A descriptive study of the centralization phenomenon. A prospective analysis

Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging findings among sciatica patients classified as centralizers or non-centralizers

OBJECTIVE

To compare if the degenerative findings from MRI differ between the sciatica patients classified as centralizers (CEN) and non-centralizers (Non-CEN) according to the McKenzie Method of mechanical diagnosis and therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Patients (N = 100) referred to a spine clinic of a single tertiary hospital for specialist consultation for sciatica. The McKenzie-based assessment was performed by the mechanical diagnosis and therapy-trained physiotherapists. Clinical data and prevalence of lumbar MRI findings were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in leg pain intensity between the groups. The Non-CEN had significantly more intense back pain, mean 56 (SD 30) and were more disabled 44 (SD 15) compared to the CEN mean 41 (SD 25) and mean 31 (11), measured with a visual analogue scale (0-100), and the Oswestry Disability Index (0-100), respectively. The CEN had more severe degenerative findings on MRI than the Non-CEN: vertebral end-plate changes were 63% and 43%; mean Pfirrmann's disc degeneration lumbar summary score was 12.8, and 10.6; and severity score of total damage was 12.0 and 10.1, respectively. There were differences neither in disc contour changes nor nerve root stenosis on MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Sciatica patients classified as non-centralizers had significantly more severe back pain, and were significantly more disabled than centralizers, who instead had more severe degenerative findings on MRI. Thus, classification to non-centralizers by the McKenzie method seems not predict higher incidence of degenerative findings on MRI compared to centralizers.

The McKenzie method for (sub)acute non-specific low back pain

BACKGROUND

There is widespread agreement amongst clinicians that people with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) comprise a heterogeneous group and that their management should be individually tailored. One treatment known by its tailored design is the McKenzie method (e.g. an individualized program of exercises based on clinical clues observed during assessment).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in people with (sub)acute non-specific low back pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers up to 15 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in adults with (sub)acute (less than 12 weeks) NSLBP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included five RCTs with a total of 563 participants recruited from primary or tertiary care. Three trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Scotland. Three trials received financial support from non-commercial funders and two did not provide information on funding sources. All trials were at high risk of performance and detection bias. None of the included trials measured adverse events. McKenzie method versus minimal intervention (educational booklet; McKenzie method as a supplement to other intervention - main comparison) There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may result in a slight reduction in pain in the short term (MD -7.3, 95% CI -12.0 to -2.56; 2 trials, 377 participants) but not in the intermediate term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -14.3 to 4.3; 1 trial, 180 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -2.5, 95% CI -7.5 to 2.0; 2 trials, 328 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD -0.9, 95% CI -7.3 to 5.6; 1 trial, 180 participants). McKenzie method versus manual therapy There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce pain in the short term (MD -8.7, 95% CI -27.4 to 10.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) and may result in a slight increase in pain in the intermediate term (MD 7.0, 95% CI 0.7 to 13.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -15.0 to 5.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 4.3, 95% CI -0.7 to 9.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). McKenzie method versus other interventions (massage and advice) There is very low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD 4.0, 95% CI -15.4 to 23.4; 1 trial, 30 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 10.0, 95% CI -8.9 to 28.9; 1 trial, 30 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low- to very low-certainty evidence, the treatment effects for pain and disability found in our review were not clinically important. Thus, we can conclude that the McKenzie method is not an effective treatment for (sub)acute NSLBP.

Effectiveness of Local Cryotherapy Treatment with the Use of Carbon Dioxide and Liquid Nitrogen Among Patients with Low Back Pain Syndrome

Introduction: Low back pain syndromes (LBPS) are common. One of the methods of treating LBPS is local cryotherapy, which can be based on various cooling substances. In the available literature, it is suggested that effective cold treatment may depend on the type and temperature of the cooling substance used. Research objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 local cryotherapy (Carbon Dioxide and Liquid Nitrogen) types among patients with low back pain syndrome (LBPS). Materials and methods: The study included 60 patients diagnosed with chronic LBPS of discopathic origin. Patients were randomised into 2 study groups. Local cryotherapy treatment with Carbon Dioxide was used in the 1st group (G1), while in the 2nd (G2), cryotherapy treatment with applied Liquid Nitrogen. Two measurements were taken, before and after 2 weeks treatment. The following were used for assessment: centralisation of symptoms (Pain Drawings), pain intensity (Numeral Rating Scale), duration of the current pain episode (Quebec Task Force Classification), level of disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), quality and intensity of subjective pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire), patients’ emotional state (Adjectival Scale for Testing Emotions) and self-efficacy related to pain (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). Statistical analysis was performed via the Student’s t-test for dependent and independent samples. Results: In both study groups, the perceived pain was either completely eliminated or centralised to the spine, hip joint and buttock. The level of pain, disability and pain-related self-efficacy decreased significantly, regardless of the therapy used. In terms of these variables, no greater therapeutic efficacy was demonstrated with either cryostimulation treatment. Qualitative assessment of pain and emotions (especially anxiety and anger) decreased significantly in G1 and G2. However, in the nitrogen-treated group, a significantly greater improvement was noted for WOB:OC, anger and anxiety scores (for these variables, the G2 group started from a higher level prior to therapy). Conclusions: Both analysed treatments are equally effective in terms of variables such as: centralisation of symptoms, level of pain intensity, disability, joy, self-efficacy related to pain, as well as the majority of the analysed MPQ indicators. Cryostimulation with liquid nitrogen may be more effective, but only in improving the WOB: OC index of the MPQ questionnaire and the level of anger and anxiety. Nonetheless, the obtained results do not allow for definitive confirmation of these results. The use of both cryostimulation treatment methods may assist in the treatment process of LBPS.

Influence of Tensioner's Mobilization on the Centralization of Symptoms in Cervicobrachial Pain Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Study Design

This study was designed as a randomized controlled trial.

Purpose

The present study aimed to determine the impact of neural mobilization by tensioner’s technique (NMTT) on the centralization of symptoms and pain in patients with cervicobrachial pain syndrome (CBPS).

Overview of Literature

CBPS is a disabling condition of the neck that is characterized by pain and paresthesia in the upper quarter. Several techniques have successfully provided immediate and long-term relief in CBPS; however, few studies have evaluated the effect of these techniques on the centralization of symptoms.

Methods

Thirty patients aged 18–45 years with a complaint of pain in the neck that had persisted for 2–12 weeks radiating to the arm and fulfilling Elvey’s criteria were randomly selected and divided into two groups. Group A received NMTT plus conventional treatment (hot pack and postural advice with cervical lateral glide), and group B received only conventional treatment 3 times a week for 2 weeks. The outcome measures were Wernicke’s scale score for the centralization of symptoms and Visual Analog Scale score for pain intensity. Within- and between-group comparisons were made before initiating treatment and at the end of the 3rd and 6th sessions. Within group analyses for the centralization values were performed using Friedmann test, and between-group analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney test. A 2×3 mixed model of the analysis of variance was used for analyzing the pain levels.

Results

There was a significant difference (p<0.05) within and between the groups for both the measures at the end of the 3rd and 6th sessions. Thus, NMTT may be beneficial in decreasing the peripheralization of symptoms and pain intensity in patients with CBPS.

Conclusions

NMTT can be used as an alternative and effective treatment option for patients with CBPS.

Variables predicting prognosis following nerve mobilisation in individuals with cervicobrachial pain

Background/Aims

The causes of cervicobrachial pain are highly variable and it is often difficult to predict patient response to multimodal treatments, such as neural mobilisation. Little research has focused on identifying subgroups of patients who may show improvement following neural mobilisation. This study aimed to identify the variables that may influence response to nerve mobilisation in individuals with cervicobrachial pain.

Methods

A quasi-experimental prospective single-arm study was conducted with 50 participants. Data were collected on various potentially prognostic variables from baseline questionnaires, medical history and physical examination. Participants received 10 days of pain modulation treatment and nerve mobilisation exercises. The Neck Disability Index, Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Upper Limb Tension Test were performed before and after treatment to determine the effect of nerve mobilisation. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, univariate correlation, multivariate stepwise logistic regression and non-parametric testing at α≤0.05.

