Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S1. Patient main-category endorsement by
patient age (years)
< 40
40 < 60
≥ 60
N (%)
N (%)
N (%)
p
pHS
19 (5.7)
29 (6.0)
6 (3.4)
0.420
--
300 (89.8)
420 (86.0)
156 (88.1)
0.269
--
Psychological / psychosocial
risk factors a
2 (0.6)
6 (1.2)
4 (2.3)
0.287
--
Other risk factors a b
3 (0.9)
1 (0.2)
0 (0.0)
0.315
--
No trigger identified c
13 (3.9)
39 (8.0)
13 (7.3)
0.057
--
Total d
334
(100.0)
488
(100.0)
177
(100.0)
--
--
Risk Factors
Individual risk factors
Biomechanical risk factors
Pairwise
pHS p-value after making the Holm- id k adjustment. Note: no adjustments were applied as
there were no significant values (p < 0.05) before adjustment.
a
Fischer’s exact test used due to low expected frequency.
b
Risk factors that did not fit into any other pre-defined categories.
c
This included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or equivalent.
d
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have endorsed more than a single
category.
Page 1 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S2. Patient main-category endorsement by
patient number of previous episodes of LBP
None
1 to 5
Over 5
N (%)
N (%)
N (%)
p
pHS
7 (3.3)
26 (5.0)
21 (8.0)
0.064
--
184 (86.4)
456 (87.2)
236 (89.7)
0.478
--
Psychological / psychosocial
risk factors a
4 (1.9)
5 (1.0)
3 (1.1)
0.548
--
Other risk factors a b
0 (0.0)
2 (0.4)
2 (0.8)
0.541
--
No trigger identified c
19 (8.9)
38 (7.3)
8 (3.0)
0.021
0.101
Total d
213
(100.0)
523
(100.0)
263
(100.0)
--
--
Risk Factors
Individual risk factors
Biomechanical risk factors
Pairwise
pHS p-value after making the Holm- id k adjustment. Note: adjustments stopped at the first
non-significant value (p > 0.05).
a
Fischer’s exact test used due to low expected frequency.
b
Risk factors that did not fit into any other pre-defined categories.
c
This included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or equivalent.
d
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have endorsed more than a single
category.
Page 2 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S3. Patient main-category endorsement by
whether the patient had pain referred below the knee
No
Yes
Difference
N (%)
N (%)
%
p
pHS
46 (5.1)
8 (7.8)
2.6
0.263
--
792 (88.4)
84 (81.6)
6.8
0.045
0.207
Psychological / psychosocial
risk factors a
10 (1.1)
2 (1.9)
0.8
0.356
--
Other risk factors a b
4 (0.4)
0 (0.0)
0.4
1
--
No trigger identified c
54 (6.0)
11 (10.7)
4.7
0.070
--
Total d
409
(100.0)
590
(100.0)
--
--
--
Risk Factors
Individual risk factors
Biomechanical risk factors
Pairwise
pHS p-value after making the Holm- id k adjustment. Note: adjustments stopped at the first
non-significant value (p > 0.05).
a
Fischer’s exact test used due to low expected frequency.
b
Risk factors that did not fit into any other pre-defined categories.
c
This included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or equivalent.
d
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have endorsed more than a single
category.
Page 3 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S4. Patient main-category endorsement by
gender
Female
Male
Difference
N (%)
N (%)
%
p
pHS
32 (7.0)
22 (4.1)
2.9
0.042
--
387 (84.5)
489 (90.4)
5.9
0.005
0.024
Psychological / psychosocial
risk factors
9 (2.0)
3 (0.6)
1.4
0.041
0.156
Other risk factors a b
2 (0.4)
2 (0.4)
0.1
1
--
33 (7.2)
32 (5.9)
1.3
0.410
--
458
(100.0)
541
(100.0)
--
--
--
Risk Factors
Individual risk factors
Biomechanical risk factors
No trigger identified
Total d
c
Pairwise
pHS p-value after making the Holm- id k adjustment. Note: adjustments stopped at the first
non-significant value (p > 0.05).
a
Risk factors that did not fit into any other pre-defined categories.
b
Fischer’s exact test used due to low expected frequency.
c
This included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or equivalent.
d
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have endorsed more than a single
category.
Page 4 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S1. Frequency of novel risk factor categories
Risk Factor Categories
N (%)
Novel risk factors
Sleeping / lying
21 (2.1)
Tired / fatigued
8 (0.8)
Household chores
6 (0.8)
Changing positions (sitting to standing)
6 (0.6)
Massage
3 (0.3)
Sexual activity
2 (0.2)
Weight gain
2 (0.2)
Sitting
1 (0.1)
Stretching
1 (0.1)
Laughing
1 (0.1)
Menses
1 (0.1)
Weather
1 (0.1)
Poor flexibility
1 (0.1)
Poor posture
1 (0.1)
Pre-defined risk factors
No trigger identified
Total
b
a
946 (94.7)
65 (6.5%)
999 (100.0)
a
This included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or
equivalent.
b
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have
endorsed more than a single category.
