Cited by 144Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

Psychosocial factors associated with change in pain and disability outcomes in chronic low back pain patients treated by physiotherapist: A systematic review

Open access
Alhowimel, Ahmed, AlOtaibi, Mazyad, Radford, Kathryn, Coulson, Neil·2018·SAGE Open Medicine

Abstract

Background: Almost 80% of people have low back pain at least once in their life. Clinical guidelines emphasize the use of conservative physiotherapy and the importance of staying active. While the psychological factors predicting poor recovery following surgical intervention are understood, the psychosocial factors associated with poor outcomes following physiotherapy have yet to be identified. Methods: Electronic searches of PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO and EBSCO were conducted using terms relating to psychosocial factors, chronic low back pain, disability and physiotherapy. Papers examining the relationship between psychosocial factors and pain and disability outcomes following physiotherapy were included. Two reviewers selected, appraised and extracted studies independently. Results: In total, 10 observational studies were identified that suggested an association between fear of movement, depression, self-efficacy and catastrophizing in modifying pain and disability outcomes following physiotherapy. Discussion: Although limited by methodological shortcomings of included studies, and heterogeneity of physiotherapy interventions and measures of disability and psychosocial outcomes, the findings are consistent with other research in the context of back pain and physiotherapy, which suggest an association between psychosocial factors, including fear of movement, catastrophizing and self-efficacy and pain and disability outcomes in chronic low back pain patients treated by physiotherapist. However, a direct relationship cannot be concluded from this study. Conclusion: Findings suggest an association between psychosocial factors, including fear of movement, catastrophizing and self-efficacy and pain and disability outcomes in chronic low back pain patients treated by physiotherapist, which warrants further study.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2050312118757387

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fear-avoidance beliefs are consistently associated with a poor prognosis.

    “which is consistently associated with a poor prognosis [60,94,95,96].”

    From Digital Rehabilitation for Elbow Pain Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study (2022) · cites this paper as [94]

    The Results (Fear avoidance; page not specified) report that fear-avoidance factors influenced disability scores in eight studies. But one study found that higher fear-avoidance scores did not predict pain levels, so the unqualified claim of a consistent association with poor prognosis overstates the review's findings in physiotherapist-treated chronic low back pain. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alhowimel, A., AlOtaibi, M., Radford, K., & Coulson, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Division of Rehabilitation and Ageing, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
Corresponding author
Alhowimel, Ahmed
Venue
SAGE Open Medicine
Published
2018-01-01
Volume
6
Pages
2050312118757387-2050312118757387
ISSN
2050-3121 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2793287328
Cited by
144
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SAGE Open Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic low back pain, psychosocial factors, physiotherapy, pain outcomes, disability outcome, kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, self-efficacy, depression, conservative treatment

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