Results

Four variables had a positive influence on treatment outcome: age <41 years, duration of symptoms ≤1 year, fasting blood glucose level ≤5.6 mmol/L (≤100 mg/dL) and systolic blood pressure ≤140 mmHg. On multiple linear regression, the presence of hypertension and diabetes were strongly associated with poor outcomes following nerve mobilisation.

Conclusions

Younger individuals with normal fasting blood glucose and systolic blood pressure who have had cervicobrachial pain for less than a year are more likely to benefit from pain modulation and neural mobilisation.

Application and utility of a clinical framework for spinally referred neck-arm pain: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study protocol

BACKGROUND

The clinical presentation of neck-arm pain is heterogeneous with varying underlying pain types (nociceptive/neuropathic/mixed) and pain mechanisms (peripheral/central sensitization). A mechanism-based clinical framework for spinally referred pain has been proposed, which classifies into (1) somatic pain, (2) neural mechanosensitivity, (3) radicular pain, (4) radiculopathy and mixed pain presentations. This study aims to (i) investigate the application of the clinical framework in patients with neck-arm pain, (ii) determine their somatosensory, clinical and psychosocial profile and (iii) observe their clinical course over time.

METHOD

We describe a study protocol. Patients with unilateral neck-arm pain (n = 180) will undergo a clinical examination, after which they will be classified into subgroups according to the proposed clinical framework. Standardized quantitative sensory testing (QST) measurements will be taken in their main pain area and contralateral side. Participants will have to complete questionnaires to assess function (Neck Disability Index), psychosocial factors (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Depression, anxiety and stress scale), neuropathic pain (Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions, PainDETECT Questionnaire) and central sensitization features (Central Sensitization Inventory). Follow-ups at three, six and 12 months include the baseline questionnaires. The differences of QST data and questionnaire outcomes between and within groups will be analyzed using (M)AN(C)OVA and/or regression models. Repeated measurement analysis of variance or a linear mixed model will be used to calculate the differences between three, six, and 12 months outcomes. Multiple regression models will be used to analyze potential predictors for the clinical course.

CONCLUSION

The rationale for this study is to assess the usability and utility of the proposed clinical framework as well as to identify possible differing somatosensory and psychosocial phenotypes between the subgroups. This could increase our knowledge of the underlying pain mechanisms. The longitudinal analysis may help to assess possible predictors for pain persistency.

Are improvements in symptoms associated with changes in lumbopelvic posture in patients with posterior derangement using Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy?

BACKGROUND

Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) manages low back pain (LBP) with subgroup classifications. For a subgroup of the posterior derangement syndrome, postural education limiting lumbar flexion is included. However, it is not known if habitual posture in this subgroup actually changes through MDT management because of technical difficulties in monitoring habitual lumbopelvic posture. However, a wearable device, "LUMOback", which can evaluate the proportion of time with a neutral lumbopelvic posture (posture score), has now become available.

OBJECTIVE

To preliminarily investigate whether the posture score changes through the course of MDT management.

METHODS

Primary inclusion criterion was LBP with the posterior derangement syndrome. Primary outcome measure was the posture score during one week. The posture score was assessed one week before and six weeks after the initial MDT management, which included extension exercises and postural education.

RESULTS

All participants (n= 8) reported a successful treatment effect after the 6-week MDT intervention; however, there was no specific trend in the posture score (Friedman test: p= 0.277).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found evidence that the proportion of time with a neutral lumbopelvic posture during daily living, the posture score, which was measured with the LUMOback, did not systematically change with MDT management.

Convergence and Divergence of Exercise-Based Approaches That Incorporate Motor Control for the Management of Low Back Pain

Many approaches for low back pain (LBP) management focus on modifying motor control, which refers to motor, sensory, and central processes for control of posture and movement. A common assumption across approaches is that the way an individual loads the spine by typical postures, movements, and muscle activation strategies contributes to LBP symptom onset, persistence, and recovery. However, there are also divergent features from one approach to another. This commentary presents key principles of 4 clinical physical therapy approaches, including how each incorporates motor control in LBP management, the convergence and divergence of these approaches, and how they interface with medical LBP management. The approaches considered are movement system impairment syndromes of the lumbar spine, Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy, motor control training, and the integrated systems model. These were selected to represent the diversity of applications, including approaches using motor control as a central or an adjunct feature, and approaches that are evidence based or evidence informed. This identification of areas of convergence and divergence of approaches is designed to clarify the key aspects of each approach and thereby serve as a guide for the clinician and to provide a platform for considering a hybrid approach tailored to the individual patient. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(6):437-452. Epub 15 May 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8451.

Classification by pain pattern for patients with cervical spine radiculopathy

OBJECTIVES

A prospective observational cohort study was conducted to (1) report the prevalence of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) classifications, Centralization (CEN), and Non-CEN among patients with Cervical Spine Radiculopathy (CSR), and (2) describe the association between classification via CEN and Non-CEN and clinical outcomes at follow-up.

METHODS

Data were collected from 680 consecutive patients who presented to outpatient, orthopedic physical therapy clinics with primary complaints of neck pain with and without radiculopathy; thirty-nine patients (6%) met the physical examination inclusion criteria for CSR. First examination and follow-up data were completed by 19 patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine percent of patients' conditions were classified as Reducible Derangement at first examination and 21% were classified as either Irreducible Derangement, Entrapment, or Mechanically Inconclusive. The prevalence of CEN and Non-CEN was 36.8% and 47.4%, respectively. All patients treated via MDT methods made clinically significant improvements in disability, but not pain intensity, at follow-up. The magnitude of change in clinical outcomes was greatest for patients who exhibited CEN; however, the changes in disability and pain intensity at follow-up were not statistically significant compared to patients who exhibited Non-CEN at first examination. Patients who exhibited CEN were discharged, on average, ten days earlier and had one less treatment visit compared to patients who exhibited Non-CEN.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study show that patients with CSR can be classified and treated via MDT methods and experienced clinically significant improvements in disability, but not pain intensity, at follow-up. Providers should consider MDT classification and treatment to improve clinical outcomes for their patients affected by CSR.

Directional preference, cognitive behavioural interventions, and outcomes among patients with chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Graded activity and graded exposure are recommended cognitive behavioural approaches to improve function and pain outcomes for patients receiving physiotherapy for chronic nonspecific low back pain. Directional preference identified following the McKenzie method is also associated with favourable patient outcomes. Study objectives were to examine associations between graded activity and/or graded exposure, and directional preference or no directional preference combined with or without graded activity/graded exposure subgroups, and function and pain outcomes among patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain managed by clinicians credentialed in the McKenzie approach.

METHOD

Cohort study: Subjects (n = 801) with chronic nonspecific low back pain completed intake surveys, that is, the Lumbar Computer Adaptive Test measuring function and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale measuring pain, and questions addressing their demographic, lifestyle, and health status. Directional preference was determined at intake. Treatment with graded activity/graded exposure during the episode of care was recorded. Function and pain measures were repeated at discharge. Two models were developed controlling for potential confounding effects. The first model examined associations between patients receiving versus not receiving graded activity/graded exposure. The second model examined interaction effects between four combinations of directional preference and graded activity/graded exposure. Outcome measures were changes in function and pain during rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Regarding the first objective, there were no clinically relevant differences between treatment versus no treatment with graded activity/graded exposure, and functional outcomes. Regarding the second objective, patients in the no-directional preference group were more likely to see benefits from the addition of graded activity/graded exposure to their treatment groups than those with a directional preference.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians using McKenzie methods might attain improved patient functional outcomes when augmenting treatment with graded activity and/or graded exposure among patients who do not demonstrate directional preference.

Initial pain and disability characteristics can assist the prediction of the centralization phenomenon on initial assessment of patients with low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Determine whether the achievement of the centralization phenomenon on initial assessment of patients with low back pain (LBP) can be predicted by history and physical examination variables.

