Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to critically analyze the meaning of NSLBP in scientific literature and its consequent influence on research and clinical practice.
Methodology and methods: Conducting a Foucauldian discourse analysis, we analyzed 24 articles that explicitly discussed the term’s meaning. Relevant articles were retrieved through a systematic literature search of six databases, supplemented by snowballing and expert recommendations.
Findings: Our analysis identified five distinct discourses analyzing NSLBP: “Biomedical,” “Neurocentric,” “Rational-Multifactorial,” “Complex-Multifactorial,” and “NSLBP Otherwise.”
Conclusion: Each identified discourse was underpinned by unique assumptions that both enable and constrain certain ways of thinking about, researching, and managing NSLBP. Most discourses were individual-centric, guiding a search for causes and solutions within the individual. An exception was the ”NSLBP Otherwise Discourse,” which enables a more society-centric perspective and encourages alternative views on NSLBP. Given the significant impact of NSLBP and the paucity of substantial breakthroughs in understanding and management, critical reflection on current discourses and their influence on clinical and research practices seem timely. Moreover, considering the present uncertainty surrounding NSLBP, embracing multiplicity could pave the way for a more expansive research agenda.
Methodology and methods: Conducting a Foucauldian discourse analysis, we analyzed 24 articles that explicitly discussed the term’s meaning. Relevant articles were retrieved through a systematic literature search of six databases, supplemented by snowballing and expert recommendations.
Findings: Our analysis identified five distinct discourses analyzing NSLBP: “Biomedical,” “Neurocentric,” “Rational-Multifactorial,” “Complex-Multifactorial,” and “NSLBP Otherwise.”
Conclusion: Each identified discourse was underpinned by unique assumptions that both enable and constrain certain ways of thinking about, researching, and managing NSLBP. Most discourses were individual-centric, guiding a search for causes and solutions within the individual. An exception was the ”NSLBP Otherwise Discourse,” which enables a more society-centric perspective and encourages alternative views on NSLBP. Given the significant impact of NSLBP and the paucity of substantial breakthroughs in understanding and management, critical reflection on current discourses and their influence on clinical and research practices seem timely. Moreover, considering the present uncertainty surrounding NSLBP, embracing multiplicity could pave the way for a more expansive research agenda.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-16 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Physiotherapy Theory and Practice |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 8 Jan 2025 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2025 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Keywords
- Non-specific low back pain
- discourse analysis
- qualitative research