Page 5 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Supplemental Digital Content 1: Table S6. Comparison of patient and physiotherapist
sub-category endorsement (full)
Risk Factors
Patients
Clinicians
Difference
Pairwise
N (%)
N (%)
%
p
pHS
Individual
Previous LBP episodes a
4 (0.4)
2 (0.4)
0.0
1
--
Past major illness
a
0 (0.0)
2 (0.4)
0.4
0.114
--
Poor health status
a
11 (1.1)
3 (0.6)
0.5
0.406
--
1 (0.1)
0 (0.0)
0.1
1
--
4 (0.4)
3 (0.6)
0.2
0.694
--
1 (0.1)
1 (0.2)
0.1
1
--
1 (0.1)
1 (0.2)
0.1
1
--
Physical inactivity a
5 (0.5)
0 (0.0)
0.5
0.174
--
Diminished trunk muscle
strength and fatigability a
3 (0.3)
2 (0.4)
0.1
1
--
Spine/ pelvis/ lower limb
pathology a
7 (0.7)
1 (0.2)
0.5
0.279
--
Spine/ pelvis/ lower limb
impairment a
2 (0.2)
2 (0.4)
0.2
0.607
--
12 (1.2)
12 (2.4)
1.2
0.091
--
3 (0.3)
4 (0.8)
0.5
0.235
--
87 (8.7)
54 (10.6)
1.9
0.235
--
Bending
133 (13.3)
81 (15.9)
2.6
0.176
--
Twisting
64 (6.4)
54 (10.6)
4.2
0.004
0.152
225 (22.5)
128 (25.1)
2.6
0.264
--
Use of machines/ tools a
1 (0.1)
2 (0.4)
0.3
0.265
--
Driving
15 (1.5)
11 (2.2)
0.7
0.355
--
Whole body vibration a
1 (0.1)
1 (0.2)
0.1
1
--
Job injury a
3 (0.3)
1 (0.2)
0.1
1
--
Gardening
55 (5.5)
19 (3.7)
1.8
0.129
--
Monotonous job/ task a
1 (0.1)
0 (0.0)
0.1
1
--
134 (13.4)
6 (1.2)
12.2
<0.001
<0.001
Prolonged standing
19 (1.9)
10 (2.0)
0.1
0.937
--
Pulling/pushing
18 (1.8)
5 (1.0)
0.8
0.218
--
Family history
a
Pregnancy/ childbirth
Increasing age
Overweight
a
a
a
Coughing/ sneezing
Other individual risk factors
a
Biomechanical
Prolonged sitting
Lifting
Awkward posture
Page 6 of 7
Patient and physiotherapists’ views on triggers for low back pain
Physical trauma
34 (3.4)
47 (9.2)
5.8
<0.001
<0.001
Sedentary work a
1 (0.1)
2 (0.4)
0.3
0.265
--
23 (2.3)
37 (7.3)
5.0
<0.001
<0.001
1 (0.1)
6 (1.2)
1.1
0.007
--
Sudden movements
14 (1.4)
8 (1.6)
0.2
0.798
--
Repetitive movements
7 (0.7)
8 (1.6)
0.9
0.108
--
159 (15.9)
24 (4.7)
11.2
<0.001
<0.001
6 (0.6)
3 (0.6)
0.0
1
--
44 (4.4)
27 (5.3)
0.9
0.440
--
Stress a
4 (0.4)
2 (0.4)
0.0
1
--
Sleep disturbances a
3 (0.3)
0 (0.0)
0.3
0.555
--
Other psychological/
psychosocial risk factors a
5 (0.5)
0 (0.0)
0.5
0.174
--
Other risk factors a b
4 (0.4)
9 (1.8)
1.4
0.014
--
No trigger identified c
65 (6.5)
10 (2.0)
--
--
--
Total d
999
(100.0)
510
(100.0)
--
--
--
Unaccustomed activity
Unexpected load
a
Sport injuries
Reaching
a
Other biomechanical risk
factors
Psychological/ psychosocial
Other
pHS p-value after making the Holm- id k adjustment. Note: adjustments stopped at the first
non-significant value (p > 0.05)
a
Fischer’s exact test used due to low expected frequency.
b
Risk factors that did not fit into any other pre-defined categories.
c
For patients this included responses such as ‘no idea’, ‘unsure’ or equivalent.
d
Column % do not add to 100% as participants may have endorsed more than a single
category.
Page 7 of 7