Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2017
Predictive ability of the start back tool: an ancillary analysis of a low back pain trial from Danish general practice.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01699256 (Enhanced Implementation of Low Back Pain Guidelines in General Practice), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Enhanced Implementation of Low Back Pain Guidelines in General Practice: A Cluster Randomized Trial
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of stratified treatment for back pain in Danish primary care: A randomized controlled trial.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2021Trial
- The StarT back screening tool and a pain mannequin improve triage in individuals with low back pain at risk of a worse prognosis - a population based cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Trial
- Observational
- The association of the STarT Back Screening Tool and type of leg pain with low back pain disability trajectories: a prospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Difference in postural stability between STarT Back Tool subgroups of patients with low back pain under conditions of sensory deprivation and cognitive load.The Journal of international medical research · 2022Article
- Predictors of response following standardized education and self-management recommendations for low back pain stratified by dominant pain location.North American Spine Society journal · 2021Article
- Exploring pain phenotypes in workers with chronic low back pain: Application of IMMPACT recommendations.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2021Article
- The association between believing staying active is beneficial and achieving a clinically relevant functional improvement after 52 weeks: a prospective cohort study of patients with chronic low back pain in secondary care.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Observational
- Artificial intelligence to improve back pain outcomes and lessons learnt from clinical classification approaches: three systematic reviews.NPJ digital medicine · 2020Review
- The use of STarT BACK Screening Tool in emergency departments for patients with acute low back pain: a prospective inception cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018Article
- Advancing practice for back pain through stratified care (STarT Back).Brazilian journal of physical therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a common cause of contact with the primary healthcare sector. In some patients, symptoms quickly resolve, but others develop long-lasting pain and disability. To improve the care pathway for patients with LBP, the STarT Back Tool (STarT) questionnaire has been developed. It helps initial decision-making by subgrouping patients on the basis of their prognosis and helps to target treatment according to prognosis. An assumption behind the use of STarT is the ability to predict functional improvement. This assumption has never been tested in a population that consists exclusively of patients enrolled when consulting a Danish general practitioner for LBP. The aim of this study was to investigate STarT's ability to predict a 30% improvement in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score.
methodsThis was an ancillary analysis using data from a Danish guideline implementation study (registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01699256). An inclusion criterion was age 18 to 65 years of age. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, fractures, and signs of underlying pathology. Patient-reported STarT score and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire were administered at baseline and again after 4, 8, and 52 weeks.
resultsBetween January 2013 and July 2014, 475 patients from the original trial participated with questionnaires. From this subpopulation, 441 (92.8%) patients provided information regarding STarT. Baseline and eight-week RMDQ data were available for 304 (64.0%) patients. After 8 weeks, 61 (65.6%) in the low-risk group, 67 (54.9%) in the medium-risk group, and 33 (37.1%) in the high-risk group had achieved a 30% improvement in the RMDQ score. After 8 weeks, high-risk patients were at 61% (95% CI: 20-125%, P < 0.001) higher risk of not achieving a 30% improvement in the RMDQ score compared with patients in either the low-risk group or the medium-risk group.
conclusionSTarT was predictive for functional improvement in patients from general practice with LBP.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01699256 , Nov 29, 2016 (registered retrospectively).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.