• F Cecchi, S Negrini, G Pasquini, A Paperini, A A Conti, M Chiti, F Zaina, C Macchi, and R Molino-Lova.
• Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Scientific Institute, Outpatient Rehabilitation Department, Florence, Italy. francescacecchi2002@libero.it
• Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Sep 1;48(3):371-8.

BackgroundRecent studies on chronic low back pain (cLBP) rehabilitation suggest that predictors of treatment outcome may be differ according to the considered conservative treatment.AimTo identify predictors of response to back school (BS), individual physiotherapy (IP) or spinal manipulation (SM) for cLBP.Populationoutpatients with cLBP.SettingOutpatient rehabilitation department.DesignRetrospective analysis from a randomized trial.MethodsTwo hundred and ten patients with cLBP were randomly assigned to either BS, IP or SM; the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RM) was assessed before and after treatment: those who decreased their RM score <2.5 were considered non-responders. Baseline potential predictors of outcome included demographics, general and cLBP history, life satisfaction.ResultsOf the 205 patients who completed treatment (140/205 women, age 58+14 years), non-responders were 72 (34.2%). SM showed the highest functional improvement and the lowest non-response rate. In a multivariable logistic regression, lower baseline RM score (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.89, P<0.001) and received treatment (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21-0.50, P<0.001) were independent predictors of non-response. Being in the lowest tertile of baseline RM score (<6) predicted non response to treatment for BS and IP, but not for SM (same risk for all tertiles).ConclusionsIn our patients with cLBP lower baseline pain-related disability predicted non-response to physiotherapy, but not to spinal manipulation.Clinical Rehabilitation ImpactOur results suggest that, independent form other characteristics, patients with cLBP and low pain-related disability should first consider spinal manipulation as a conservative treatment.

20 keywords...

hide…