Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Abstract 


Study design

Population-based cross-sectional postal survey and interview substudy.

Objectives

To examine the association between socioeconomic status and severe back pain and to determine whether this association can be explained by occupational factors.

Summary of background data

Like other disorders, back pain and its consequences are inversely related to indicators of high socioeconomic status.

Methods

The associations between indicators of socioeconomic status and presence or severity of current back pain (no back pain or back pain of low intensity and low disability versus back pain with high intensity and/or high disability) were investigated in a survey among German adults 25 to 74 years of age (n = 2731) and an interview substudy of 770 participants with a recent history of back pain.-

Results

In the survey, educational level was inversely associated with back pain and severe current back pain. Similarly, in the interview substudy, educational level, vocational training, occupational class, household income, and health insurance status were inversely related to severe current back pain. Age-adjusted and gender-adjusted odds ratios were 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.52) for immediate educational level and 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.73) for high educational level. Recalled work tasks at the onset of back pain were significant risk factors of severe current back pain (heavy physical work: odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% CI 1.06-2.93; work in bent position among males: OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.03-3.46). After adjusting for occupational class or work tasks, the association between educational level and severe current back pain remained unchanged.-

Conclusions

The findings support the hypothesis that severe back pain is less prevalent among adults of higher socioeconomic status. The underlying mechanism could not be explained by differences in self-reported occupational factors.

References 


Articles referenced by this article (27)


Show 10 more references (10 of 27)

Citations & impact 


Impact metrics

Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Article citations


Go to all (55) article citations