METHODS

Ninety patients referred to physical therapy due to LBP completed pain, disability, and fear-avoidance questionnaires, followed by a complete history and a physical examination based on mechanical diagnosis and therapy principles. Patients were subsequently classified as centralizers or noncentralizers. Univariate, followed by multivariate analysis was performed to identify history and physical examination variables that predicted the occurrence of the CP. Factors retained in the multivariate analysis were used to develop a clinical prediction rule (CPR).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (31%) were classified as centralizers immediately following assessment. Three predictors were retained in the multivariate analysis: (1) modified Oswestry Disability Index score lower than 33%; (2) intensity of the most distal symptom lower than 6/10; and (3) back pain equal to or greater than leg pain. The resultant CPR indicated the presence of all three variables increased the post-test likelihood of the CP to 57%.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study suggest the CP may be considerably more likely in less severe cases of LBP characterized by lower disability, lower intensity of distal symptoms, and a greater back-versus-leg pain intensity. Pending future validation, the CPR developed in this study may aide decision making regarding the initial management strategy of patients with LBP.

Directional preference constructs for patients' neck pain in the absence of centralization

Objectives: We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective, observational cohort study to (1) report the prevalence of Directional Preference (DP) constructs at first examination for patients with cervical spine challenges, and (2) determine the association between DP constructs and clinical outcomes at discharge from physical therapy. Methods: We analyzed data collected from 718 consecutive patients who presented to outpatient, private practice clinics with primary complaints of non-specific neck pain; 200 patients met the inclusion criteria and completed first examination and discharge data. Statistical analysis determined the association between DP constructs at first examination and clinical outcomes at discharge. Results: The findings in this investigation were that (1) the most prevalent DP constructs at first examination were related to ROM and pain intensity including Patient Reported Improvement in ROM (79.5%), Increase in Spine ROM (32.5%), and Pain Intensity Change (15.0%), (2) all DP groups improved and met the MCID for disability and pain intensity change at discharge except for the group that did not exhibit Increase in Spine ROM for pain intensity, (3) no clinically significant differences in pain intensity or disability existed between DP groups at discharge, and (4) 28.5% and 6.5% of patients exhibited a relative increase in cervical spine extension and flexion ROM, respectively, post-repeated movement testing on the first examination. Discussion: The most prevalent DP constructs at first examination were related to ROM and pain intensity, and each was associated with a comparable clinical trajectory in terms of pain and disability outcomes at discharge. The findings of this study help Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) providers understand the common DP constructs encountered in routine clinical practice and their relation to pain and disability outcomes for patients with cervical spine challenges. Level of Evidence: 2b.

Reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy System in Patients With Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

An updated summary of the evidence for the reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) system in patients with spinal pain is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the evidence on the intrarater and interrater reliability of MDT in patients with spinal pain.

METHODS

Searches in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PEDro, and Scopus were conducted for this systematic review. We included any study design as long as reliability of the MDT method was tested in patients with spinal pain. We collected data on the reliability of MDT to identify main and subsyndromes, directional preference, the centralization phenomenon, and lateral shift. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability and the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies checklists.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included (8 studies on back pain, pooled n = 2160 patients; 3 studies on neck pain, pooled n = 45 patients; and 3 studies recruited mixed spinal conditions, pooled n = 389 patients). Studies investigating patients with back pain reported kappa estimates ranging from 0.26 to 1.00 (main and subsyndromes), 0.27 to 0.90 (directional preference), and 0.11 to 0.70 (centralization phenomenon). Kappa estimates for studies investigating neck pain ranged from 0.47 to 0.84 (main and subsyndromes) and 0.46 (directional preference). In mixed populations, kappa estimates ranged from 0.56 to 0.96 (main and subsyndromes).

CONCLUSION

The MDT system appears to have acceptable interrater reliability for classifying patients with back pain into main and subsyndromes when applied by therapists who have completed the credentialing examination, but unacceptable reliability in other therapists. We found conflicting evidence regarding the reliability of the MDT system in patients with neck pain or mixed pain locations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(12):923-933. Epub 22 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7876.

Socioeconomic factors, psychological factors, and function in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain from rural Nepal

Background

Both socioeconomic and psychological factors have been shown to predict patient function in samples of individuals with chronic pain in Western countries. However, little is known about their role as predictors of function in individuals with chronic pain from developing countries.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between measures of socioeconomic factors (income, education) and psychological factors (catastrophizing and resilience) and measures of function in a sample of individuals with chronic pain from rural Nepal. In addition, we sought to evaluate the moderating effects of socioeconomic factors on the associations between the psychological variables and function.

Methods

We interviewed 143 adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain from rural areas of Nepal to assess income, education level, pain intensity, catastrophizing, resilience, physical function, and depression. We performed two regression analyses to evaluate the direct and unique effects of the socioeconomic and psychological variables and pain intensity as predictors of patient function, as well as the moderating influence of income, education level, and pain intensity on the associations between the psychological variables and function.

Results

Education and income both predicted physical function, but only income predicted depression. In addition, pain catastrophizing, but not resilience, evidenced a direct and significant independent association with depression. Neither catastrophizing nor resilience made independent and significant direct contributions to the prediction of physical function. The association between resilience and physical function was moderated by pain intensity and income, and income (but not education or pain intensity) moderated the associations between both 1) resilience and depression and 2) catastrophizing and depression.

Conclusion

The results suggest the possibility that cultural differences may influence the role that psychosocial factors play in chronic pain adjustment. These findings have important implications regarding how psychosocial pain interventions should be adapted by individuals in developing countries.

Directional preference constructs for patients' low back pain in the absence of centralization

Objectives: A detailed description of how Directional Preference (DP) constructs are measured could accelerate research to practice translation and improve research findings for Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) stakeholders. A secondary analysis of a prospective, observational cohort study was conducted to understand (1) the type and prevalence of DP constructs at first examination and (2) the relationships between DP constructs and clinical outcomes at follow-up. Methods: Data were collected and analyzed from 1485 consecutive patients who presented to outpatient, private practice clinics with primary complaints of non-specific low back pain (LBP); 400 patients met the inclusion criteria and completed first examination and follow-up data. Statistical analysis determined prevalence and the relationships between DP constructs at first examination and clinical outcomes at follow-up. Results: The primary findings in this investigation were that (1) the most prevalent DP constructs at first examination were related to range of motion (ROM) and pain intensity (Patient Reported Improvement in ROM (74.8%), Increase in Spine ROM (29.5%), and Pain Intensity Change (17.3%)), (2) all groups improved and made clinically meaningful improvements in disability and pain intensity at follow-up, (3) no clinically significant differences in disability or pain intensity were found between the groups at follow-up, and (4) 26.5% and 6.5% of patients exhibited a relative increase in lumbar spine extension and flexion ROM, respectively, post repeated movement testing on the first examination. Discussion: The findings in this study assist providers in making assessment and treatment decisions with their patients by offering insight regarding the most prevalent DP constructs typically found at the first examination and their subsequent association with outcome when Centralization (CEN) does not occur. Recommendations for researchers have been made to further explore the DP framework used in this study.

McKenzie mechanical syndromes coincide with biopsychosocial influences, including central sensitization: a descriptive study of individuals with chronic neck pain

BACKGROUND

Mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) aims to assess and classify patients into theoretically mutually exclusive subgroups, in order to direct treatment. However, the latest evidence for biopsychosocial influence-central sensitization (CS) and psychological distress-have not been assessed in conjunction with MDT.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Determine the percentage of patients categorized into the MDT subgroups; (2) characterize the biopsychosocial clinical profile (presence of CS and psychological distress); and (3) identify associations between pain, disability, and biopsychosocial influences among this cohort.

METHODS

Eighty four patients with chronic neck pain were recruited by 10 certified MDT therapists using a convenience (consecutive) sampling method. Patients were evaluated using MDT principles and also completed an online survey to measure CS (using the Central Sensitization Inventory [CSI]), pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia.

RESULTS

The proportions of the subgroups derangement (DER), dysfunction, postural and 'other' were 74.4, 2.4, 1.2, 20.7%, respectively. CS was observed in 62% of our sample (CSI score ≥ 40). CS was also observed in 64.7% of patients of the DER subgroup. Almost half of our sample (47.8%) demonstrated the co-occurrence of CS and DER, while 38% presented with DER syndrome, CS, and kinesiophobia.

