Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 440–448 | Cite as

Impact of postpartum lumbopelvic pain on disability, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, activity level, kinesiophobia, and depressive symptoms

  • Annelie Gutke
  • Mari Lundberg
  • Hans Christian Östgaard
  • Birgitta Öberg
Original Article

Abstract

The majority of women recover from pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain within 3 months of delivery. Since biomechanical and hormonal changes from pregnancy are largely reversed by 3 months postpartum, consequently, it is assumed that other factors might interfere with recovery. Relative to the fear-avoidance model and with reference to previous studies, we chose to investigate some pre-decided factors to understand persistent lumbopelvic pain. The evaluation of lumbopelvic pain postpartum is mostly based on self-administered questionnaires or interviews. Clinical classification of the lumbopelvic pain may increase our knowledge about postpartum subgroups. Two hundred and seventy-two consecutively registered pregnant women evaluated at 3 months postpartum, answered questionnaires concerning disability (Oswestry disability index), pain intensity on visual analog scale, health-related quality of life (HRQL, EQ5D), activity level, depressive symptoms (Edinburgh postnatal Depression Scale) and kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia). Women were classified into lumbopelvic pain subgroups according to mechanical assessment of the lumbar spine, pelvic pain provocation tests, standard history, and pain drawings. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to explain the variance of disability. Thirty-three percent of postpartum women were classified with lumbopelvic pain; 40% reported moderate to severe disability. The impacts were similar among subgroups. Pain intensity, HRQL and kinesiophobia explained 53% of postpartum disability due to lumbopelvic pain. In conclusion, one of three postpartum women still had some lumbopelvic pain and the impacts were equivalent irrespective of symptoms in lumbar or pelvic areas. The additional explanations of variance in disability by HRQL and kinesiophobia were minor, suggesting that pain intensity was the major contributing factor.

Keywords

Postpartum Disability Prevalence Pain intensity Low back pain (LBP) 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by grants from The Swedish Research Council, The Vardal Foundation, and Foundation of the Region Västra Götaland, Trygg Hansa Research Foundation. The authors thank Henrik Magnusson for assisting in statistical analyses.

