北欧背部疼痛亚群项目:预测芬兰脊椎指压治疗患者的预后。

Stefan Malmqvist, Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, Tuomo Ahola, Olli Andersson, Kristian Ekström, Harri Pekkarinen, Markku Turpeinen, Niels Wedderkopp
{"title":"北欧背部疼痛亚群项目:预测芬兰脊椎指压治疗患者的预后。","authors":"Stefan Malmqvist,&nbsp;Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde,&nbsp;Tuomo Ahola,&nbsp;Olli Andersson,&nbsp;Kristian Ekström,&nbsp;Harri Pekkarinen,&nbsp;Markku Turpeinen,&nbsp;Niels Wedderkopp","doi":"10.1186/1746-1340-16-13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In a previous Swedish study it was shown that it is possible to predict which chiropractic patients with persistent LBP will not report definite improvement early in the course of treatment, namely those with LBP for altogether at least 30 days in the past year, who had leg pain, and who did not report definite general improvement by the second treatment. The objectives of this study were to investigate if the predictive value of this set of variables could be reproduced among chiropractic patients in Finland, and if the model could be improved by adding some new potential predictor variables.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was a multi-centre prospective outcome study with internal control groups, carried out in private chiropractic practices in Finland. Chiropractors collected data at the 1st, 2nd and 4th visits using standardized questionnaires on new patients with LBP and/or radiating leg pain. Status at base-line was identified in relation to pain and disability, at the 2nd visit in relation to disability, and \"definitely better\" at the 4th visit in relation to a global assessment. The Swedish questionnaire was used including three new questions on general health, pain in other parts of the spine, and body mass index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Swedish model was reproduced in this study sample. An alternative model including leg pain (yes/no), improvement at 2nd visit (yes/no) and BMI (underweight/normal/overweight or obese) was also identified with similar predictive values. Common throughout the testing of various models was that improvement at the 2nd visit had an odds ratio of approximately 5. Additional analyses revealed a dose-response in that 84% of those patients who fulfilled none of these (bad) criteria were classified as \"definitely better\" at the 4th visit, vs. 75%, 60% and 34% of those who fulfilled 1, 2 or all 3 of the criteria, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When treating patients with LBP, at the first visits, the treatment strategy should be different for overweight/obese patients with leg pain as it should be for all patients who fail to improve by the 2nd visit. The number of predictors is also important.</p>","PeriodicalId":87173,"journal":{"name":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","volume":"16 ","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1746-1340-16-13","citationCount":"40","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Nordic back pain subpopulation program: predicting outcome among chiropractic patients in Finland.\",\"authors\":\"Stefan Malmqvist,&nbsp;Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde,&nbsp;Tuomo Ahola,&nbsp;Olli Andersson,&nbsp;Kristian Ekström,&nbsp;Harri Pekkarinen,&nbsp;Markku Turpeinen,&nbsp;Niels Wedderkopp\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1746-1340-16-13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In a previous Swedish study it was shown that it is possible to predict which chiropractic patients with persistent LBP will not report definite improvement early in the course of treatment, namely those with LBP for altogether at least 30 days in the past year, who had leg pain, and who did not report definite general improvement by the second treatment. The objectives of this study were to investigate if the predictive value of this set of variables could be reproduced among chiropractic patients in Finland, and if the model could be improved by adding some new potential predictor variables.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was a multi-centre prospective outcome study with internal control groups, carried out in private chiropractic practices in Finland. Chiropractors collected data at the 1st, 2nd and 4th visits using standardized questionnaires on new patients with LBP and/or radiating leg pain. Status at base-line was identified in relation to pain and disability, at the 2nd visit in relation to disability, and \\\"definitely better\\\" at the 4th visit in relation to a global assessment. The Swedish questionnaire was used including three new questions on general health, pain in other parts of the spine, and body mass index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Swedish model was reproduced in this study sample. An alternative model including leg pain (yes/no), improvement at 2nd visit (yes/no) and BMI (underweight/normal/overweight or obese) was also identified with similar predictive values. Common throughout the testing of various models was that improvement at the 2nd visit had an odds ratio of approximately 5. Additional analyses revealed a dose-response in that 84% of those patients who fulfilled none of these (bad) criteria were classified as \\\"definitely better\\\" at the 4th visit, vs. 75%, 60% and 34% of those who fulfilled 1, 2 or all 3 of the criteria, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When treating patients with LBP, at the first visits, the treatment strategy should be different for overweight/obese patients with leg pain as it should be for all patients who fail to improve by the 2nd visit. The number of predictors is also important.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chiropractic & osteopathy\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1746-1340-16-13\",\"citationCount\":\"40\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chiropractic & osteopathy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1340-16-13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1340-16-13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 40