CONCLUSION

The majority of our patients were classified as DER; they also presented with high levels of CS and/or psychological distress. This suggests that MDT mechanical subgroups, particularly DER, can present with co-occurring biopsychosocial influences. Without assessing CS and psychological distress, MDT therapists may miss crucial information. Further research is required to determine the optimal management of patients presenting with mechanical and non-mechanical drivers of pain.

Effectiveness of the McKenzie Method of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy for Treating Low Back Pain: Literature Review With Meta-analysis

Study Design Literature review with meta-analysis. Background The McKenzie Method of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT), a classification-based system, was designed to classify patients into homogeneous subgroups to direct treatment. Objectives To examine the effectiveness of MDT for improving pain and disability in patients with either acute (less than 12 weeks in duration) or chronic (greater than 12 weeks in duration) low back pain (LBP). Methods Randomized controlled trials examining MDT in patients with LBP were identified from 6 databases. Independent investigators assessed the studies for exclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval were calculated to compare the effects of MDT to those of other interventions in patients with acute or chronic LBP. Results Of the 17 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 11 yielded valid data for analysis. In patients with acute LBP, there was no significant difference in pain resolution (P = .11) and disability (P = .61) between MDT and other interventions. In patients with chronic LBP, there was a significant difference in disability (SMD, -0.45), with results favoring MDT compared to exercise alone. There were no significant differences between MDT and manual therapy plus exercise (P>.05) for pain and disability outcomes. Conclusion There is moderate- to high-quality evidence that MDT is not superior to other rehabilitation interventions for reducing pain and disability in patients with acute LBP. In patients with chronic LBP, there is moderate- to high-quality evidence that MDT is superior to other rehabilitation interventions for reducing pain and disability; however, this depends on the type of intervention being compared to MDT. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1a. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(6):476-490. Epub 30 Mar 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7562.

Pain pattern classification and directional preference for patients with neck pain

Objectives: Pain Pattern Classification (PPC) and Directional Preference (DP) have been shown to be predictive of health care outcomes and serve to guide orthopedic clinical decision making. We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study to verify the association between PPC, DP, and clinical outcomes. Methods: Clinical outcome measures including pain intensity and disability were completed at first examination and follow-up by 335 patients. A Pearson's chi-squared test was used to determine differences in prevalence rates for the categorical variables, and two-sample t-tests were used to determine differences in rates for the continuous variables. A Tukey's range test was used to determine differences in follow-up pain intensity and disability for neck pain dual-classification schemes. Results: The prevalence of DP was 82.4%. The prevalence of CEN, Non-CEN, and Non-Classifiable (NC) was 15.2%, 42.1%, and 25.1%, respectively. The prevalence of DP was lowest for patients with sub-acute symptoms and who were <45 years old. Patients classified as DP CEN had, on average 2.62 NDI units less than patients classified as Non-DP. Patients classified as DP CEN had, on average, 0.90 pain intensity units less than patients classified as Non-DP at follow-up. Patients who demonstrated DP CEN did not have clinically significant lower pain intensity or disability at follow-up than patients who demonstrated Non-DP. Discussion: The results of this investigation need to be interpreted with caution with respect to the study design and it's subsequent strengths and limitations. Level of Evidence: 1b.

A preliminary analysis of outcomes and end range procedures used to achieve centralization in people with low back pain

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the relationship between clinical outcome and the types of end range procedures used to achieve centralization in a sample of patients with low back pain (LBP) and/or peripheral symptoms.

METHODS

Small sample retrospective analysis of an observational cohort. Patients with LBP who centralized during initial visit at two physical therapy clinics were recruited to participate. The types of end range procedures used to achieve centralization were documented during each office visit and a chart review was performed after 4 weeks. Outcomes were determined by improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score after 4 weeks. Statistical analysis determined the association between the types of end range procedures and outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients gave consent to participate. Nineteen patients met inclusion criteria and were included in data analysis. After 4 weeks, the improvement in mean ODI scores was 15.89 ± 16.28. Differing end range procedures were used to achieve centralization within this cohort. The types of end range procedures used to achieve centralization were not significantly associated with outcomes.

DISCUSSION

The results observed in this study promote exhausting many different types of end range procedures to determine if centralization can be achieved. Limiting the end range procedures used to assess centralization may fail to identify patients who can achieve centralization and subsequently have positive clinical outcomes. Larger cohort studies investigating relationships between outcomes and the types of end range procedures used to achieve centralization would contribute to management of people with LBP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Pain pattern classification and directional preference are associated with clinical outcomes for patients with low back pain

Pain Pattern Classification (PPC) and Directional Preference (DP) have shown merit as reliable and predictable clinical solutions to help reduce the burden posed by low back pain (LBP). We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study to verify the association between PPC, DP, and clinical outcomes. We hypothesized that (1) patients who demonstrated DP Centralization (CEN) would have lower pain intensity and disability at follow-up than patients who demonstrated Non-DP Non-CEN, and (2) the prevalence of DP at first examination would be lowest for patients with chronic LBP and are greater than 65 years old. First examination and follow-up data were completed by 639 patients. Clinical outcome measures, including pain intensity and disability, were collected at first examination and follow-up. Baseline comparisons were made between groups with first examination data only and groups with first examination data and follow-up data. A Pearson's chi-squared test was used to determine differences in prevalence rates for the categorical variables, and two-sample t-tests were used for the continuous variables. A Turkey's range test was used to determine differences in follow-up pain intensity and disability for LBP dual-classifications. Multiple regression was used to investigate DP prevalence considering risk adjusted factors. Overall prevalence of DP was 84.5% and prevalence was lowest for patients with sub-acute symptoms. No significant difference existed for the prevalence of DP for patients based on age. Patients classified as DP CEN had, on average, 1.99 pain intensity units less than patients classified as Non-DP Non-CEN at follow-up. Patients classified as DP CEN had, on average, 3.43 RMDQ units less than patients classified as Non-DP Non-CEN at follow-up.These findings support previous reports, verifying the association between LBP dual-classification schemes and clinical outcomes.

The effect of direction specific thoracic spine manipulation on the cervical spine: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the difference on neck outcomes with directional manipulation to the thoracic spine. There is evidence that thoracic spine manipulation is effective in treating patients with neck pain. However, there is no research that determines if the assessment of directional hypomobility and the selection of thrust direction offer improved outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 69 patients with cervical spine pain were randomly assigned to receive either a manipulation that was consistent with their thoracic spine motion loss (matched) or opposite their motion loss (unmatched). The patient was given care consistent with the orthopedic section guidelines for neck pain and the physical therapist's clinical reasoning. Baseline outcome measures (NPRS, NDI, GROC) were taken and reassessed two days and two weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

Both groups had positive results when pain, neck disability index, and global rating of change were assessed. There was no difference between the matched and unmatched groups.

DISCUSSION

Directional manipulation of hypomobile thoracic spine segments may not be required to improved outcomes in patients with neck pain. Future studies should assess a variety of factors when determining the best available treatment, including manual therapy procedures, exercise, and patient selection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

Consistency of commonly used orthopedic special tests of the shoulder when used with the McKenzie system of mechanical diagnosis and therapy

BACKGROUND

Shoulder Orthopedic Special Tests (OSTs) are used to assist with diagnosis in shoulder disorders. Issues with reliability and validity exist, making their interpretation challenging. Exploring OST results on repeated testing within Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) shoulder classifications may offer insight into the poor performance of these tests.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate in patients with shoulder complaints, whether MDT classifications affect the agreement of OST results over the course of treatment.

METHODS

An international group of MDT clinicians recruited 105 patients with shoulder problems. Three commonly used OSTs (Empty Can, Hawkins-Kennedy, and Speed's tests) were utilized. Results of the OSTs were collected at sessions 1, 3, 5 and 8, or at discharge from an MDT classification-based treatment. The Kappa statistic was utilized to determine the agreement of the OST results over time for each of the MDT classifications.

