Use of a classification system to guide nonsurgical management of a patient with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This case report describes the use of a classification system in the evaluation of a patient with chronic low back pain (LBP) and illustrates how this system was used to develop a management program in which the patient was instructed in symptom-reducing strategies for positioning and functional movement. CASE DESCRIPTION: The patient was a 55-year-old woman with a medical diagnosis of lumbar degenerative disk and degenerative joint disease from L2 to S1. Rotation with extension of the lumbar spine was found to be consistently associated with an increase in symptoms during the examination. Instruction was provided to restrict lumbar rotation and extension during performance of daily activities. OUTCOMES: The patient completed 8 physical therapy sessions over a 3-month period. Pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3-month follow-up modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores were 43%, 16%, and 12%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Daily repetition of similar movements and postures may result in preferential movement of the lumbar spine in a specific direction, which then may contribute to the development, persistence, or recurrence of LBP. Research is needed to determine whether patients with LBP would benefit from training in activity modifications that are specific to the symptom-provoking movements and postures of each individual as identified through examination.     

Classification, treatment and outcomes of a patient with lumbar extension syndrome

The purpose of the current report is to describe the classification, treatment, and outcomes of a patient with lumbar extension syndrome. The patient was a 40-year-old female with an 18-month history of mechanical low back pain (LBP). The patient reported a history of daily, intermittent pain (mean intensity of 9/10) that limited her ability to sit, stand, walk, and sleep, as well as perform work-related activities. Symptom-provoking movement and alignment impairments associated with the direction of lumbar extension were identified and modification of these impairments consistently resulted in a decrease in pain. Treatment was provided in 3 sessions over a 2-month period. Priority of treatment was to train the patient to restrict lumbar extension-related alignments and movements during symptom-provoking functional activities. Exercises to address the extension-related impairments also were prescribed. The primary change in outcome was a decrease in the mean intensity (2 months: 2/10; 6 months: 1/10) and frequency of pain (2 months: decreased pain with standing and walking; 6 months: additional decrease with sitting, standing and walking). She also reported a decreased duration and number of LBP episodes. Classification directed treatment resulted in improvement in short and long term impairment and functional-level outcomes.     

Classification,treatment and outcomes of a patient with lumbar extension syndrome

The purpose of the current report is to describe the classification, treatment, and outcomes of a patient with lumbar extension syndrome. The patient was a 40-year-old female with an 18-month history of mechanical low back pain (LBP). The patient reported a history of daily, intermittent pain (mean intensity of 9/10) that limited her ability to sit, stand, walk, and sleep, as well as perform work-related activities. Symptom-provoking movement and alignment impairments associated with the direction of lumbar extension were identified and modification of these impairments consistently resulted in a decrease in pain. Treatment was provided in 3 sessions over a 2-month period. Priority of treatment was to train the patient to restrict lumbar extension-related alignments and movements during symptom-provoking functional activities. Exercises to address the extension-related impairments also were prescribed. The primary change in outcome was a decrease in the mean intensity (2 months: 2/10; 6 months: 1/10) and frequency of pain (2 months: decreased pain with standing and walking; 6 months: additional decrease with sitting, standing and walking). She also reported a decreased duration and number of LBP episodes. Classification directed treatment resulted in improvement in short and long term impairment and functional-level outcomes.     

The relationship of lumbar flexion to disability in patients with low back pain

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Physical therapists routinely assess spinal active range of motion (AROM) in patients with low back pain (LBP). The purpose of this study was to use 2 approaches to examine the relationship between impairment of lumbar spine flexion AROM and disability. One approach relied on the use of normative data to determine when an impairment in flexion AROM was present. The other approach required therapists to make judgments of whether the flexion AROM impairment was relevant to the patient's disability. SUBJECTS: Fifteen physical therapists and 81 patients with LBP completed in the study. METHODS: Patients completed the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire (RMQ), and the therapists assessed lumbar spine flexion AROM using a dual-inclinometer technique at the initial visit and again at discharge. RESULTS: Correlations between the lumbar flexion AROM measure and disability were low and did not vary appreciably for the 2 approaches tested. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Measures of lumbar flexion AROM should not be used as surrogate measures of disability. Lumbar spine flexion AROM and disability are weakly correlated, suggesting that flexion AROM measures should not be used as treatment goals.     