摘要

背景:瑞典先前的一项研究表明,可以预测哪些患有持续性腰痛的整脊患者在治疗过程的早期不会报告明确的改善,即那些在过去一年中患有腰痛至少30天的患者,有腿痛的患者,以及在第二次治疗时没有报告明确的总体改善的患者。本研究的目的是探讨这组变量的预测价值是否可以在芬兰的脊椎指压治疗患者中重现,以及是否可以通过添加一些新的潜在预测变量来改进模型。方法:该研究是一项多中心前瞻性结果研究,内部对照组,在芬兰的私人脊椎指压治疗实践中进行。脊医在第一次、第二次和第四次就诊时对腰痛和/或放射性腿痛的新患者使用标准化问卷收集数据。在第二次访问时,确定了与疼痛和残疾相关的基线状态,在第4次访问时,确定了与残疾相关的基线状态,并且在与全球评估相关的第四次访问中“肯定更好”。瑞典问卷包括三个关于一般健康、脊柱其他部位疼痛和体重指数的新问题。结果:瑞典模型在本研究样本中重现。另一种模型包括腿痛(是/否)、第二次就诊时的改善(是/否)和BMI(体重不足/正常/超重或肥胖)也被确定为具有类似的预测值。在各种模型的测试中,常见的是第二次访问时的改善具有大约5的优势比。额外的分析显示,在那些没有达到这些(不良)标准的患者中,84%的患者在第4次就诊时被归类为“绝对更好”,而满足1、2或全部3个标准的患者分别为75%、60%和34%。结论:在治疗腰痛患者时,第一次就诊时,超重/肥胖患者的治疗策略应与第二次就诊时未能改善的所有患者的治疗策略不同。预测因子的数量也很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Nordic back pain subpopulation program: predicting outcome among chiropractic patients in Finland.

The Nordic back pain subpopulation program: predicting outcome among chiropractic patients in Finland.

The Nordic back pain subpopulation program: predicting outcome among chiropractic patients in Finland.

Background: In a previous Swedish study it was shown that it is possible to predict which chiropractic patients with persistent LBP will not report definite improvement early in the course of treatment, namely those with LBP for altogether at least 30 days in the past year, who had leg pain, and who did not report definite general improvement by the second treatment. The objectives of this study were to investigate if the predictive value of this set of variables could be reproduced among chiropractic patients in Finland, and if the model could be improved by adding some new potential predictor variables.

Methods: The study was a multi-centre prospective outcome study with internal control groups, carried out in private chiropractic practices in Finland. Chiropractors collected data at the 1st, 2nd and 4th visits using standardized questionnaires on new patients with LBP and/or radiating leg pain. Status at base-line was identified in relation to pain and disability, at the 2nd visit in relation to disability, and "definitely better" at the 4th visit in relation to a global assessment. The Swedish questionnaire was used including three new questions on general health, pain in other parts of the spine, and body mass index.

Results: The Swedish model was reproduced in this study sample. An alternative model including leg pain (yes/no), improvement at 2nd visit (yes/no) and BMI (underweight/normal/overweight or obese) was also identified with similar predictive values. Common throughout the testing of various models was that improvement at the 2nd visit had an odds ratio of approximately 5. Additional analyses revealed a dose-response in that 84% of those patients who fulfilled none of these (bad) criteria were classified as "definitely better" at the 4th visit, vs. 75%, 60% and 34% of those who fulfilled 1, 2 or all 3 of the criteria, respectively.

Conclusion: When treating patients with LBP, at the first visits, the treatment strategy should be different for overweight/obese patients with leg pain as it should be for all patients who fail to improve by the 2nd visit. The number of predictors is also important.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信