RESULTS

The overall Kappa values for Empty Can, Hawkins-Kennedy and Speed's tests were 0.28 (SE = 0.07), 0.28 (SE = 0.07) and 0.29 (SE = 0.07), respectively. The highest level of agreement was for Articular Dysfunction for the Empty Can test (0.84, SE = 0.19). For shoulder Derangements, there was no agreement for any of the OSTs (P values > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The lack of agreement when the OSTs were consecutively tested in the presence of the MDT Derangement classification contrasted with the other MDT classifications. The presence of Derangement was responsible for reducing the overall agreement of commonly used OSTs and may explain the poor consistency for OSTs.

Associations between changes in knee pain location and clinical symptoms in people with medial knee osteoarthritis using footwear for self-management: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether change in pain location is associated with clinically-relevant improvements in walking pain severity and physical dysfunction in people with medial tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA) using footwear for self-management.

DESIGN

We analysed a sub-set of 91 participants pooled from both arms of a 6-month randomised controlled trial of footwear for knee OA. The Photographic Knee Pain Map was self-administered to generate changes in the number of painful zones ('unchanged', 'increased', 'decreased') and anatomical patterns of pain ('unchanged', 'no longer diffuse', 'becoming diffuse', 'other pattern changes'). Improvement in symptoms was determined using the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) in pain severity on a numeric rating scale, and function with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Fisher's exact tests examined differences in symptom improvement across categories of change and odds ratios (ORs, 95% CI) were calculated (adjusted for treatment allocation).

RESULTS

Seventy-four percent (n = 67) of participants reported a change in pain location, and 46-50% (n = 42-45) reported clinically-relevant improvements in pain and function respectively. Fewer participants 'becoming diffuse' reported improved pain (n = 0, 0%) when compared to the other pattern change categories (P = 0.012). Participants with 'no longer diffuse' (OR (95% CI) = 0.3 (0.1-0.9) or 'becoming diffuse' (OR (95% CI) = 0.0 (0.0-0.4) pain patterns had significantly lower odds of improved function than those with 'other pattern changes'.

CONCLUSION

Participants either developing into, or changing from, diffuse pain patterns were less likely to experience improvement in pain and/or function when self-managing with footwear.

Efficacy of kinesiology tape versus postural correction exercises on neck disability and axioscapular muscles fatigue in mechanical neck dysfunction: A randomized blinded clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Mechanical neck dysfunction (MND), with axioscapular muscles fatigue, is highly prevalent worldwide. While postural correction is commonly used for its treatment, efficacy of kinesiology tape (KT) has received considerable attention.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of KT versus correction exercises on neck disability, and axioscapular muscles fatigue in MND patients.

METHODS

46 MND patients were randomly assigned into 1 of 2 groups receiving 4 weeks treatment of either KT or correction exercises. Neck disability and axioscapular muscles fatigue as median frequency of electromyography (EMG-MF) were measured pre and post treatment.

RESULTS

Group-by-time interaction was not significant in the multivariable test. Post hoc tests revealed that KT produced more disability reduction than the postural exercises. However, there was no significant interaction for EMG-MF.

CONCLUSIONS

KT has been found to be more effective than postural exercises to reduce neck disability. However, both modalities have similar effects to reduce axioscapular muscles fatigue.

Kinesio taping versus postural correction exercises on mechanically triggered neck dysfunction

Background/Aims:

Mechanically triggered cervicalgia is a common complain worldwide. Postural exercises are commonly used for its treatment. Kinesio taping has been proved to help many musculoskeletal disorders. We aimed to determine and compare the efficacy of kinesio taping and postural exercises in mechanical neck dysfunction.

Methods:

Forty-five patients, aged 18–40 years with mechanical neck dysfunction were randomly assigned into two different groups, and received 4 weeks of treatment. Group A received kinesio taping, and group B received postural exercises. Neck pain, disability, cervical curvature and upper trapezius activities were measured pre and post treatment by visual analogue scale, neck disability index, flexible ruler and electromyography. Between group comparisons were performed using multivariate analysis of variance and intra-group comparisons were performed using paired t test.

Findings:

Group-by-time interaction was significant in the multivariable test. Post hoc tests revealed that kinesio taping produced more pain reduction than the postural exercises. However, there was no significant interaction for disability, cervical curvature and upper trapezius activities.

Conclusion:

Kinesio taping has been found to be more effective than postural exercises to reduce pain. However, both have the same effect regarding disability, muscle activities and cervical curvature.

Pain provocation following sagittal plane repeated movements in people with chronic low back pain: Associations with pain sensitivity and psychological profiles

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Provocative pain responses following standardised protocols of repeated sagittal plane spinal bending have not been reported in people with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Potential differing pain responses to movement likely reflect complex sensorimotor interactions influenced by physical, psychological and neurophysiological factors. To date, it is unknown whether provocative pain responses following repeated bending are associated with different pain sensitivity and psychological profiles. Therefore the first aim of this study was to determine whether data-driven subgroups with different, clinically-important pain responses following repeated movement exist in a large CLBP cohort, specifically using a standardised protocol of repeated sagittal plane spinal bending. The second aim was to determine if the resultant pain responses following repeated movement were associated with pain and disability, pain sensitivity and psychological factors.

METHODS

Clinically-important (≥2-points, 11-point numeric rating scale) changes in pain intensity following repeated forward/backward bending were examined. Participants with different provocative pain responses to forward and backward bending were profiled on age, sex, pain sensitivity, psychological variables, pain characteristics and disability.

RESULTS

Three groups with differing provocative pain responses following repeated movements were derived: (i) no clinically-important increased pain in either direction (n=144, 49.0%), (ii) increased pain with repeated bending in one direction only (unidirectional, n=112, 38.1%), (iii) increased pain with repeated bending in both directions (bidirectional, n=38, 12.9%). After adjusting for psychological profile, age and sex, for the group with bidirectional pain provocation responses following repeated spinal bending, higher pressure and thermal pain sensitivity were demonstrated, while for the group with no increase in pain, better cognitive and affective psychological questionnaire scores were evident. However, these associations between provocative pain responses following movement and pain sensitivity and psychological profiles were weak.

CONCLUSIONS

Provocative pain responses following repeated movements in people with CLBP appear heterogeneous, and are weakly associated with pain sensitivity and psychological profiles.

IMPLICATIONS

To date, suboptimal outcomes in studies examining exercise interventions targeting directional, movement-based subgroups in people with CLBP may reflect limited consideration of broader multidimensional clinical profiles associated with LBP. This article describes heterogeneous provocative pain responses following repeated spinal bending, and their associated pain sensitivity and psychological profiles, in people with CLBP. These findings may help facilitate targeted management. For people with no increase in pain, the lack of pain provocation following repeated spinal bending, in combination with a favourable psychological profile, suggests this subgroup may have fewer barriers to functional rehabilitation. In contrast, those with pain provoked by both forward and backward bending may require specific interventions targeting increased pain sensitivity and negative psychological cognitions and affect, as these may be may be important barriers to functional rehabilitation.

Inter-examiner classification reliability of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy for extremity problems - Systematic review

BACKGROUND

Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is used in the treatment of extremity problems. Classifying clinical problems is one method of providing effective treatment to a target population. Classification reliability is a key factor to determine the precise clinical problem and to direct an appropriate intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To explore inter-examiner reliability of the MDT classification for extremity problems in three reliability designs: 1) vignette reliability using surveys with patient vignettes, 2) concurrent reliability, where multiple assessors decide a classification by observing someone's assessment, 3) successive reliability, where multiple assessors independently assess the same patient at different times.

DESIGN

Systematic review with data synthesis in a quantitative format.

METHOD

Agreement of MDT subgroups was examined using the Kappa value, with the operational definition of acceptable reliability set at ≥ 0.6. The level of evidence was determined considering the methodological quality of the studies.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Six studies were included and all studies met the criteria for high quality. Kappa values for the vignette reliability design (five studies) were ≥ 0.7. There was data from two cohorts in one study for the concurrent reliability design and the Kappa values ranged from 0.45 to 1.0. Kappa values for the successive reliability design (data from three cohorts in one study) were < 0.6.

CONCLUSION

The current review found strong evidence of acceptable inter-examiner reliability of MDT classification for extremity problems in the vignette reliability design, limited evidence of acceptable reliability in the concurrent reliability design and unacceptable reliability in the successive reliability design.

