Table S5.
Summary of cohort studies on informal social support and prognosis of spinal pain.
| Author (year) | Country | Study population (follow up period) | Quality score (%) | Main study focus | Assessment spinal pain | Assessment social support | Analysis (adjusted or univariate) | Study outcome | Findings | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohort studies on prognosis for spinal pain outcome | ||||||||||
| Hurwitz et al. (2006) | USA | 91 | Impact of psychosocial variables on neck pain and associated disability | Four questions on instrumental and emotional support and frequency of support | Linear regression (adjusted) | |||||
| Secondary analysis of RCT | Neck disability index | 2 + Point reduction in severe and average pain | Greater emotional support was shown to have significant effect on average pain reduction | OR 2.26 (1.03–4.95)N/S | ||||||
| 336 (35%) baseline | Pain rating for average and severe pain | 5 + Point reduction in neck disability score at 6 months | There was no significant effect of emotional support on severe pain or neck disability | OR 2.94 | ||||||
| 268 (79%) Follow up | Higher instrumental support was associated with a reduction in neck disability | (1.32–6.58) | ||||||||
| Health care population invited to take part in RCT (6 month follow up) | There was no effect of instrumental support on pain levels (severe/average) | N/S | ||||||||
| Koleck et al. (2006) | France | 64 | Coping strategies in those with LBP | Self report LBP | Perceived social support scale (adapted from the Sarason SSQ including quality and availability of support) | Principal components analysis (adjusted) | Assessment of acute (T1) to chronic stage (T2). PCA to form factors influencing outcome | Social support quality was dropped from initial analysis | Not reported | |
| 99 Baseline | Social support availability remained in PCA model as part of ‘perceived control’ factor. Perceived control did not contribute to improvement over time | N/S | ||||||||
| 90 (90%) Follow up | VAS pain intensity | |||||||||
| Consecutive GP consulters with new episode of nonspecific back pain (12 month follow up) | ||||||||||
| Muramatsu et al. (1997) | Japan | 2200 (68%) | 93 | Sociomedical perspective on the transitions in CLBP | Self report question on current experience of LBP (Time 1). Self report question on experience of chronic LBP (Time 2) | Emotional and instrumental support from a significant other | Logistic and multiple regression (adjusted) | Onset of LBP (Time 1) | Instrumental and emotional support did not reduce chronic status (back pain at T1 and back pain at T2). | N/S |
| 1986 (90%) Follow up | Recovery of LBP (Time 2) | Instrumental support did not significantly contribute to recovery (back pain T1 to no back pain T2). | N/S | |||||||
| General sample of over 60 population (3 year follow up) | Emotional support decreased recovery status (back pain T1 to no back pain T2). | −2.93% | ||||||||
CLBP – chronic low back pain, LBP – low back pain, β – beta, OR – Odds Ratio, ANOVA – analysis of variance, N/S – not significant, VAS – visual analogue scale.