Clinical diagnosis and treatment of a patient with low back pain using the patient response model: A case report

The medical management of low back pain (LBP) can be approached in a multitude of ways. Classification via subgrouping is increasingly common in orthopedic literature. Clinical diagnosis and treatment of LBP using the patient response model (PRM) can assist clinicians in hypothesizing the origin of pain and providing beneficial interventions unlike the widely used pathoanatomical model. This case report involved a 52-year-old female with sudden onset of right-sided LBP that radiated to the foot. These symptoms were accompanied by occasional paresthesias in bilateral lower extremities. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confirmed disc bulges at levels T11-T12 and T12-L1. On the first of seven visits, she reported 9/10 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), scored a 24/50 on the modified Oswestry disability index (mODI), and demonstrated lumbar flexion range of motion (ROM) of 10°. Using the PRM, the patient was classified as an extension responder and was instructed to perform 10 repetitions of standing lumbar extension every 2 waking hours. After 4 weeks of therapy, the patient reported a 1/10 pain localized to the low back, scored 20/50 on the mODI, and improved flexion ROM to 45°. Classification using the PRM yielded positive outcomes with this patient’s symptoms and daily function.     

Differences in end-range lumbar flexion during slumped sitting and forward bending between low back pain subgroups and genders

Patterns of lumbar posture and motion are associated with low back pain (LBP). Research suggests LBP subgroups demonstrate different patterns during common tasks. This study assessed differences in end-range lumbar flexion during two tasks between two LBP subgroups classified according to the Movement System Impairment model. Additionally, the impact of gender differences on subgroup differences was assessed. Kinematic data were collected. Subjects in the Rotation (Rot) and Rotation with Extension (RotExt) LBP subgroups were asked to sit slumped and bend forward from standing. Lumbar end-range flexion was calculated. Subjects reported symptom behaviour during each test. Compared to the RotExt subgroup, the Rot subgroup demonstrated greater end-range lumbar flexion during slumped sitting and a trend towards greater end-range lumbar flexion with forward bending. Compared to females, males demonstrated greater end-range lumbar flexion during slumped sitting and forward bending. A greater proportion of people in the Rot subgroup reported symptoms with each test compared to the RotExt subgroup. Males and females were equally likely to report symptoms with each test. Gender differences were not responsible for LBP subgroup differences. Subgrouping people with LBP provides insight into differences in lumbar motion within the LBP population. Results suggesting potential consistent differences across flexion-related tasks support the presence of stereotypical movement patterns that are related to LBP.     

Spinal kinematics and trunk muscle activity in cyclists: a comparison between healthy controls and non-specific chronic low back pain subjects-a pilot investigation

The aim of this pilot study was to examine whether differences existed in spinal kinematics and trunk muscle activity in cyclists with and without non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). Cyclists are known to be vulnerable to low back pain (LBP) however, the aetiology of this problem has not been adequately researched. Causative factors are thought to be prolonged forward flexion, flexion-relaxation or overactivation of the erector spinae, mechanical creep and generation of high mechanical loads while being in a flexed and rotated position. Nine asymptomatic cyclists and nine cyclists with NSCLBP with a flexion pattern disorder primarily related to cycling were tested. Spinal kinematics were measured by an electromagnetic tracking system and EMG was recorded bilaterally from selected trunk muscles. Data were collected every five minutes until back pain occurred or general discomfort prevented further cycling. Cyclists in the pain group showed a trend towards increased lower lumbar flexion and rotation with an associated loss of co-contraction of the lower lumbar multifidus. This muscle is known to be a key stabiliser of the lumbar spine. The findings suggest altered motor control and kinematics of the lower lumbar spine are associated with the development of LBP in cyclists.     

