept can be used as an operational model that explains many clinical observations. This model is used to compare rest and active rehabilitation for low-back pain. Rest is the commonest treatment prescribed after analgesics but is based on a doubtful rationale, and there is little evidence of any lasting benefit. There is, however, little doubt about the harmful effects--especially of prolonged bed rest. Conversely, there is no evidence that activity is harmful and, contrary to common belief, it does not necessarily make the pain worse. Experimental studies clearly show that controlled exercises not only restore function, reduce distress and illness behavior, and promote return to work, but actually reduce pain. Clinical studies confirm the value of active rehabilitation in practice. To achieve the goal of treating patients rather than spines, we must approach low-back disability as an illness rather than low-back pain as a purely physical disease. We must distinguish pain as a purely the symptoms and signs of distress and illness behavior from those of physical disease, and nominal from substantive diagnoses. Management must change from a negative philosophy of rest for pain to more active restoration of function. Only a new model and understanding of illness by physicians and patients alike makes real change possible.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Waddell, G., Newton, M., Henderson, I., Somerville, D., & Main, C. J. (1993) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(93)90127-b · Cited by 3,167
Self-citationFear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance
Vlaeyen, J. W. S., Kole-Snijders, A. M. J., Boeren, R. G. B., & van Eek, H. (1995) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(94)00279-n · Cited by 2,446
Deyo, R. A., & Weinstein, J. N. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200102013440508 · Cited by 1,675
The economic burden of back pain in the UK
Maniadakis, N., & Gray, A. (2000) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(99)00187-6 · Cited by 1,510
Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews
Geneen, L. J., Moore, R. A., Clarke, C., Martin, D., Colvin, L. A., & Smith, B. H. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011279.pub3 · Cited by 1,222
Metadata
- Authors
- WADDELL, G.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 1987-09
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 632-644
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989815215
- Cited by
- 1,245
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 1987 Volvo Award in Clinical Sciences: A New Clinical Model for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00007632-198709000-00002
- The paper
- WADDELL, G. (1987). 1987 Volvo Award in Clinical Sciences: A New Clinical Model for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198709000-00002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.