Measurement of outcomes for patients with centralising versus non-centralising neck pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine whether individuals with neck pain who demonstrate centralisation of symptoms have more favourable outcome than individuals who do not demonstrate centralisation.

METHODS

Eleven subjects with neck pain were evaluated and treated by two physical therapists certified in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT). Eleven physical therapy patients underwent a routine initial evaluation and were treated 2-3 times per week using MDT principles and other physical therapy interventions. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) tool was administered at the initial examination, approximately 2 weeks following the initial examination, each subsequent re-evaluation, and at discharge from the study to measure changes in functional outcomes for each subject. Patients continued with treatments until they were discharged or removed from the study. Four subjects were referred back to their physician by treating physical therapist secondary to non-centralisation (NC) and worsening of symptoms.

RESULTS

Of the 11 subjects, six demonstrated centralisation (CEN) and five demonstrated NC. At initial evaluation, the average NDI score for the CEN group was 51.0 (SD ± 19.4) and 56.4 (SD ± 17.6) for the NC group. For the CEN group, the average change in NDI score between initial evaluation and discharge was 41.2 (SD ± 13.2 and 12.2 (SD ± 13.0) for the NC group. The correlation coefficient of CEN and change in NDI score was 0.772 and was statistically significant (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In this limited sample, people with neck pain demonstrated more favourable outcomes when the CEN phenomenon was observed. Future research on CEN should be investigated with a larger sample size and with a greater number of clinicians trained in the MDT approach.

Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial

QUESTION

In people with nerve-related leg pain, does adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active improve leg pain, disability, low back pain, function, global perceived effect and location of symptoms?

DESIGN

Randomised trial with concealed allocation and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty participants with nerve-related leg pain recruited from the community.

INTERVENTIONS

The experimental group received four sessions of neurodynamic treatment. Both groups received advice to remain active.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Leg pain and low back pain (0, none, to 10, worst), Oswestry Disability Index (0, none, to 100, worst), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (0, unable to perform, to 30, able to perform), global perceived effect (-5 to 5) and location of symptoms were measured at 2 and 4 weeks after randomisation. Continuous outcomes were analysed by linear mixed models. Location of symptoms was assessed by relative risk (95% CI).

RESULTS

At 2 weeks, the experimental group did not have significantly greater improvement than the control group in leg pain (MD -1.1, 95% CI -2.3 to 0.1) or disability (MD -3.3, 95% CI -9.6 to 2.9). At 4 weeks, the experimental group experienced a significantly greater reduction in leg pain (MD -2.4, 95% CI -3.6 to -1.2) and low back pain (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.8 to -0.2). The experimental group also improved significantly more in function at 2 weeks (MD 5.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 8.2) and 4 weeks (MD 4.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.8), as well as global perceived effect at 2 weeks (MD 2.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.5) and 4 weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.9). No significant between-group differences occurred in disability at 4 weeks and location of symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active did not improve leg pain and disability at 2 weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01954199. [Ferreira G, Stieven F, Araujo F, Wiebusch M, Rosa C, Plentz R, et al. (2016) Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 197-202].

Effect of Adding McKenzie Syndrome, Centralization, Directional Preference, and Psychosocial Classification Variables to a Risk-Adjusted Model Predicting Functional Status Outcomes for Patients With Lumbar Impairments

Study Design Retrospective cohort. Background Patient-classification subgroupings may be important prognostic factors explaining outcomes. Objectives To determine effects of adding classification variables (McKenzie syndrome and pain patterns, including centralization and directional preference; Symptom Checklist Back Pain Prediction Model [SCL BPPM]; and the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire subscales of work and physical activity) to a baseline risk-adjusted model predicting functional status (FS) outcomes. Methods Consecutive patients completed a battery of questionnaires that gathered information on 11 risk-adjustment variables. Physical therapists trained in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy methods classified each patient by McKenzie syndromes and pain pattern. Functional status was assessed at discharge by patient-reported outcomes. Only patients with complete data were included. Risk of selection bias was assessed. Prediction of discharge FS was assessed using linear stepwise regression models, allowing 13 variables to enter the model. Significant variables were retained in subsequent models. Model power (R(2)) and beta coefficients for model variables were estimated. Results Two thousand sixty-six patients with lumbar impairments were evaluated. Of those, 994 (48%), 10 (<1%), and 601 (29%) were excluded due to incomplete psychosocial data, McKenzie classification data, and missing FS at discharge, respectively. The final sample for analyses was 723 (35%). Overall R(2) for the baseline prediction FS model was 0.40. Adding classification variables to the baseline model did not result in significant increases in R(2). McKenzie syndrome or pain pattern explained 2.8% and 3.0% of the variance, respectively. When pain pattern and SCL BPPM were added simultaneously, overall model R(2) increased to 0.44. Although none of these increases in R(2) were significant, some classification variables were stronger predictors compared with some other variables included in the baseline model. Conclusion The small added prognostic capabilities identified when combining McKenzie or pain-pattern classifications with the SCL BPPM classification did not significantly improve prediction of FS outcomes in this study. Additional research is warranted to investigate the importance of classification variables compared with those used in the baseline model to maximize predictive power. Level of Evidence Prognosis, level 4. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(9):726-741. Epub 31 Jul 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6266.

Inter-rater reliability of a modified version of Delitto et al.'s classification-based system for low back pain: a pilot study

STUDY DESIGN

Observational inter-rater reliability study.

OBJECTIVES

To examine: (1) the inter-rater reliability of a modified version of Delitto et al.'s classification-based algorithm for patients with low back pain; (2) the influence of different levels of familiarity with the system; and (3) the inter-rater reliability of algorithm decisions in patients who clearly fit into a subgroup (clear classifications) and those who do not (unclear classifications).

METHODS

Patients were examined twice on the same day by two of three participating physical therapists with different levels of familiarity with the system. Patients were classified into one of four classification groups. Raters were blind to the others' classification decision. In order to quantify the inter-rater reliability, percentages of agreement and Cohen's Kappa were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients were included (clear classification n = 23; unclear classification n = 13). The overall rate of agreement was 53% and the Kappa value was 0·34 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0·11-0·57], which indicated only fair inter-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability for patients with a clear classification (agreement 52%, Kappa value 0·29) was not higher than for patients with an unclear classification (agreement 54%, Kappa value 0·33). Familiarity with the system (i.e. trained with written instructions and previous research experience with the algorithm) did not improve the inter-rater reliability.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study challenges the inter-rater reliability of the classification procedure in clinical practice. Therefore, more knowledge is needed about factors that affect the inter-rater reliability, in order to improve the clinical applicability of the classification scheme.

Subjective and clinical assessment criteria suggestive for five clinical patterns discernible in nonspecific neck pain patients. A Delphi-survey of clinical experts

BACKGROUND

Nonspecific neck pain patients form a heterogeneous group with different musculoskeletal impairments. Classifying nonspecific neck pain patients into subgroups based on clinical characteristics might lead to more comprehensive diagnoses and can guide effective management.

OBJECTIVE

To establish consensus among a group of experts regarding the clinical criteria suggestive of a clinical dominance of 'articular', 'myofascial', 'neural', 'central' and 'sensorimotor control' dysfunction patterns distinguishable in patients with nonspecific neck pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Delphi study.

METHODS

A focus group with 10 academic experts was organized to elaborate on the different dysfunction patterns discernible in neck pain patients. Consecutively, a 3-round online Delphi-survey was designed to obtain consensual symptoms and physical examination findings for the 5 distinct dysfunction patterns resulting from the focus group.

RESULTS

A total of 21 musculoskeletal physical therapists from Belgium and the Netherlands experienced in assessing and treating neck pain patients completed the 3-round Delphi-survey. Respectively, 33 (response rate, 100.0%), 27 (81.8%) and 21 (63.6%) respondents replied to rounds 1, 2 and 3. Eighteen 'articular', 16 'myofascial', 20 'neural', 18 'central' and 10 'sensorimotor control' clinical indicators reached a predefined ≥80% consensus level.

