Low Back Pain, Musculoskeletal Injury
Conditions
Keywords
Nocebo, Self-Efficacy
Brief summary
Background: Lower back injuries are a common occurrence in athletes, sports programs, and in the military (Bengtsson, 2018; Lovalekar, 2021). The Army's new fitness test includes a three-repetition maximum deadlift, and this inclusion has raised concern amongst servicemembers and healthcare workers due to the association between deadlifts and lower back injuries. There is debate amongst researchers about the role of deadlift form in lower back injury prevention, specifically related to flexion of the spine (Sjoberg, 2020). Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of low back pain education (either cautionary regarding injury risk or reassuring regarding spine resiliency) on deadlift performance (weight lifted), and if this education has an effect on self-efficacy and perceived spine vulnerability. Participants: Participants will be incoming new cadets at the United States Military Academy (USMA). Inclusion criteria are cadets age 17-26 (cadets under the age of 18 are legally emancipated therefore able to consent), those participating in the ACFT, and speak and understand English. Study Design: This study will be a randomized controlled trial with parallel design and 1:1 allocation ratio. The investigators plan to use cluster randomization. There will be three groups- control, cautionary, reassuring (Jackson, 2005). The investigators are also planning a prospective cohort study to assess self-efficacy, injury, and performance over time. Procedures: Data will be collected at the United States Military Academy during the summer of 2022 during cadet basic training. Shortly after new cadets arrive at USMA, the investigators will gather demographic and initial self-efficacy information. The randomized control element of this study will occur before and during the maximum deadlift (MDL) of the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). At the start of cadet basic training, investigators will randomly allocate each company of cadets into one of three groups (three companies per group.) The investigator will administer the education (cautionary, reassuring, or control) shortly prior to cadets taking the MDL, and will collect results after the ACFT. The cautionary education is similar to standard information provided to many servicemembers before the start of an ACFT or a maximum deadlift.
Detailed description
Background: Musculoskeletal injuries (MSKIs) are the leading cause of nondeployability, lost duty days (LDD), medical encounters, military discharge, and disability in the United States Military. (Lovalekar, 2021). Ironically, the leading causes of MSKIs are same activities that leaders deliberately conduct to develop physical resilience: running, foot marching, other physical fitness training activities (besides running) and work-related tasks (Lovalekar, 2021). Purpose: The purpose of this study is to learn about relationships between self-efficacy, injury and physical/tactical performance. The investigators also plan to assess the effect of low back pain education (either cautionary regarding injury risk or reassuring regarding spine resiliency) on deadlift performance (weight lifted), and if this education has an effect on self-efficacy and perceived spine vulnerability. Participants: Participants will be incoming new cadets at the United States Military Academy (USMA). Inclusion criteria are cadets age 17-26 (cadets under the age of 18 are legally emancipated therefore able to consent), those participating in the ACFT, and speak and understand English. Study Design: This study will be a randomized controlled trial with parallel design and 1:1 allocation ratio. The investigators plan to use cluster randomization. There will be three groups- control, cautionary, reassuring (Jackson, 2005). The investigators are also planning a prospective cohort study to assess self-efficacy, injury, and performance over time. Procedures: Data will be collected at the United States Military Academy during the summer of 2022 during cadet basic training. Shortly after new cadets arrive at USMA, the investigators will gather demographic and initial self-efficacy information. The randomized control element of this study will occur before and during the maximum deadlift (MDL) of the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). At the start of cadet basic training, researchers will randomly allocate each company of cadets into one of three groups (three companies per group.) The researchers will administer the education (cautionary, reassuring, or control) shortly prior to cadets taking the MDL, and will collect results after the ACFT. The cautionary education is similar to standard information provided to many servicemembers before the start of an ACFT or a maximum deadlift.
Interventions
The education will include information about the lumbar spine as it relates to a deadlift. The researchers will administer this education shortly prior to participants taking a strength test.
Sponsors
Study design
Intervention model description
Group Between-Factor, Randomized Controlled Trial
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* All incoming US Military Academy cadets, attending cadet basic training in summer 2022.