References

  1. 1.
    Albert H, Godskesen M, Westergaard J (2001) Prognosis in four syndromes of pregnancy-related pelvic pain. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 80:505–510PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bastiaenen CH, de Bie RA, Vlaeyen JW, Goossens ME, Leffers P, Wolters PM et al (2008) Long-term effectiveness and costs of a brief self-management intervention in women with pregnancy-related low back pain after delivery. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 8:19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bastiaenen CH, de Bie RA, Wolters PM, Vlaeyen JW, Leffers P, Stelma F et al (2006) Effectiveness of a tailor-made intervention for pregnancy-related pelvic girdle and/or low back pain after delivery: short-term results of a randomized clinical trial [ISRCTN08477490]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7:19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brynhildsen J, Hansson A, Persson A, Hammar M (1998) Follow-up of patients with low back pain during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 91:182–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burstrom K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F (2001) Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res 10:621–635PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R (1987) Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry 150:782–786PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Enthoven P, Skargren E, Oberg B (2004) Clinical course in patients seeking primary care for back or neck pain: a prospective 5-year follow-up of outcome and health care consumption with subgroup analysis. Spine 29:2458–2465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry disability index. Spine 25:2940–2952 (discussion 2952)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fritz JM, Delitto A, Erhard RE (2003) Comparison of classification-based physical therapy with therapy based on clinical practice guidelines for patients with acute low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. Spine 28:1363–1371 (discussion 1372)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grimby G (1986) Physical activity and muscle training in the elderly. Acta Med Scand Suppl 711:233–237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gustafsson J, Nilsson-Wikmar L (2008) Influence of specific muscle training on pain, activity limitation and kinesiophobia in women with back pain post-partum—a single-subject research design. Physiother Res Int 13:18–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gutke A, Josefsson A, Oberg B (2007) Pelvic girdle pain and lumbar pain in relation to postpartum depressive symptoms. Spine 32:1430–1436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gutke A, Kjellby-Wendt G, Oberg B (2009) The inter-rater reliability of a standardised classification system for pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain. Man Ther 15(1):13–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gutke A, Ostgaard HC, Oberg B (2006) Pelvic girdle pain and lumbar pain in pregnancy: a cohort study of the consequences in terms of health and functioning. Spine 31:E149–E155PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gutke A, Ostgaard HC, Oberg B (2008) Predicting persistent pregnancy-related low back pain. Spine 33:E386–E393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kori S, Miller R, Todd D (1990) Kinesiophobia: a new view of chronic pain behavior. Pain Manag 3:35–43Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kristiansson P, Svardsudd K, von Schoultz B (1996) Back pain during pregnancy: a prospective study. Spine 21:702–709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larsen EC, Wilken-Jensen C, Hansen A, Jensen DV, Johansen S, Minck H et al (1999) Symptom-giving pelvic girdle relaxation in pregnancy. I. Prevalence and risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 78:105–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Long A, Donelson R, Fung T (2004) Does it matter which exercise? A randomized control trial of exercise for low back pain. Spine 29:2593–2602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mattiasson-Nilo I, Sonn U, Johannesson K, Gosman-Hedstrom G, Persson GB, Grimby G (1990) Domestic activities and walking in the elderly: evaluation from a 30-hour heart rate recording. Aging (Milano) 2:191–198Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McKenzie R, May S (2003) The lumbar spine. Mechanical diagnosis & therapy. Spinal Publications New Zealand Ltd, WaikanaeGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Melzack R, Wall PD (1965) Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science 150:971–979PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mens JM, Vleeming A, Stoeckart R, Stam HJ, Snijders CJ (1996) Understanding peripartum pelvic pain. Implications of a patient survey. Spine 21:1363–1369 (discussion 1369–1370)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mogren IM (2005) Previous physical activity decreases the risk of low back pain and pelvic pain during pregnancy. Scand J Public Health 33:300–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Noren L, Ostgaard S, Johansson G, Ostgaard HC (2002) Lumbar back and posterior pelvic pain during pregnancy: a 3-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 11:267–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Olsson C, Nilsson-Wikmar L (2004) Health-related quality of life and physical ability among pregnant women with and without back pain in late pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 83:351–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ostgaard HC, Zetherstrom G, Roos-Hansson E (1997) Back pain in relation to pregnancy: a 6-year follow-up. Spine 22:2945–2950PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Picavet HS, Schouten JS (2003) Musculoskeletal pain in the Netherlands: prevalences, consequences and risk groups, the DMC(3)-study. Pain 102:167–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rabin R, de Charro F (2001) EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 33:337–343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stuge B, Veierod MB, Laerum E, Vollestad N (2004) The efficacy of a treatment program focusing on specific stabilizing exercises for pelvic girdle pain after pregnancy: a two-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Spine 29:E197–E203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Svensson HO, Andersson GB, Hagstad A, Jansson PO (1990) The relationship of low-back pain to pregnancy and gynecologic factors. Spine 15:371–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sydsjo A, Sydsjo G, Wijma B (1998) Increase in sick leave rates caused by back pain among pregnant Swedish women after amelioration of social benefits. A paradox. Spine 23:1986–1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vlaeyen JW, Kole-Snijders AM, Boeren RG, van Eek H (1995) Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain 62:363–372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annelie Gutke
    • 1
  • Mari Lundberg
    • 2
  • Hans Christian Östgaard
    • 3
  • Birgitta Öberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Medical and Health SciencesLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden
  2. 2.Division of Occupational Orthopedics, Department of Orthopedics, Sahlgrenska University HospitalGöteborg UniversityGöteborgSweden
  3. 3.Department of Orthopedic SurgerySahlgrenska University HospitalMölndalSweden

Personalised recommendations