» Articles » PMID: 16181937

Lumbar Spine Segmental Mobility Assessment: an Examination of Validity for Determining Intervention Strategies in Patients with Low Back Pain

Overview
Date 2005 Sep 27
PMID 16181937
Citations 42
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To examine the predictive validity of posterior-anterior (PA) mobility testing in a group of patients with low back pain (LBP).

Design: Randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Outpatient physical therapy clinics.

Participants: Patients with LBP (N=131; mean age +/- standard deviation, 33.9+/-10.9 y; range, 19-59 y), and a median symptom duration of 27 days (range, 1-5941 d). Patients completed a baseline examination, including PA mobility testing, and were categorized with respect to both hypomobility and hypermobility (present or absent), and treated for 4 weeks.

Intervention: Seventy patients were randomized to an intervention involving manipulation and 61 to a stabilization exercise intervention.

Main Outcome Measures: Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) scores were collected at baseline and after 4 weeks. Three-way repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to assess the effect of mobility categorization and intervention group on the change on the ODQ with time. Number-needed-to-treat (NNT) statistics were calculated.

Results: Ninety-three (71.0%) patients were judged to have hypomobility present and 15 (11.5%) were judged with hypermobility present. The ANOVAs resulted in significant interaction effects. Pairwise comparisons showed greater improvements among patients receiving manipulation categorized with hypomobility present versus absent (mean difference, 23.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1%-42.4%), and among patients receiving stabilization categorized with hypermobility present versus absent (mean difference, 36.4%; 95% CI, 10.3%-69.3%). For patients with hypomobility, failure rates were 26% with manipulation and 74.4% with stabilization (NNT=2.1; 95% CI, 1.6-3.5). For patients with hypermobility, failure rates were 83.3% and 22.2% for manipulation and stabilization, respectively (NNT=1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-10.2).

Conclusions: Patients with LBP judged to have lumbar hypomobility experienced greater benefit from an intervention including manipulation; those judged to have hypermobility were more likely to benefit from a stabilization exercise program.

Citing Articles

Effects of Thoracic Spine Self-mobilization on Patients with Low Back Pain and Lumbar Hypermobility: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yasuda T, Jaotawipart S, Kuruma H Prog Rehabil Med. 2023; 8:20230022.

PMID: 37483879 PMC: 10359721. DOI: 10.2490/prm.20230022.


Lumbar spondylolisthesis: STATE of the art on assessment and conservative treatment.

Vanti C, Ferrari S, Guccione A, Pillastrini P Arch Physiother. 2021; 11(1):19.

PMID: 34372944 PMC: 8351422. DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00113-2.


Self-reports vs. physical measures of spinal stiffness.

Nielsen J, Glissmann Nim C, ONeill S, Boyle E, Hartvigsen J, Kawchuk G PeerJ. 2020; 8:e9598.

PMID: 33354411 PMC: 7727369. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.9598.


The bench-top accuracy of the VerteTrack spinal stiffness assessment device.

Young A, Swain M, Kawchuk G, Wong A, Downie A Chiropr Man Therap. 2020; 28(1):42.

PMID: 32807186 PMC: 7433107. DOI: 10.1186/s12998-020-00331-8.


Alternating lumbar lateral shift: a case report.

Peterson S, Laslett M J Man Manip Ther. 2020; 29(1):59-66.

PMID: 32615882 PMC: 7889245. DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2020.1787747.