Respondents

Gender

Gender

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Male 45 15.2 15.2 15.2

Female 252 84.8 84.8 100.0

Total 297 100.0 100.0

Age

Age_Category

Cumulative
Age_Category
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid 20-35 79 26.6 26.6 26.6

36-50 173 58.2 58.2 84.8

50< 45 15.2 15.2 100.0

Total 297 100.0 100.0

Civil Status

CivilStatus

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Married 263 88.6 88.9 88.9

Unmarried 25 8.4 8.4 97.3

Divoced 3 1.0 1.0 98.3

Widow 5 1.7 1.7 100.0

Total 296 99.7 100.0

Missing System 1 .3
Total 297 100.0
Respondents by LBP Severity

Severity_of_LBP

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Minor 97 32.7 32.7 32.7

Moderate 103 34.7 34.7 67.3

Severe 97 32.7 32.7 100.0

Total 297 100.0 100.0

ANALYSIS
Severity of LBP vs Gender

Gender * Severity_of_LBP Cross tabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

Gender Male Count 22 16 7 45

Expected Count 14.7 15.6 14.7 45.0

% within Gender 48.9% 35.6% 15.6% 100.0%

Female Count 75 87 90 252

Expected Count 82.3 87.4 82.3 252.0

% within Gender 29.8% 34.5% 35.7% 100.0%

Total Count 97 103 97 297

Expected Count 97.0 103.0 97.0 297.0

% within Gender 32.7% 34.7% 32.7% 100.0%

97 respondents suffer from low back pain. 35.7% of it female and 15.6% id male.

Moderate and severe LBP of female respondents are always higher than the expected count. There is
significant percentage of female suffer from LBP.

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-

Value df sided) (P)

Pearson Chi-Square 9.039a 2 .011

Likelihood Ratio 9.531 2 .009
Linear-by-Linear Association 8.991 1 .003
N of Valid Cases 297

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is 14.70.

If P=<0.05, the test is significant (there is significant relationship between Gender and Low back pain)

If P=>0.05, the test is not significant (there is not significant relationship between Gender and Low back
pain)

Above pearson chi-square test shows 0.011 P value, that means there is significant relationship between
Gender and Low back pain
Severity of LBP vs Age

Age_Cat * Severity_of_LBP Crosstabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

Age_Cat 20-35 Count 42 29 8 79

Expected Count 25.8 27.4 25.8 79.0

% within Age_Cat 53.2% 36.7% 10.1% 100.0%

36-50 Count 49 64 60 173

Expected Count 56.5 60.0 56.5 173.0

% within Age_Cat 28.3% 37.0% 34.7% 100.0%

50< Count 6 10 29 45

Expected Count 14.7 15.6 14.7 45.0

% within Age_Cat 13.3% 22.2% 64.4% 100.0%

Total Count 97 103 97 297

Expected Count 97.0 103.0 97.0 297.0

% within Age_Cat 32.7% 34.7% 32.7% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) (P)

Pearson Chi-Square 45.105a 4 3.78082238808501E-09

Likelihood Ratio 46.775 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 41.273 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 297

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is
14.70.

Pearson chi-square holds almost 0 (3.78082238808501E-09) P value, that means there is significant
relationship between Age and Low back pain
Severity of LBP vs Civil Status

CivilStatus * Severity_of_LBP Crosstabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

CivilStatus Married Count 81 90 92 263

Expected Count 85.3 91.5 86.2 263.0

% within CivilStatus 30.8% 34.2% 35.0% 100.0%

Unmarried Count 13 10 2 25

Expected Count 8.1 8.7 8.2 25.0

% within CivilStatus 52.0% 40.0% 8.0% 100.0%

Divoced Count 1 1 1 3

Expected Count 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0

% within CivilStatus 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0%

Widow Count 1 2 2 5

Expected Count 1.6 1.7 1.6 5.0

% within CivilStatus 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 100.0%

Total Count 96 103 97 296

Expected Count 96.0 103.0 97.0 296.0

% within CivilStatus 32.4% 34.8% 32.8% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-

Value df sided) (P)

Pearson Chi-Square 8.820a 6 .184

Likelihood Ratio 10.441 6 .107
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.358 1 .244
N of Valid Cases 296

a. 6 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is .97.

