Lumbar spine segmental mobility assessment: an examination of validity for determining intervention strategies in patients with low back pain.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the predictive validity of posterior-anterior (PA) mobility testing in a group of patients with low back pain (LBP).


METHODS
Randomized controlled trial.


METHODS
Outpatient physical therapy clinics.


METHODS
Patients with LBP (N=131; mean age +/- standard deviation, 33.9+/-10.9 y; range, 19-59 y), and a median symptom duration of 27 days (range, 1-5941 d). Patients completed a baseline examination, including PA mobility testing, and were categorized with respect to both hypomobility and hypermobility (present or absent), and treated for 4 weeks.


METHODS
Seventy patients were randomized to an intervention involving manipulation and 61 to a stabilization exercise intervention.


METHODS
Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) scores were collected at baseline and after 4 weeks. Three-way repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to assess the effect of mobility categorization and intervention group on the change on the ODQ with time. Number-needed-to-treat (NNT) statistics were calculated.


RESULTS
Ninety-three (71.0%) patients were judged to have hypomobility present and 15 (11.5%) were judged with hypermobility present. The ANOVAs resulted in significant interaction effects. Pairwise comparisons showed greater improvements among patients receiving manipulation categorized with hypomobility present versus absent (mean difference, 23.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1%-42.4%), and among patients receiving stabilization categorized with hypermobility present versus absent (mean difference, 36.4%; 95% CI, 10.3%-69.3%). For patients with hypomobility, failure rates were 26% with manipulation and 74.4% with stabilization (NNT=2.1; 95% CI, 1.6-3.5). For patients with hypermobility, failure rates were 83.3% and 22.2% for manipulation and stabilization, respectively (NNT=1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-10.2).


CONCLUSIONS
Patients with LBP judged to have lumbar hypomobility experienced greater benefit from an intervention including manipulation; those judged to have hypermobility were more likely to benefit from a stabilization exercise program.
Fritz
Julie M
JM
Division of Physical Therapy, University of Utah, and Clinical Outcomes Research Scientist, Intermountain Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.
Whitman
Julie M
JM
Childs
John D
JD
D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D005081:Exercise Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D017116:Low Back Pain / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000502:physiology*; D008297:Male; D020393:Manipulation, Spinal / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010147:Pain Measurement; D026741:Physical Therapy Modalities; D011336:Probability; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular / Q000502:physiology*; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D016896:Treatment Outcome