Managing pain in the workplace: a focus group study of challenges,strategies and what matters most to workers with low back pain

Purpose.?Most working adults with low back pain (LBP) continue to work despite pain, but few studies have assessed self-management strategies in this at-work population. The purpose of this study was to identify workplace challenges and self-management strategies reported by workers remaining at work despite recurrent or persistent LBP, to be used as a framework for the development of a workplace group intervention to prevent back disability.

Method.?Workers with LBP (n?=?38) participated in five focus groups, and audio recordings of sessions were analysed to assemble lists of common challenges and coping strategies. A separate analysis provided a general categorisation of major themes.

Results.?Workplace pain challenges fell within four domains: activity interference, negative self-perceptions, interpersonal challenges and inflexibility of work. Self-management strategies consisted of modifying work activities and routines, reducing pain symptoms, using cognitive strategies and communicating pain effectively. Theme extraction identified six predominant themes: knowing your work setting, talking about pain, being prepared for a bad day, thoughts and emotions, keeping moving and finding leeway.

Conclusions.?To retain workers with LBP, this qualitative investigation suggests future intervention efforts should focus on worker communication and cognitions related to pain, pacing of work and employer efforts to provide leeway for altered job routines.     

Application of a classification system and description of a combined manual therapy intervention: a case with low back related leg pain

Low back pain and leg pain commonly occur together. Multiple factors can cause low back related leg pain; therefore, identification of the source of symptoms is required in order to develop an appropriate intervention program. The patient in this case presented with low back and leg pain. A patho-mechanism based classification is described in combination with the patient’s subjective and objective examination findings to guide treatment. The patient’s symptoms improved marginally with intervention addressing primarily the musculoskeletal impairments and with intervention addressing primarily the neurodynamic impairments. Full functional improvements were attained with a manual therapy intervention directed at both mechanisms simultaneously. The approach described in this case address a mixed pathology utilizing passive accessory and passive physiological lumbar mobilizations in combination with lower extremity neurodynamic mobilization. The patient reported complete resolution of symptoms after a total of seven visits over a period of 6 weeks. While specific guidelines do not yet exist for treatment based on the classification approach utilized, this case report provides an example of manual therapy to address low back related leg pain of mixed pathology.     

The relationship beween posture and back muscle endurance in industrial workers with flexion-related low back pain

This preliminary cross-sectional study was undertaken to determine if there were measurable relationships between posture, back muscle endurance and low back pain (LBP) in industrial workers with a reported history of flexion strain injury and flexion pain provocation. Clinical reports state that subjects with flexion pain disorders of the lumbar spine commonly adopt passive flexed postures such as slump sitting and present with associated dysfunction of the spinal postural stabilising musculature. However, to date there is little empirical evidence to support that patients with back pain, posture their spines differently than pain-free subjects. Subjects included 21 healthy industrial workers and 24 industrial workers with flexion-provoked LBP. Lifestyle information, lumbo-pelvic posture in sitting, standing and lifting, and back muscle endurance were measured. LBP subjects had significantly reduced back muscle endurance (P < 0.01). LBP subjects sat with less hip flexion, (P = 0.05), suggesting increased posterior pelvic tilt in sitting. LBP subjects postured their spines significantly closer to their end of range lumbar flexion in 'usual' sitting than the healthy controls (P < 0.05). Correlations between increased time spent sitting, physical inactivity and poorer back muscle endurance were also identified. There were no significant differences found between the groups for the standing and lifting posture measures. These preliminary results support that a relationship may exist between flexed spinal postures, reduced back muscle endurance, physical inactivity and LBP in subjects with a history of flexion injury and pain.     

