↓ Skip to main content

Could low grade bacterial infection contribute to low back pain? A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
48 X users
patent
8 patents
facebook
9 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Could low grade bacterial infection contribute to low back pain? A systematic review
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0267-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donna M Urquhart, Yiliang Zheng, Allen C Cheng, Jeffrey V Rosenfeld, Patrick Chan, Susan Liew, Sultana Monira Hussain, Flavia M Cicuttini

Abstract

BackgroundRecently, there has been both immense interest and controversy regarding a randomised, controlled trial which showed antibiotics to be effective in the treatment of chronic low back pain (disc herniation with Modic Type 1 change). While this research has the potential to result in a paradigm shift in the treatment of low back pain, several questions remain unanswered. This systematic review aims to address these questions by examining the role of bacteria in low back pain and the relationship between bacteria and Modic change.MethodsWe conducted electronic searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE and included studies that examined the relationship between bacteria and back pain or Modic change. Studies were rated based on their methodological quality, a best-evidence synthesis was used to summarise the results, and Bradford Hill¿s criteria were used to assess the evidence for causation.ResultsEleven studies were identified. The median (range) age and percentage of female participants was 44.7 (41¿46.4) years and 41.5% (27¿59%), respectively, and in 7 of the 11 studies participants were diagnosed with disc herniation. Nine studies examined the presence of bacteria in spinal disc material and all identified bacteria, with the pooled estimate of the proportion with positive samples being 34%. Propionibacterium acnes was the most prevalent bacteria, being present in 7 of the 9 studies, with median (minimum, maximum) 45.0% (0¿86.0) of samples positive. The best evidence synthesis found moderate evidence for a relationship between the presence of bacteria and both low back pain with disc herniation and Modic Type 1 change with disc herniation. There was modest evidence for a cause-effect relationship.ConclusionsWe found that bacteria were common in the spinal disc material of people undergoing spinal surgery. There was moderate evidence for a relationship between the presence of bacteria and both low back pain with disc herniation and Modic Type 1 change associated with disc herniation and modest evidence for causation. However, further work is needed to determine whether these organisms are a result of contamination or represent low grade infection of the spine which contributes to chronic low back pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Student > Master 19 12%
Other 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Other 42 27%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 41 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2024.
All research outputs
#788,497
of 25,711,194 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#551
of 4,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,140
of 361,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#13
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,073 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.