CONCLUSION

These indicators suggestive of a clinical dominance of 'articular', 'myofascial', 'neural', 'central', and 'sensorimotor control' dysfunction patterns may help clinicians to assess and diagnose patients with nonspecific neck pain. Future validity testing is needed to determine how these criteria may help to improve the outcome of physical therapy interventions in nonspecific neck pain patients.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the McKenzie Method to Motor Control Exercises in People With Chronic Low Back Pain and a Directional Preference

Study Design Randomized clinical trial. Background Motor control exercises are believed to improve coordination of the trunk muscles. It is unclear whether increases in trunk muscle thickness can be facilitated by approaches such as the McKenzie method. Furthermore, it is unclear which approach may have superior clinical outcomes. Objectives The primary aim was to compare the effects of the McKenzie method and motor control exercises on trunk muscle recruitment in people with chronic low back pain classified with a directional preference. The secondary aim was to conduct a between-group comparison of outcomes for pain, function, and global perceived effect. Methods Seventy people with chronic low back pain who demonstrated a directional preference using the McKenzie assessment were randomized to receive 12 treatments over 8 weeks with the McKenzie method or with motor control approaches. All outcomes were collected at baseline and at 8-week follow-up by blinded assessors. Results No significant between-group difference was found for trunk muscle thickness of the transversus abdominis (-5.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -15.2%, 3.7%), obliquus internus (-0.7%; 95% CI: -6.6%, 5.2%), and obliquus externus (1.2%; 95% CI: -4.3%, 6.8%). Perceived recovery was slightly superior in the McKenzie group (-0.8; 95% CI: -1.5, -0.1) on a -5 to +5 scale. No significant between-group differences were found for pain or function (P = .99 and P = .26, respectively). Conclusion We found no significant effect of treatment group for trunk muscle thickness. Participants reported a slightly greater sense of perceived recovery with the McKenzie method than with the motor control approach. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 1b-. Registered September 7, 2011 at www.anzctr.org.au (ACTRN12611000971932). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):514-522. Epub 12 May 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6379.

The pain drawing as an instrument for identifying cervical spine nerve involvement in chronic whiplash-associated disorders

Objective

The aim of the study was to investigate the psychometric properties of a standardized assessment of pain drawing with regard to clinical signs of cervical spine nerve root involvement.

Design

This cross-sectional study included data collected in a randomized controlled study. Patients: Two hundred and sixteen patients with chronic (≥6 months) whiplash-associated disorders, grade 2 or 3, were included in this study.

Methods

The validity, sensitivity, and specificity of a standardized pain drawing assessment for determining nerve root involvement were analyzed, compared to the clinical assessment. In addition, we analyzed the interrater reliability with 50 pain drawings.

Results

Agreement was poor between the standardized pain drawing assessment and the clinical assessment (kappa =0.11, 95% CI: −0.03 to 0.20). Sensitivity was high (93%), but specificity was low (19%). Interrater reliability was good (kappa =0.64, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.76). Conclusion: The standardized pain drawing assessment of nerve root involvement in chronic whiplash-associated disorders was not in agreement with the clinical assessment. Further research is warranted to optimize the utilization of a pain/discomfort drawing as a supportive instrument for identifying nerve involvement in cervical spinal injuries.

Does experimental low back pain change posteroanterior lumbar spinal stiffness and trunk muscle activity? A randomized crossover study

BACKGROUND

While some patients with low back pain demonstrate increased spinal stiffness that decreases as pain subsides, this observation is inconsistent. Currently, the relation between spinal stiffness and low back pain remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effects of experimental low back pain on temporal changes in posteroanterior spinal stiffness and concurrent trunk muscle activity.

METHOD

In separate sessions five days apart, nine asymptomatic participants received equal volume injections of hypertonic or isotonic saline in random order into the L3-L5 interspinous ligaments. Pain intensity, spinal stiffness (global and terminal stiffness) at the L3 level, and the surface electromyographic activity of six trunk muscles were measured before, immediately after, and 25-minute after injections. These outcome measures under different saline conditions were compared by generalized estimating equations.

FINDINGS

Compared to isotonic saline injections, hypertonic saline injections evoked significantly higher pain intensity (mean difference: 5.7/10), higher global (mean difference: 0.73N/mm) and terminal stiffness (mean difference: 0.58N/mm), and increased activity of four trunk muscles during indentation (P<0.05). Both spinal stiffness and trunk muscle activity returned to baseline levels as pain subsided.

INTERPRETATION

While previous clinical research reported inconsistent findings regarding the association between spinal stiffness and low back pain, our study revealed that experimental pain caused temporary increases in spinal stiffness and concurrent trunk muscle co-contraction during indentation, which helps explain the temporal relation between spinal stiffness and low back pain observed in some clinical studies. Our results substantiate the role of spinal stiffness assessments in monitoring back pain progression.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections influence Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) pain response classification in candidates for lumbar herniated disc surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND

Although lumbar radiculopathy is regarded as a specific diagnosis, the most effective treatment strategy is unclear. Commonly used treatments include transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) and Mechanical Diagnosis & Therapy (MDT), but no studies have investigated the effectiveness of this combination. MDT differentiates pain centralization (C) from non-centralization (NC), which indicates good vs. poor prognostic validity respectively.

OBJECTIVE

The main aims were 1) to determine changes in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) pain response classifications after transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) in candidates for lumbar herniated disc surgery and 2) to evaluate differences in short and long term outcomes for patients with different pain response classifications.

METHODS

Candidates for lumbar herniated disc surgery were assessed with a MDT protocol and their pain response classified as centralizing or peripheralizing. For this study,only patients were eligible who showed a peripheralizing pain response at intake. All patients then received TESIs and were reassessed and classified using the MDT protocol, into groups according to pain response (resolved, centralizing, peripheralizing with less pain and peripheralising with severe pain). After receiving targeted treatment based on pain response after TESIs, ranging from advice, MDT or surgery, follow-up assessments were completed at discharge and at 12 months. The primary outcomes were disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMDQ] for Sciatica), pain severity in leg (visual analogue scale [VAS], 0-100) and global perceived effect (GPE). Linear mixed-models were used to determine between-groups differences in outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients with lumbar disc herniation and peripheralizing symptoms were included. Patients received an average of 2 (SD 0.7) TESIs. After TESIs, 17 patients (22%) were classified as peripheralizing with continuing severe pain.These patients underwent surgery and were not further evaluated. Eleven (14%) patients were classified as resolved, 37 (48%) as centralizing with significant less pain, and 12 (16%) as peripheralizing with significant less pain. None of these patients underwent surgery. Resolved and centralizer subgroups had better outcomes in terms of VAS and RMDQ than the non-operated peripheralizers at discharge and at 12 months. The succes rates (GPE) for the resolved, centralizing, and peripheralizing with less pain patients were 100%, 100% and 33% respectively at short term, and 100%, 92% and 50% respectively at long term.

CONCLUSION

After TESIs, a peripheralizing pain pattern changed to resolved or centralizing in 62% of the patients. For the non-operated patients, those with a centralising pattern after TESIs reported better pain and disability outcomes than those with peripheralizing pattern at short and long term.

The Influence of Centralization and Directional Preference on Spinal Control in Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort, test-retest design.

BACKGROUND

Directional preference (DP) with centralization (CEN) and DP without CEN are common pain-pattern responses assessed by Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT). Although there is evidence that MDT can reduce pain and disability in the short term by treating the patient with direction-specific exercises concordant with the patient's DP, the mechanism responsible for this is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether clinical signs of impaired spinal control improve immediately after eliciting a DP-with-CEN response or a DP-without-CEN response in patients with nonspecific low back pain.

METHODS

Participants underwent a standardized MDT assessment and were classified into the following pain-pattern subgroups: DP with CEN, DP without CEN, or no DP. Clinical signs of impaired spinal control were assessed pre-MDT assessment and post-MDT assessment by an independent examiner. Four spinal control tests were conducted: aberrant lumbar movements while bending forward, the active straight leg raise (ASLR) test, the Trendelenburg test, and the prone instability test. Differences in spinal control pre-MDT assessment and post-MDT assessment were calculated for the 3 pain-pattern subgroups and compared with chi-square tests. We hypothesized that a larger proportion of patients in the DP-with-CEN subgroup would exhibit improved spinal control than patients categorized as DP without CEN or no DP.

