Quality of Japanese Online Information on Causes of Neck Pain: A Biopsychosocial Analysis

Abstract

BackgroundWhile a considerable amount of information on neck pain is available online, the quality and comprehensiveness of this information can vary greatly. Particularly, the representation of the biopsychosocial model -which recognizes neck pain as an interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors -in online information remains unclear. Given the prevalence and accessibility of online health information, it is important to understand its quality and how it may shape individuals' understanding and management of neck pain. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze the quality of online Japanese information on the causes of neck pain from a biopsychosocial perspective. MethodologyA descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. The search term "neck pain" was utilized on Google's search engine in June 2023, and the websites from the first two pages of the search results were included in the study. Ten advertisement websites were excluded, resulting in 19 websites being analyzed. Each website was evaluated based on the presence of the Health-on-the-Net (HON) code. Biomedical and psychosocial factors present in each website were identified using the biopsychosocial analysis tool. Websites were then categorized as biomedical, limited biopsychosocial, or biopsychosocial based on the number of psychosocial factors they mentioned. ResultsAmong the 19 evaluated websites, only one possessed the HON certification, indicating a potential lack of credibility for the remaining sites. Of these websites, a large majority (63.2%) were classified as biomedical, while the remaining (36.8%) were classified as limited biopsychosocial. All the websites included some form of biomedical information on the causes of neck pain, while only seven websites mentioned psychological factors and one website mentioned social factors. The most common biomedical causes of neck pain discussed were cervical muscle strain and radicular pain due to cervical disc prolapse. On the other hand, the limited biopsychosocial websites highlighted perceived stress, depressed mood, and job-related mental stress as psychosocial factors contributing to neck pain. ConclusionsThis analysis revealed that freely accessible Japanese online information on the causes of neck pain, as found through Google, predominantly focuses on the biomedical causes, often neglecting or insufficiently addressing the psychosocial aspects. This finding underscores a gap between the available online resources and the comprehensive understanding promoted by the biopsychosocial model of health. Healthcare professionals need to be proactive in guiding their patients toward reliable, well-rounded resources that acknowledge the crucial role of psychosocial factors in neck pain. Furthermore, developers of online health information must aim to improve the depth and breadth of psychosocial factors discussed, promoting a more holistic understanding of neck pain for the Japanese public.

Don’t Throw the ‘Bio’ out of the Bio-Psycho-Social Model: Editorial for Spine Rehabilitation in 2022 and Beyond

“…Spinal injuries, disorders and disabilities are among the leading causes for work loss, suffering, and health care expenditures throughout the industrialized world [1][2][3][4][5][6]. The psycho-social and economic impact of general and specific spine disorders demands continued research into the most effective types of preventative and interventional treatment strategies.…”

“…The psycho-social and economic impact of general and specific spine disorders demands continued research into the most effective types of preventative and interventional treatment strategies. Specifically, low-back-pain (LBP)-and neck-pain-related disorders are the 1st and 4th leading causes of work loss and disability in the world [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Though billions are spent annually in experimental, epidemiology, and interventional strategies, precise treatment regimens aimed towards improving, resolving, and preventing these spinal disorders are highly varied and have limited and/or only short-term efficacy [1][2][3][4][5][6].…”

“…Specifically, low-back-pain (LBP)-and neck-pain-related disorders are the 1st and 4th leading causes of work loss and disability in the world [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Though billions are spent annually in experimental, epidemiology, and interventional strategies, precise treatment regimens aimed towards improving, resolving, and preventing these spinal disorders are highly varied and have limited and/or only short-term efficacy [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Thus, spinal disorders and related disabilities remain a high priority research avenue within the health sciences; in particular, there is an urgent need to increase the knowledge related to the manual rehabilitation disciplines [5,6].…”

“…Problematically, in recent decades, many authors have begun to minimize the 'bio' (tissue injury, damage, anatomical disorder, etc.) component of the problem, thus favoring the 'psycho-social' aspects such as catastrophizing, fear/anxiety and avoidance behavior components in the development of chronic pain in the patient [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9], as some authors are quite adamant that the 'tissue injury' component plays a rather limited role [6]. It can be argued, though, that the lack of appreciation for the tissue component of spine pain/disorders is shortsighted, based on an incomplete review of recent systematic reviews, and based on limitations with early analytical methods, whereas today's technology and more detailed investigations have identified a significant role for the tissue component as contributing to the presence and development of chronic spine pain and disability [12][13][14][15].…”