Exclusion criteria
* Unable to communicate in English; unable to participate in deadlift event.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Deadlift Weight Lifted | Following the intervention. This event/data collection took place at a single time point immediately following the intervention, up to 30 minutes | Weight lifted for three repetitions |
| Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q1 | Immediately after the intervention | Ease of which participants believe the back can be injured, it is easy to injure your back. Questions based on Back Pain Attitude Questionnaire, item 6. Count reflects the number of participants who selected true |
| Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q2 | Immediately after the intervention | Ease of which participants believe the back can be injured, you could injure your back if you are not careful. Questions based on Back Pain Attitude Questionnaire, item 11. Count reflects the number of participants who selected true |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Deadlift Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | Outcome data was collected immediately following the intervention | Self-efficacy related to the deadlift was gathered by a single numeric rating scale question. Participants were asked to rate their confidence in succeeding at the deadlift event, from not confident at all - 0 to fully confident - 10). |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
903 new cadets consented to the study and signed informed consent forms. 18 of them were separated from the academy before data collection, and 64 were injured prior to data collection and did not take the fitness test. Of the 64 participants who were injured, 16 received the intervention but did not take the fitness test, thus we did not collect primary outcome data. This resulted in 837 who received the intervention. There were 821 participants who were included in the final analysis.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Cautionary The group will receive a message regarding potential risk for spine injury before the tested task.
Deadlift Form Education: The education will include information about the lumbar spine as it relates to a deadlift. The researchers will administer this education shortly prior to participants taking a strength test. | 293 |
| Reassuring This group will receive a message regarding spine resiliency before the tested task.
Deadlift Form Education: The education will include information about the lumbar spine as it relates to a deadlift. The researchers will administer this education shortly prior to participants taking a strength test. | 298 |
| Control This group will not receive education before the tested task. | 312 |
| Total | 903 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 | FG002 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Received intervention but did not complete primary outcome measure | 5 | 5 | 6 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Control | Total | Cautionary | Reassuring |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 18.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.9 | 18.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.9 | 18.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1 | 18.2 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.9 |
| Intercollegiate Athlete | 96 Participants | 286 Participants | 101 Participants | 89 Participants |
| Prior history of deadlift-related low back pain | 49 Participants | 116 Participants | 30 Participants | 37 Participants |
| Prior Military Service | 54 Participants | 153 Participants | 52 Participants | 47 Participants |
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | — | 0 Participants | — | — |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 73 Participants | 198 Participants | 62 Participants | 63 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 239 Participants | 705 Participants | 231 Participants | 235 Participants |
| Weight | 74.1 kilograms STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.7 | 74.4 kilograms STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.6 | 74.7 kilograms STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.3 | 74.3 kilograms STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.8 |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk | EG002 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 269 | 0 / 283 | 0 / 279 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 269 | 0 / 283 | 0 / 285 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 269 | 0 / 283 | 0 / 285 |
Outcome results
Maximum Deadlift Weight Lifted
Weight lifted for three repetitions
Time frame: Following the intervention. This event/data collection took place at a single time point immediately following the intervention, up to 30 minutes
Population: Includes only those who completed the primary outcome measure
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cautionary | Maximum Deadlift Weight Lifted | 117.2 kilograms | Standard Deviation 25.9 |
| Reassuring | Maximum Deadlift Weight Lifted | 115.9 kilograms | Standard Deviation 26.6 |
| Control | Maximum Deadlift Weight Lifted | 119.0 kilograms | Standard Deviation 27.1 |
Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q1
Ease of which participants believe the back can be injured, it is easy to injure your back. Questions based on Back Pain Attitude Questionnaire, item 6. Count reflects the number of participants who selected true
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Cautionary | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q1 | 153 Participants |
| Reassuring | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q1 | 136 Participants |
| Control | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q1 | 114 Participants |
Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q2
Ease of which participants believe the back can be injured, you could injure your back if you are not careful. Questions based on Back Pain Attitude Questionnaire, item 11. Count reflects the number of participants who selected true
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Cautionary | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q2 | 242 Participants |
| Reassuring | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q2 | 251 Participants |
| Control | Perceived Spine Vulnerability, Q2 | 227 Participants |
Deadlift Self-Efficacy Questionnaire
Self-efficacy related to the deadlift was gathered by a single numeric rating scale question. Participants were asked to rate their confidence in succeeding at the deadlift event, from not confident at all - 0 to fully confident - 10).
Time frame: Outcome data was collected immediately following the intervention
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Cautionary | Deadlift Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | 10 score on a scale |
| Reassuring | Deadlift Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | 10 score on a scale |
| Control | Deadlift Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | 9 score on a scale |