RESULTS

Of 114 patients recruited, 51 patients (44.7%) were categorized as DP with CEN, 23 (20.2%) as DP without CEN, and 40 (35.1%) as no DP. Before MDT assessment, between 28.9% (Trendelenburg test) and 63.7% (ASLR test) of patients showed impaired spinal control. After MDT assessment, a larger proportion of patients in the DP-with-CEN subgroup (43%) showed improvement than those in the no-DP subgroup (7%) on aberrant lumbar movements (P = .02). Likewise, more patients in the DP-with-CEN subgroup (50%) improved on the ASLR test than those in the no-DP subgroup (8%, P<.01) or the DP-without-CEN subgroup (7%, P = .01). Changes in Trendelenburg test and prone instability test outcomes did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Immediately following MDT assessment, a larger proportion of patients with a DP-with-CEN pain pattern showed improvement in clinical signs of spinal control compared to patients with a DP-without-CEN or no-DP pain pattern. The current study was registered in the Dutch trial registry at http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp (NTR4246).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapy, level 2b.

Inter-examiner reliability of diplomats in the mechanical diagnosis and therapy system in assessing patients with shoulder pain

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the inter-examiner reliability of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT)-trained diplomats in classifying patients with shoulder disorders. The MDT system has demonstrated acceptable reliability when used in patients with spinal disorders; however, little is known about its utility when used for appendicular conditions.

METHODS

Fifty-four clinical scenarios were created by a group of 11 MDT diploma holders based on their clinical experience with patients with shoulder pain. The vignettes were made anonymous, and their clinical diagnoses sections were left blank. The vignettes were sent to a second group of six international McKenzie Institute diploma holders who were asked to classify each vignette according to the MDT categories for upper extremity. Inter-examiner agreement was evaluated with kappa statistics.

RESULTS

There was 'very good' agreement among the six MDT diplomats for classifying the McKenzie syndromes in patients with shoulder pain (kappa = 0.90, SE = 0.018). The raw overall level of multi-rater agreement among the six clinicians in classifying the vignettes was 96%. After accounting for the actual MDT category for each vignette, kappa and the raw overall level of agreement decreased negligibly (0.89 and 95%, respectively).

DISCUSSION

Using clinical vignettes, the McKenzie system of MDT has very good reliability in classifying patients with shoulder pain. As an alternative, future reliability studies could use real patients instead of written vignettes.

Outcome of physiotherapy after surgery for cervical disc disease: a prospective randomised multi-centre trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients with cervical disc disease require leave from work, due to long-lasting, complex symptoms, including chronic pain and reduced levels of physical and psychological function. Surgery on a few segmental levels might be expected to resolve disc-specific pain and reduce neurological deficits, but not the non-specific neck pain and the frequent illness. No study has investigated whether post-surgery physiotherapy might improve the outcome of surgery. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a well-structured rehabilitation programme might add benefit to the customary post-surgical treatment for cervical disc disease, with respect to function, disability, work capability, and cost effectiveness.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study was designed as a prospective, randomised, controlled, multi-centre study. An independent, blinded investigator will compare two alternatives of rehabilitation. We will include 200 patients of working age, with cervical disc disease confirmed by clinical findings and symptoms of cervical nerve root compression. After providing informed consent, study participants will be randomised to one of two alternative physiotherapy regimes; (A) customary treatment (information and advice on a specialist clinic); or (B) customary treatment plus active physiotherapy. Physiotherapy will follow a standardised, structured programme of neck-specific exercises combined with a behavioural approach. All patients will be evaluated both clinically and subjectively (with questionnaires) before surgery and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months after surgery. The main outcome variable will be neck-specific disability. Cost-effectiveness will also be calculated.

DISCUSSION

We anticipate that the results of this study will provide evidence to support physiotherapeutic rehabilitation applied after surgery for cervical radiculopathy due to cervical disc disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01547611.

Association between centralization and directional preference and functional and pain outcomes in patients with neck pain

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVES

In subjects with neck pain, the present study aimed (1) to describe the prevalence of centralization (CEN), noncentralization (non-CEN), directional preference (DP), and no directional preference (no DP); (2) to determine if age, sex, fear-avoidance beliefs about physical activity, number of comorbid conditions, or symptom duration varies among subjects who demonstrate CEN versus non-CEN and DP versus no DP; and (3) to determine if CEN and/or DP are associated with changes in function and pain.

BACKGROUND

CEN and DP are prevalent among patients with low back pain and should be considered when determining treatment strategies and predicting outcomes; however, these findings are not well investigated in patients with neck pain.

METHODS

Three hundred four subjects contributed data. CEN and DP prevalence were calculated, as was the association between CEN and DP, and age, sex, number of comorbid conditions, fear-avoidance beliefs, and symptom duration. Multivariate models assessed whether CEN and DP predicted change in function and pain.

RESULTS

CEN and DP prevalence were 0.4 and 0.7, respectively. Younger subjects and those with fewer comorbid conditions were more likely to centralize; however, subjects who demonstrated DP were more likely to have acute symptoms. Subjects who centralized experienced, on average, a 3.6-point (95% confidence interval: -0.3, 7.4) improvement in function scores, whereas subjects with a DP averaged a 5.4-point (95% confidence interval: 0.8, 10.0) improvement. Neither CEN nor DP was associated with pain outcomes.

CONCLUSION

DP and, to a lesser extent, CEN represent evaluation categories that are associated with improvements in functional outcomes.

Treatment of shoulder pain utilizing mechanical diagnosis and therapy principles

This case report describes the effectiveness of mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) in the management of a patient referred with a diagnosis of shoulder tendonitis. The patient was a 56-year-old male with a 3-month history of left anterior shoulder pain. Upon initial assessment, he presented with a positive open-can test, lift-off test, and Hawkins-Kennedy impingement test. A MDT assessment quickly ruled out cervical involvement and identified a loss of end-range shoulder mobility and pain during active shoulder movement. After the patient underwent a repeated movement examination and treatment based on responses to end-range movements over three visits, his shoulder pain was abolished and motion was fully restored. Despite having positive rotator cuff and impingement signs, this patient was effectively treated with repeated end-range movements over a short period of 2 weeks. This case demonstrates that treatment based on MDT sub-classification principles may be an effective way to manage shoulder pain as it is in the spine.

Positive predictive factors and subgroup analysis of clinically relevant improvement after anterior cervical decompression and fusion for cervical disc disease: a 10- to 13-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study

Object

The main purpose of this 10- to 13-year follow-up of a prospective randomized study was to identify preoperative factors that predicted good long-term outcome after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with the Cloward procedure or the cervical intervertebral fusion cage. A second purpose was to investigate subgroup differences at the 10-year follow-up between patients with and without clinically relevant improvement (CRI) and between men and women.

Methods

To evaluate clinically meaningful outcomes, good outcome was defined as CRI in neck-related pain intensity (≥ 30-mm improvement on a visual analog scale), and CRI in neck-specific disability (≥ 20% improvement in the neck disability index [NDI]) from preoperative measurements to the 10-year follow-up. A total of 73 patients (77% of the original study sample) completed questionnaires at least 10 years after ACDF.

Results

High preoperative neck-related pain intensity and preoperative nonsmoking status were predictors of CRI in neck-related pain intensity, and male sex was a predictor of CRI in neck-specific disability; however, no additional predictive factors were identified for good outcome after ACDF. The surgical procedure, number of operated levels, and radiological factors such as healing status did not influence the prediction models. Individuals without CRI in neck-specific disability (75%) and pain intensity (43%) reported a worse outcome for several psychosocial outcome variables compared with those with CRI. At the 10-year follow-up, women reported significantly greater neck- and arm-related pain intensity than men, and women also reported more disability and worse psychosocial status. Women reported CRI on the NDI less frequently than men (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Preoperative predictive factors of good outcome 10–13 years after ACDF included initial high neck-related pain intensity, nonsmoking status at the time of surgery, and male sex. There were greater improvements in pain intensity than in neck-specific disability, and the latter showed a greater association with psychosocial factors. These results suggest the need for multimodal postoperative rehabilitation for patients who do not have a satisfactory outcome after ACDF.