Correlation between change in pain,disability, and surface electromyography topographic parameters after interferential current treatment in patients with chronic low back pain

[Purpose] Surface electromyography (SEMG) topography is used to objectively assess patients with low back pain (LBP). This study aimed to investigate the correlation between SEMG topographic variables, pain, and disability in patients with chronic LBP (CLBP) after interferential current (IFC) treatment, and to evaluate IFC treatment efficacy using SEMG topography. [Participants and Methods] Twenty nine patients with CLBP were recruited for a 6-week IFC treatment. Pain and disability scores, and the root-mean-square difference (RMSD) of SEMG topographic variables (relative areas [RAs] at flexion and extension) were compared before and after the intervention by repeated measures ANOVA; the correlation between variables was also explored and p-value was set at 0.001. [Results] Significant positive correlations between changes in pain score and the RMSD of RA at flexion (r(29)=0.593), and between changes in pain and disability scores (r(29)=0.426) were observed. All participants showed statistically significant improvements in the RMSD of RA at flexion, pain score, and disability score after IFC treatment. [Conclusion] SEMG topographic variables are closely associated with changes in pain score in patients with CLBP after IFC treatment. The RMSD of RA at flexion can be used as an objective marker in IFC treatment efficacy evaluation.     

Fear-avoidance beliefs as measured by the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire: change in fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire is predictive of change in self-report of disability and pain intensity for patients with acute low back pain

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to investigate the association among measures of fear-avoidance beliefs, pain intensity, and lumbar flexion and to determine if changes in these measures were predictive of treatment outcome following physical therapy for acute low back pain. It was hypothesized that items of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire would be correlated with concurrent measures of pain intensity and lumbar flexion. In addition, it was hypothesized that changes in fear-avoidance beliefs would be predictive of changes in self-report of pain intensity and disability. STUDY DESIGN: Patients underwent a standard examination that included measures of fear-avoidance beliefs, pain intensity, lumbar flexion, and disability from low back pain. Patients were then re-examined after 4 weeks of physical therapy treatment. PATIENTS: Sixty-three patients with acute low back pain enrolled in a clinical trial of physical therapy treatment. RESULTS: Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire items were consistently correlated with lumbar flexion, but not with measures of pain intensity. Pearson correlations indicated that changes in disability were significantly associated with changes in fear-avoidance beliefs and pain intensity, but not changes in lumbar flexion. Changes in fear-avoidance beliefs explained significant amounts of variance in changes in average pain intensity while controlling for changes in lumbar flexion. Changes in fear-avoidance beliefs explained significant amounts of variance in changes in disability while controlling for changes in average pain intensity. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that fear-avoidance beliefs have a similar association with pain intensity, physical impairment, and disability for patients with acute and chronic low back pain. This study provides preliminary support for the use of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire as an outcome measure for patients with acute low back pain.     

Classification-Specific Treatment Improves Pain,Disability, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs,and Erector Spinae Muscle Activity During Walking in Patients With Low Back Pain Exhibiting Lumbar Extension-Rotation Pattern: A Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectiveLow back pain (LBP) has commonly been managed via classification-specific interventions in homogeneous groups. However, it is largely unknown whether treatment tailored to specific classifications is more effective than generic treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of classification-specific treatment on the self-reported responses and erector spinae (ES) activity of patients with LBP exhibiting a lumbar extension-rotation (ExtRot) pattern.MethodsIn total, 39 patients exhibiting the lumbar ExtRot pattern were randomized to an experimental (n = 19) group and a control (n = 20) group. Participants in the experimental group received classification-specific treatment, which included exercise to control or prevent lumbopelvic motion during lower-extremity movement. Participants in the control group were encouraged to perform general exercises and were educated about LBP. Patient-reported pain intensity, disability, and fear-avoidance belief and ES muscle activity during walking were assessed prior to and after the intervention. Two-way analysis of covariance was used to examine the effects of classification-specific treatment.ResultsAfter 6-week intervention, significant time-by-group interaction effects were demonstrated on pain intensity, disability, fear-avoidance beliefs-physical activity score, and ES muscle activity during walking. There were significant effects of group on pain, disability, and fear-avoidance beliefs-physical activity score after intervention. After the 6-week intervention, the ES muscle activity significantly decreased in the experimental group during walking, but does not represent an all-events decrease.ConclusionClassification-specific treatment may be effective in patients with LBP exhibiting the lumbar ExtRot pattern, reducing pain intensity, disability, fear-avoidance beliefs, and ES muscle activity during walking.     

