Cargando…

Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Reports vary considerably concerning characteristics of patients who will respond to mobilizing exercises or manipulation. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to identify characteristics of patients with a changeable lumbar condition, i.e. presenting with centralization or...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Petersen, Tom, Christensen, Robin, Juhl, Carsten
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4393582/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25887046
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0526-1
_version_ 1782366182308839424
author Petersen, Tom
Christensen, Robin
Juhl, Carsten
author_facet Petersen, Tom
Christensen, Robin
Juhl, Carsten
author_sort Petersen, Tom
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reports vary considerably concerning characteristics of patients who will respond to mobilizing exercises or manipulation. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to identify characteristics of patients with a changeable lumbar condition, i.e. presenting with centralization or peripheralization, that were likely to benefit the most from either the McKenzie method or spinal manipulation. METHODS: 350 patients with chronic low back pain were randomized to either the McKenzie method or manipulation. The possible effect modifiers were age, severity of leg pain, pain-distribution, nerve root involvement, duration of symptoms, and centralization of symptoms. The primary outcome was the number of patients reporting success at two months follow-up. The values of the dichotomized predictors were tested according to the prespecified analysis plan. RESULTS: No predictors were found to produce a statistically significant interaction effect. The McKenzie method was superior to manipulation across all subgroups, thus the probability of success was consistently in favor of this treatment independent of predictor observed. When the two strongest predictors, nerve root involvement and peripheralization, were combined, the chance of success was relative risk 10.5 (95% CI 0.71-155.43) for the McKenzie method and 1.23 (95% CI 1.03-1.46) for manipulation (P = 0.11 for interaction effect). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any baseline variables which were statistically significant effect modifiers in predicting different response to either McKenzie treatment or spinal manipulation when compared to each other. However, we did identify nerve root involvement and peripheralization to produce differences in response to McKenzie treatment compared to manipulation that appear to be clinically important. These findings need testing in larger studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00939107 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0526-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4393582
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43935822015-04-12 Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial Petersen, Tom Christensen, Robin Juhl, Carsten BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Reports vary considerably concerning characteristics of patients who will respond to mobilizing exercises or manipulation. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to identify characteristics of patients with a changeable lumbar condition, i.e. presenting with centralization or peripheralization, that were likely to benefit the most from either the McKenzie method or spinal manipulation. METHODS: 350 patients with chronic low back pain were randomized to either the McKenzie method or manipulation. The possible effect modifiers were age, severity of leg pain, pain-distribution, nerve root involvement, duration of symptoms, and centralization of symptoms. The primary outcome was the number of patients reporting success at two months follow-up. The values of the dichotomized predictors were tested according to the prespecified analysis plan. RESULTS: No predictors were found to produce a statistically significant interaction effect. The McKenzie method was superior to manipulation across all subgroups, thus the probability of success was consistently in favor of this treatment independent of predictor observed. When the two strongest predictors, nerve root involvement and peripheralization, were combined, the chance of success was relative risk 10.5 (95% CI 0.71-155.43) for the McKenzie method and 1.23 (95% CI 1.03-1.46) for manipulation (P = 0.11 for interaction effect). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any baseline variables which were statistically significant effect modifiers in predicting different response to either McKenzie treatment or spinal manipulation when compared to each other. However, we did identify nerve root involvement and peripheralization to produce differences in response to McKenzie treatment compared to manipulation that appear to be clinically important. These findings need testing in larger studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00939107 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0526-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4393582/ /pubmed/25887046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0526-1 Text en © Petersen et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Petersen, Tom
Christensen, Robin
Juhl, Carsten
Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title_full Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title_short Predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following McKenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
title_sort predicting a clinically important outcome in patients with low back pain following mckenzie therapy or spinal manipulation: a stratified analysis in a randomized controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4393582/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25887046
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0526-1
work_keys_str_mv AT petersentom predictingaclinicallyimportantoutcomeinpatientswithlowbackpainfollowingmckenzietherapyorspinalmanipulationastratifiedanalysisinarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT christensenrobin predictingaclinicallyimportantoutcomeinpatientswithlowbackpainfollowingmckenzietherapyorspinalmanipulationastratifiedanalysisinarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT juhlcarsten predictingaclinicallyimportantoutcomeinpatientswithlowbackpainfollowingmckenzietherapyorspinalmanipulationastratifiedanalysisinarandomizedcontrolledtrial