Subgrouping patients with low back pain in primary care: are we getting any better at it?

Low back pain is a common, disabling condition with high personal and economic costs. Despite clinical guidelines, there have not been tangible reductions in the population prevalence of back pain or its serious long-term consequences. One reason for this might be that the 'one-size fits all approach' advocated by many guidelines fails to target treatments at patients who might benefit the most, thus diluting their potential benefits. Identifying subgroups of patients for whom different treatments are superior has been referred to as the 'Holy Grail' of low back pain research. Maximising the potential for targeted interventions is predicated on better understanding of the prognostic factors that are causally related to clinical outcome and identifying which are a) most predictive of outcome and b) most likely to be modifiable. Systematic identification of key obstacles to recovery in primary care back pain patients from high quality epidemiological studies can inform the development of early, targeted interventions. Only then can closer matching of treatments to patient characteristics be a clinical reality. This paper critically reviews progress in subgrouping for targeted treatment for patients with low back pain, identifies the key arguments for and against subgrouping and highlights the attributes of robust approaches in this field.