There is not Significant Relationship, Even P value shows that there is not significant relationship between
Civil Status and LBP, lack of respondents for divorced and widowed categories could be the reason.
Children vs LBP

Children * Severity_of_LBP Crosstabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

Children Yes Count 72 85 91 248

Expected Count 81.5 86.7 79.8 248.0

% within Children 29.0% 34.3% 36.7% 100.0%

No Count 23 16 2 41

Expected Count 13.5 14.3 13.2 41.0

% within Children 56.1% 39.0% 4.9% 100.0%

Total Count 95 101 93 289

Expected Count 95.0 101.0 93.0 289.0

% within Children 32.9% 34.9% 32.2% 100.0%

Majority of respondents who have children suffer from moderate and severe LBP.

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) (P)

Pearson Chi-Square 19.135a 2 0.0000699815371578649

Likelihood Ratio 23.262 2 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 18.688 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 289

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is
13.19.

There is Significant Relationship between severity of LBP and having children. Therefore it can be
assumed that marital status too has significant impact on LBP.
Smoking vs LBP

Smoker * Severity_of_LBP Crosstabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

Smoker Yes Count 5 4 1 10

Expected Count 3.3 3.4 3.3 10.0

% within Smoker 50.0% 40.0% 10.0% 100.0%

No Count 91 97 95 283

Expected Count 92.7 97.6 92.7 283.0

% within Smoker 32.2% 34.3% 33.6% 100.0%

Total Count 96 101 96 293

Expected Count 96.0 101.0 96.0 293.0

% within Smoker 32.8% 34.5% 32.8% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-

Value df sided) (P)

Pearson Chi-Square 2.668a 2 .263

Likelihood Ratio 3.134 2 .209
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.519 1 .112
N of Valid Cases 293

a. 3 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is 3.28.

The Result shows that there is no significant relationship between smoking and LBP. This cant be taken as
real interpretation due to lack of respondents to the smoking category. Majority of Nurses are females and
in Sri Lanka smoking population of female is very low.
Period of LBP & Period of Employment

Correlations

How long have you been

Period of Low Back Pain employed as a nurse? in
(Yrs) Years

Period of Low Back Pearson Correlation 1 .291**

Pain (Yrs) Sig. (2-tailed) 4.65193367629346E-07

N 297 289
**
How long have you Pearson Correlation .291 1
been employed as Sig. (2-tailed) 4.65193367629346E-07
a nurse? in Years N 289 289

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

There is small positive correlation (0.291) between the time period of suffering LBP and the Employment
period as a nurse.

Significance value (4.65193367629346E-07) is lower than the level of significance (0.01), which means
that there is enough evidence in the data set to suggest that the correlation (0.291) we observed does
exist in the population.
Severity of LBP vs Physical Information (Table 1)

Average_Physical_Info * Severity_of_LBP Crosstabulation

Severity_of_LBP

Minor Moderate Severe Total

Average_Physical_Info Seldom Count 0 0 1 1

Expected Count .3 .3 .3 1.0

% within .0% .0% 100.0% 100.0%

Average_Physical_Info

% within Severity_of_LBP .0% .0% 1.0% .3%

% of Total .0% .0% .3% .3%

1-3 per week Count 25 24 11 60

Expected Count 19.6 20.8 19.6 60.0

% within 41.7% 40.0% 18.3% 100.0%

Average_Physical_Info

% within Severity_of_LBP 25.8% 23.3% 11.3% 20.2%

% of Total 8.4% 8.1% 3.7% 20.2%

0-3 per day Count 62 62 55 179

Expected Count 58.5 62.1 58.5 179.0

% within 34.6% 34.6% 30.7% 100.0%

Average_Physical_Info

% within Severity_of_LBP 63.9% 60.2% 56.7% 60.3%

% of Total 20.9% 20.9% 18.5% 60.3%

More than 3 Count 10 17 30 57

times per day Expected Count 18.6 19.8 18.6 57.0

% within 17.5% 29.8% 52.6% 100.0%

Average_Physical_Info

% within Severity_of_LBP 10.3% 16.5% 30.9% 19.2%

% of Total 3.4% 5.7% 10.1% 19.2%

Total Count 97 103 97 297

Expected Count 97.0 103.0 97.0 297.0

% within 32.7% 34.7% 32.7% 100.0%

Average_Physical_Info

% within Severity_of_LBP 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

% of Total 32.7% 34.7% 32.7% 100.0%

Results shows; Majority of respondents who suffering from LBP within the categories which has frequent

physical movements (0-3 Per Day, More than 3 times per day)
Severity of LBP vs Physical Information

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2-

Value df sided) (P)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 19.568 6 .003
Likelihood Ratio 20.054 6 .003
Linear-by-Linear Association 12.921 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 297

a. 3 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is .33.

Above pearson chi-square test shows 0.003 P value, that means there is significant relationship between
Frequent Physical Movements and Low back pain
Severity of LBP vs Physical Information (Table 2)