ArticleThe Journal of manual & manipulative therapy2018
Prevalence and reliability of treatment-based classification for subgrouping patients with low back pain.
Article in The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Are movement-based classification systems more effective than therapeutic exercise or guideline based care in improving outcomes for patients with chronic low back pain? A systematic review.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo observe the distribution of patients who presented with low back pain (LBP) and to determine the between therapists' interrater reliability of assessments in a private outpatient setting using treatment-based classification (TBC) subgroups.
methodsAn observational and methodological study was conducted. Four hundred and twenty-nine patients (231 male; 198 female) presenting LBP symptoms and referred to conservative treatment were assessed by 13 physical therapists who conducted a 60-min examination process utilizing TBC subgroups. Interrater reliability analyses from six raters were assessed using Fleiss' kappa and previously recorded data (
resultsIn this study, 65.74% of patients were classified in only one subgroup, the most prevalent being stabilization (21.91%), followed by extension (15.38%), traction (11.89%), flexion (10.96%), manipulation (5.13%), and lateral shift (0.47%). Approximately 20.98% of patients were classified in two subgroups, where the most frequent overlaps were flexion + stabilization (7.46%), extension + stabilization (6.06%), flexion + traction (4.20%), extension + manipulation (1.86%), and 13.29% of patients were not classified in any TBC subgroup. Analysis of interrater reliability showed a kappa value of 0.62 and an overall agreement of 66% between raters. DISCUSSION: LBP is a heterogeneous clinical condition and several classification methods are proposed in the attempt to observe better outcomes for patients. Eighty-five percent of patients assessed were able to be classified when using the TBC assessment and reliability analysis showed a substantial agreement between raters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c.
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.