The effect of modifying patient-preferred spinal movement and alignment during symptom testing in patients with low back pain: a preliminary report

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect on symptoms of modifying patient-preferred movements and alignments of the lumbar spine during patient examination. DESIGN: Repeated-measures study in which patients with low back pain (LBP) participated in a standardized examination that included tests of symptoms with various movements and positions. SETTING: Six university-affiliated outpatient physical therapy clinics and the local community. PARTICIPANTS: Five trained physical therapists examined a total of 185 patients (102 women, 83 men; mean age, 41.89+/-13.29 y) with LBP. The majority of patients had multiepisode, chronic LBP. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The examination included tests of symptoms with various alignments and movements in several different positions. Seven tests were designated as primary tests. Tests that increased symptoms were followed immediately by a secondary test in which (1) patient-preferred lumbar spine movement was modified or (2) the lumbar spine was positioned in a neutral alignment. Patients reported the effect of the secondary test on symptoms relative to their symptoms with the primary test. Three responses were possible: symptoms increased, remained the same, or decreased. RESULTS: Eighty-three percent of the patients reported an increase in symptoms with 1 or more of the 7 primary tests. Ninety-five percent who reported an increase in symptoms with at least 1 of the primary tests reported a decrease in symptoms with 1 or more of the 7 secondary tests. The majority of patients reported a decrease in symptoms when the spinal movement or alignment was modified for 6 of the 7 secondary tests. CONCLUSIONS: Modifying the symptom-provoking movements and alignments of the spine during symptom testing resulted in a decrease in symptoms for the majority of patients. Information about specific modifications that provide relief of LBP symptoms is important because it can be used to design a treatment program that focuses on training a patient to modify the same movements and alignments in their everyday activities.     

Lower lumbar spine axial rotation is reduced in end-range sagittal postures when compared to a neutral spine posture

Sports such as rowing, gymnastics, cycling and fast bowling in cricket that combine rotation with spine flexion and extension are known to carry greater risk of low back pain (LBP). Few studies have investigated the capacity of the lumbar spine to rotate in various sagittal positions, and further, these studies have generated disparate conclusions. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the range of lower lumbar axial rotation (L3–S2) is decreased in end-range flexion and extension postures when compared to the neutral spine posture. Eighteen adolescent female rowers (mean age=14.9 years) with no history of LBP were recruited for this study. Lower lumbar axial rotation was measured by an electromagnetic tracking system (3-Space Fastrak™) in end-range flexion, extension and neutral postures, in sitting and standing positions. There was a reduction in the range of lower lumbar axial rotation in both end-range extension and flexion (p<0.001) postures when compared to neutral. Further, the range of lower lumbar axial rotation measurements in flexion when sitting was reduced when compared to standing (p=0.013). These findings are likely due to the anatomical limitations of the passive structures in end-range sagittal postures.     

Factors related to the inability of individuals with low back pain to improve with a spinal manipulation

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although spinal manipulation is one of the few interventions for low back pain supported by evidence, it appears to be underutilized by physical therapists, possibly due to therapists' concerns that a patient may not benefit from the intervention. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that are associated with an inability to benefit from manipulation. SUBJECTS: Seventy-five people with nonradicular low back pain (mean age=37.6 years, SD=10.6, range=19-59; mean duration of symptoms=41.7 days, SD=54.7, range=1-252) participated. METHODS: Subjects underwent a standardized examination that included history-taking; self-reports of pain, disability, and fear-avoidance beliefs; measurement of lumbar and hip range of motion; and use of various tests. All subjects received a spinal manipulation intervention for a maximum of 2 sessions. Subjects who did not show greater than 5 points of improvement on the modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire were considered to have shown no improvement with the manipulation. Baseline variables were tested for univariate relationship with the outcome of the manipulation. Variables showing a univariate relationship were entered into a logistic regression equation, and adjusted odds ratios were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty subjects (28%) did not improve with manipulation. Six variables were identified as being related to inability to improve with manipulation: longer symptom duration, having symptoms in the buttock or leg, absence of lumbar hypomobility, less hip rotation range of motion, less discrepancy in left-to-right hip medial rotation range of motion, and a negative Gaenslen sign. The resulting logistic regression model explained 63% of the variance in manipulation outcome. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The majority of subjects improved with manipulation. Baseline variables could be identified that were predictive of which subjects would not improve.     

