Literature DB >> 31044671

Classification by pain pattern for patients with cervical spine radiculopathy.

Richard Yarznbowicz1, Matt Wlodarski2, Jonathan Dolutan2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A prospective observational cohort study was conducted to (1) report the prevalence of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) classifications, Centralization (CEN), and Non-CEN among patients with Cervical Spine Radiculopathy (CSR), and (2) describe the association between classification via CEN and Non-CEN and clinical outcomes at follow-up.
METHODS: Data were collected from 680 consecutive patients who presented to outpatient, orthopedic physical therapy clinics with primary complaints of neck pain with and without radiculopathy; thirty-nine patients (6%) met the physical examination inclusion criteria for CSR. First examination and follow-up data were completed by 19 patients.
RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of patients' conditions were classified as Reducible Derangement at first examination and 21% were classified as either Irreducible Derangement, Entrapment, or Mechanically Inconclusive. The prevalence of CEN and Non-CEN was 36.8% and 47.4%, respectively. All patients treated via MDT methods made clinically significant improvements in disability, but not pain intensity, at follow-up. The magnitude of change in clinical outcomes was greatest for patients who exhibited CEN; however, the changes in disability and pain intensity at follow-up were not statistically significant compared to patients who exhibited Non-CEN at first examination. Patients who exhibited CEN were discharged, on average, ten days earlier and had one less treatment visit compared to patients who exhibited Non-CEN. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study show that patients with CSR can be classified and treated via MDT methods and experienced clinically significant improvements in disability, but not pain intensity, at follow-up. Providers should consider MDT classification and treatment to improve clinical outcomes for their patients affected by CSR.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical spine; McKenzie; centralization; cervical radiculopathy; directional preference; musculoskeletal; neck pain; orthopedic

Year:  2019        PMID: 31044671      PMCID: PMC7480406          DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2019.1587135

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Man Manip Ther        ISSN: 1066-9817


  40 in total

Review 1.  Is treatment in extension contraindicated in the presence of cervical spinal cord compression without myelopathy? A case report.

Authors:  Donald R Murphy; Jacqueline L Beres
Journal:  Man Ther       Date:  2008-02-15

Review 2.  The effectiveness of conservative treatment for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Erik J Thoomes; Wendy Scholten-Peeters; Bart Koes; Deborah Falla; Arianne P Verhagen
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.442

3.  Clinical predictors of screening lumbar zygapophyseal joint blocks: development of clinical prediction rules.

Authors:  Mark Laslett; Barry McDonald; Charles N Aprill; Hans Tropp; Birgitta Oberg
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

4.  Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain.

Authors:  John D Childs; Sara R Piva; Julie M Fritz
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  A prospective study of centralization of lumbar and referred pain. A predictor of symptomatic discs and anular competence.

Authors:  R Donelson; C Aprill; R Medcalf; W Grant
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the neck disability index, patient-specific functional scale, and numeric pain rating scale in patients with cervical radiculopathy.

Authors:  Ian A Young; Joshua A Cleland; Lori A Michener; Chris Brown
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.159

7.  Outcome in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Prospective, multicenter study with independent clinical review.

Authors:  P Sampath; M Bendebba; J D Davis; T Ducker
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Proposal of a classification system for patients with neck pain.

Authors:  John D Childs; Julie M Fritz; Sara R Piva; Julie M Whitman
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.751

Review 9.  A systematic review of efficacy of McKenzie therapy for spinal pain.

Authors:  Helen A Clare; Roger Adams; Christopher G Maher
Journal:  Aust J Physiother       Date:  2004

10.  Centralization: prevalence and effect on treatment outcomes using a standardized operational definition and measurement method.

Authors:  Mark W Werneke; Dennis L Hart; Linda Resnik; Paul W Stratford; Adrian Reyes
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.751

View more
  1 in total

1.  Application and utility of a clinical framework for spinally referred neck-arm pain: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study protocol.

Authors:  Camilla Kapitza; Kerstin Lüdtke; Brigitte Tampin; Nikolaus Ballenberger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.