Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31254095›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2019

Predicting a beneficial response to motor control training in patients with low back pain: a longitudinal cohort study.

Julie A Hides, Michael Murphy, Ellen Jang, Linda Blackwell, Margot Sexton, Christopher Sexton, M Dilani Mendis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Julie A HidesSchool of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia. J.Hides@griffith.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1830-8121
Michael MurphyMater Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4101, Australia.
Ellen JangMater Back Stability Research Clinic, Mater Health, South Brisbane, QLD, 4101, Australia.
Linda BlackwellMater Back Stability Research Clinic, Mater Health, South Brisbane, QLD, 4101, Australia.
Margot SextonSchool of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.
Christopher SextonSchool of Dentistry, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, 4006, Australia.
M Dilani MendisSchool of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0533-2587

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeExercise therapy such as motor control training (MCT) has been shown to reduce pain and disability in people with low back pain (LBP). It is unknown which patients are most likely to benefit. This longitudinal cohort study aimed to: (1) retrospectively examine records from a large cohort of patients who received MCT treatment, (2) identify potentially important predictors of response to MCT and (3) test the predictors on an independent (split) sample derived from the original cohort of patients, using one group to identify the predictors and the other to test them.

methodsThe response of 775 patients with LBP to MCT was classified as 'improved' or 'not improved' based on self-reported change in pain levels and symptoms. Measures were examined for associations with improvement and entered into a logistic regression model to classify patients as low, medium or high benefits of improvement with MCT. The model was tested on an independent sample.

resultsA positive response was seen in patients with: no evidence of scoliosis [OR  = 4.0, 95% CI (1.7, 9.6)], LBP without associated groin pain [OR = 2.2, 95% CI (1.0, 5.0)], LBP which was chronic recurrent in nature [OR = 3.1, 95% CI (1.8, 5.3)] and poor results on muscle testing of the multifidus muscle [OR = 2.0, 95% CI (1.1, 3.7)]. Testing on an independent sample confirmed that patients could be classified into benefit groups.

conclusionsThis study provides a first step towards assisting clinicians to select patients most likely to respond to MCT. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Cohort StudiesExercise TherapyFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesLow Back PainMaleRetrospective StudiesVisual Analog ScaleExercise therapyLow back painMultifidus musclePrognostic factorsRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID31254095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.