Patterns of lumbar region movement during trunk lateral bending in 2 subgroups of people with low back pain

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The movement system impairment (MSI) system is one proposed system for classifying low back pain (LBP) problems. Prior clinical data and observations for the MSI system suggest that different LBP subgroups demonstrate different patterns of movement during clinical tests, such as trunk lateral bending (TLB). The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the validity of the observation that lumbar region (LR) movement patterns during TLB are different between 2 subgroups of people with LBP: lumbar rotation with extension (Rotation With Extension) and lumbar rotation (Rotation). SUBJECTS: Participants were 44 people (28 men and 16 women; age [X+/-SD], 28.5+/-8.4 years) with chronic or recurrent LBP. METHODS: Each participant's LBP problem was classified with the MSI system. Kinematic variables were measured, and LBP symptoms were recorded during the TLB test. RESULTS: People in the 2 LBP subgroups demonstrated different patterns of LR movement during TLB. People in the Rotation With Extension subgroup displayed an asymmetric (right versus left) pattern of LR movement across the TLB movement, whereas people in the Rotation subgroup displayed a symmetric pattern of LR movement. Equal proportions of people in the 2 subgroups reported an increase in symptoms with the TLB test. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The patterns of LR movement across the TLB movement were different in 2 subgroups of people with LBP. The difference in the LR movement patterns between subgroups may be an important factor to consider in specifying the details of the interventions for these 2 LBP problems.     

Symmetry of timing of hip and lumbopelvic rotation motion in 2 different subgroups of people with low back pain

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether lumbopelvic motion associated with a clinical test of active hip lateral rotation (HLR) systematically varied between people classified into 1 of 2 low back pain (LBP) subgroups: lumbar rotation (Rot) or lumbar rotation with extension (RotExt); and, specifically, to determine whether the timing of hip and lumbopelvic rotation with HLR would be more symmetric, right versus left, in people in the Rot subgroup compared with the RotExt subgroup. DESIGN: Two-group, cross-sectional. SETTING: A university-based movement science laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects were 39 people (23 men, 16 women; mean age, 28.1+/-8.0 y) with chronic or recurrent LBP who regularly participated in a rotation-related sport and associated their LBP symptoms with participation. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects participated in a standardized clinical examination to classify their LBP problem. A 3-dimensional movement system was used to capture kinematics of hip and lumbopelvic rotation during the test of active HLR. To examine timing of motion between the hip and lumbopelvic region, the difference in time between the start of hip and lumbopelvic rotation was calculated (startdiff). Symmetry of motion was indexed by the correlation (r) between right and left startdiff and the coefficient of determination (r2) for each LBP subgroup. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to subject, LBP, activity, and range of motion variables (P range, >.05 for all comparisons). People in the Rot subgroup displayed significantly more symmetry of timing of hip and lumbopelvic rotation motion with active HLR than people in the RotExt subgroup (Rot subgroup: r=.94, r2=.88, P=.00; RotExt subgroup: r=.31, r2=.10, P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: People in the Rot and RotExt subgroups displayed systematic differences in how they moved the hip and lumbopelvic region with the clinical test of active HLR. These findings are potentially important because such differences in movement patterns between subgroups of people with LBP suggest different contributing factors and may require different treatments to affect the movement patterns.