Exploring indicators of extremity pain of spinal source as identified by Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT): a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore indicators that predict whether patients with extremity pain have a spinal or extremity source of pain. METHODS: The data were from a prospective cohort study (n = 369). Potential indicators were gathered from a typical Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) history and examination. A stepwise logistic regression with a backward elimination was performed to determine which indicators predict classification into spinal or extremity source groups. A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to examine the number of significant indicators that could predict group classification. RESULTS: Five indicators were identified to predict group classification. Classification into the spinal group was associated with the presence of paresthesia [odds ratio (OR) 1.984], change in symptoms with sitting/neck or trunk flexion/turning neck/when still (OR 2.642), change in symptoms with posture change (OR 3.956), restrictions in spinal movements (OR 2.633), and no restrictions in extremity movements (OR 2.241). The optimal number of indicators for classification was two (sensitivity = 0.638, specificity = 0.807). DISCUSSION: This study provides guidance on clinical indicators that predict the source of symptoms for isolated extremity pain. The clinical indicators will allow clinicians to supplement their decision-making process in regard to spinal and extremity differentiation so as to appropriately target their examinations and interventions.

Do patients with low back pain remember physiotherapists' advice? A mixed-methods study on patient-therapist communication.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study was to determine if the advice physiotherapists think they provide to patients with low back pain (LBP) is what the patients remember and take away from the clinical encounter. The secondary aim was to determine which factors may influence the retention of this advice. METHODS: The first component of the study used questionnaires completed by patients and therapists after the initial visit. Related questionnaires of patients and therapists were screened for inconsistencies. The second component of the study involved semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Ninety pairs of questionnaires were completed. Therapists provided patients with one (N = 90), two (N = 85) or three (N = 51) items of advice regarding the management of their LBP. All patients remembered the first item of advice, 92% remembered a second, and 67% remembered the third piece of advice. All items of advice were deemed either 'relevant' or 'very relevant' by 97% of the patients. After the analysis of 14 interviews, data saturation was reached. Four themes emerged from the data analysis of the interviews: (a) Evaluation type, (b) Exercise factors, (c) Patient concerns about their diagnosis, and (d) Patient expectations. DISCUSSION: In most cases, patients remembered what therapists told them and considered that the advice provided was relevant. Based on the qualitative data, patients were more likely to remember what therapists said when: (a) shared decision making was used during the initial encounter, (b) prescribed exercises were simple to perform and few in number, (c) patients' concerns about their diagnosis were addressed, and (d) patients' expectations were identified and addressed.

A study exploring the prevalence of Extremity Pain of Spinal Source (EXPOSS).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the proportion of patients that present with isolated extremity pain who have a spinal source of symptoms and evaluate the response to spinal intervention. METHODS: Participants (n = 369) presenting with isolated extremity pain and who believed that their pain was not originating from their spine, were assessed using a Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy differentiation process. Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Upper Extremity/Lower Extremity Functional Index and the Orebro Questionnaire were collected at the initial visit and at discharge. Global Rating of Change outcomes were collected at discharge. Clinicians provided MDT 'treatment as usual'. A chi-square test examined the overall significance of the comparison within each region. Effect sizes between spinal and extremity source groups were calculated for the outcome scores at discharge. RESULTS: Overall, 43.5% of participants had a spinal source of symptoms. Effect sizes indicated that the spinal source group had improved outcomes at discharge for all outcomes compared to the extremity source group. DISCUSSION: Over 40% of patients with isolated extremity pain, who believed that their pain was not originating from the spine, responded to spinal intervention and thus were classified as having a spinal source of symptoms. These patients did significantly better than those whose extremity pain did not have a spinal source and were managed with local extremity interventions. The results suggest the spine is a common source of extremity pain and adequate screening is warranted to ensure the patients ́ source of symptoms is addressed.