Literature DB >> 17576604

Subclassification of low back pain: a cross-country comparison.

Evdokia V Billis1, Christopher J McCarthy, Jacqueline A Oldham.   

Abstract

Various health professionals have attempted to classify low back pain (LBP) subgroups and have developed several LBP classification systems. Knowing that culture has an effect on LBP symptomatology, assessment findings and clinical decision making, the aim of this review is to perform a cross-country comparative review amongst the published classification systems, addressing each country's similarities and differences as well as exploring whether cultural factors have been incorporated into the subclassification process. A systematic search of databases limited to human adults was undertaken by Medline, Cinahl, AMED and PEDro databases between January 1980 and October 2005. Classification systems from nine countries were identified. Most studies were classified according to pathoanatomic and/or clinical features, whereas fewer studies utilized a psychosocial and even less, a biopsychosocial approach. Most studies were limited in use to the country of the system's developer. Very few studies addressed cultural issues, highlighting the lack of information on the impact of specific cultural factors on LBP classification procedures. However, there seem to be certain 'cultural trends' in classification systems within each country, which are discussed. Despite the plethora of classification studies, there is still no system which is internationally established, effective, reliable and valid. Future research should aim to develop a LBP classification system within a well identified cultural setting, addressing the multi-dimensional features of the LBP presentation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17576604      PMCID: PMC2219658          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0313-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  90 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of psychological factors as predictors of chronicity/disability in prospective cohorts of low back pain.

Authors:  Tamar Pincus; A Kim Burton; Steve Vogel; Andy P Field
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  Classification and low back pain: a review of the literature and critical analysis of selected systems.

Authors:  D L Riddle
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1998-07

3.  Behavioral assessment of low back pain: identification of pain behavior subgroups.

Authors:  Francis J Keefe; Laurence A Bradley; James E Crisson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 6.961

4.  Why has the search for causes of low back pain largely been nonconclusive?

Authors:  C Leboeuf-Yde; J M Lauritsen; T Lauritzen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Preliminary development of a clinical prediction rule for determining which patients with low back pain will respond to a stabilization exercise program.

Authors:  Gregory E Hicks; Julie M Fritz; Anthony Delitto; Stuart M McGill
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Clinical examination variables discriminate among treatment-based classification groups: a study of construct validity in patients with acute low back pain.

Authors:  Steven Z George; Anthony Delitto
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2005-04

7.  "INTERMED": a method to assess health service needs. II. Results on its validity and clinical use.

Authors:  F C Stiefel; P de Jonge; F J Huyse; P Guex; J P Slaets; J S Lyons; J Spagnoli; M Vannotti
Journal:  Gen Hosp Psychiatry       Date:  1999 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.238

8.  Association between direction of lateral lumbar shift, movement tests, and side of symptoms in patients with low back pain syndrome.

Authors:  J A Tenhula; S J Rose; A Delitto
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1990-08

9.  Discriminant validity and relative precision for classifying patients with nonspecific neck and back pain by anatomic pain patterns.

Authors:  Mark Werneke; Dennis L Hart
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Factors affecting general practitioners' decisions about plain radiography for back pain: implications for classification of guideline barriers--a qualitative study.

Authors:  Ansgar Espeland; Anders Baerheim
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-03-24       Impact factor: 2.655

View more
  24 in total

1.  Disentangling classification systems from their individual categories and the category-specific criteria: an essential consideration to evaluate clinical utility.

Authors:  Julie Fritz
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-12

2.  Distressed, immobilized, or lacking employer support? A sub-classification of acute work-related low back pain.

Authors:  Silje Endresen Reme; William S Shaw; Ivan A Steenstra; Mary Jane Woiszwillo; Glenn Pransky; Steven J Linton
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2012-12

3.  The cost-effectiveness of a treatment-based classification system for low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation.

Authors:  Adri T Apeldoorn; Raymond W Ostelo; Hans van Helvoirt; Julie M Fritz; Henrika C W de Vet; Maurits W van Tulder
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Movement control exercise versus general exercise to reduce disability in patients with low back pain and movement control impairment. A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Jeannette Saner; Jan Kool; Rob A de Bie; Judith M Sieben; Hannu Luomajoki
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Knowledge translation from continuing education to physiotherapy practice in classifying patients with low back pain.

Authors:  Eira Karvonen; Markku Paatelma; Jukka-Pekka Kesonen; Ari O Heinonen
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2015-05

6.  Inter-tester Reliability in Classifying Acute and Subacute Low Back Pain Patients into Clinical Subgroups: A Comparison of Specialists and Non-Specialists. A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Markku Paatelma; Eira Karvqnen; Ari Heinqnen
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2009

7.  Outcomes differ between subgroups of patients with low back and leg pain following neural manual therapy: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Axel Schäfer; Toby Hall; Gerd Müller; Kathryn Briffa
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

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

Authors:  Adri T Apeldoorn; Hans van Helvoirt; Raymond W Ostelo; Hanneke Meihuizen; Steven J Kamper; Maurits W van Tulder; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2016-05

9.  What comprises a good outcome in spinal surgery? A preliminary survey among spine surgeons of the SSE and European spine patients.

Authors:  M Haefeli; A Elfering; M Aebi; B J C Freeman; P Fritzell; J Guimaraes Consciencia; C Lamartina; M Mayer; T Lund; N Boos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Clinical perspective: how do clinical test results differentiate chronic and subacute low back pain patients from "non-patients"?

Authors:  Markku Paatelma; Eira Karvonen; Jouko Heiskanen
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2009
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.