The Role of Classification of Chronic Low Back Pain

被引:85
|
作者
Fairbank, Jeremy [2 ]
Gwilym, Stephen E. [2 ]
France, John C. [3 ]
Daffner, Scott D. [3 ]
Dettori, Joseph [1 ]
Hermsmeyer, Jeff [1 ]
Andersson, Gunnar [4 ]
机构
[1] Spectrum Res Inc, Tacoma, WA 98405 USA
[2] Nuffield Orthopaed Ctr, Oxford OX3 7LD, England
[3] W Virginia Univ, Dept Orthopaed, Morgantown, WV 26506 USA
[4] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Ronald L DeWald MD Chair Spinal Deform, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
关键词
chronic low back pain; classification systems; treatment-based outcome; reliability; systematic review; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; LUMBAR SPINE; INTERTESTER RELIABILITY; REHABILITATION PROGRAM; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; ARTIFICIAL DISC; MOVEMENT; THERAPY; FUSION; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ef72c
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Systematic review. Objective. To describe the various ways chronic low back pain (CLBP) is classified, to determine if the classification systems are reliable and to assess whether classification-specific interventions have been shown to be effective in treating CLBP. Summary of Background Data. A classification system by which individual patients with CLBP could be identified and directed to an effective treatment protocol would be beneficial. Those systems that direct treatment have the greatest potential influence on patient outcomes. Methods. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library for English language literature published through January 2011. We included articles that specifically described a clinical classification system for CLBP, reported on the reliability of a classification system, or evaluated the effectiveness of classification-specific interventions. Results. A total of 60 articles were initially reviewed. We identified 28 classification systems that met inclusion criteria: 16 diagnostic systems, 7 prognostic systems, and 5 treatment-based systems. In addition, we found 10 randomized controlled trials of CLBP treatment from which we compared inclusion and exclusion criteria. Treatment-based systems were all directed at nonoperative management. Four of the 5 treatment-based systems underwent reliability testing and were found to have interobserver agreement of 70% to 100%. Reliability increased with training and familiarity with a given classification. As the number of subgroups within a classification increased, interobserver agreement decreased. Function and pain were similar between patients treated with the McKenzie classification system and those treated with dynamic strengthening training after 8 months of follow-up in one randomized controlled trial. One prospective cohort study reported better pain and function using the Canadian Back Institute Classification system than with standard rehabilitation. An analysis of the admission criteria to recent randomized studies with either nonoperative care or another surgical intervention provided a methodology for refining criteria to be met by patients considering surgery. Conclusion. There currently are many classification systems for CLBP; some that are descriptive, some prognostic, and some that attempt to direct treatment. We recommend that no one classification system be adopted for all purposes. We further recommend that future efforts in developing a classification system focus on one that helps to direct both surgical and nonsurgical treatments. Clinical Recommendations. There currently are many classification systems for CLBP; some that are descriptive, some prognostic, and some that attempt to direct treatment. We recommend that no one classification system be adopted for all purposes. We further recommend that future efforts in developing a classification system focus on one that helps to direct both surgical and nonsurgical treatments.
引用
收藏
页码:S19 / S42
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] CHRONIC LOW-BACK PAIN LOW-BACK LOSER
    STERNBACH, RA
    MURPHY, RW
    AKESON, WH
    WOLF, SR
    POSTGRADUATE MEDICINE, 1973, 53 (06) : 135 - 138
  • [42] PROBLEMS OF CLASSIFICATION OF LOW-BACK-PAIN
    ANDERSON, JAD
    RHEUMATOLOGY AND REHABILITATION, 1977, 16 (01): : 34 - 36
  • [43] Effectiveness of a low back pain classification system
    Hall, Hamilton
    McIntosh, Greg
    Boyle, Christina
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2009, 9 (08): : 648 - 657
  • [44] Are patients with chronic low back pain or chronic neck pain fatigued?
    Fishbain, DA
    Cutler, RB
    Cole, B
    Lewis, J
    Smets, E
    Rosomoff, HL
    Rosomoff, RS
    PAIN MEDICINE, 2004, 5 (02) : 187 - 195
  • [45] The Role Of Race, Just World Belief, And Pain Acceptance In Adjustment To Chronic Low Back Pain
    Crouch, Taylor
    Trost, Zina
    Sturgeon, Drew
    JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2023, 24 (04): : 101 - 102
  • [46] The role of anticipation and fear of pain in the persistence of avoidance behavior in patients with chronic low back pain
    Al-Obaidi, SM
    Nelson, RM
    Al-Awadhi, S
    Al-Shuwaie, N
    SPINE, 2000, 25 (09) : 1126 - 1131
  • [47] EXPLORING THE ROLE OF PAIN CATASTROPHIZING IN DRIVING BEHAVIOR AMONG INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN
    Seward, Joshua
    Gates, Maegan
    Rumble, Deanna D.
    Attridge, Nina
    Stavrinos, Despina
    Moore, David J.
    Trost, Zina
    ANNALS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE, 2018, 52 : S331 - S331
  • [48] Psychometric properties of chronic low back pain diagnostic classification systems: a systematic review
    Ahmed Omar Abdelnaeem
    Aliaa Rehan Youssef
    Nesreen Fawzy Mahmoud
    Nadia Abdalazeem Fayaz
    Robert Vining
    European Spine Journal, 2021, 30 : 957 - 989
  • [49] Inter-rater reliability of classification systems in chronic low back pain populations
    Flavell, Carol
    Gordon, Susan
    Marshman, Laurence
    Watt, Kerrianne
    PHYSICAL THERAPY REVIEWS, 2014, 19 (03) : 204 - 212
  • [50] Psychometric properties of chronic low back pain diagnostic classification systems: a systematic review
    Abdelnaeem, Ahmed Omar
    Youssef, Aliaa Rehan
    Mahmoud, Nesreen Fawzy
    Fayaz, Nadia Abdalazeem
    Vining, Robert
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 30 (04) : 957 - 989