Top

European Spine Journal

Published in:

01-10-2008 | Letter to the Editor

Letter to the editor concerning “Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial” (M. Hancock et al.)

Authors: Jeffrey J. Hebert, Stephen M. Perle

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2008

Excerpt

To the Editor: …

Childs JD et al (2004) A clinical prediction rule to identify patients with low back pain most likely to benefit from spinal manipulation: a validation study. Ann Intern Med 141(12):920–928PubMed

Cleland JA et al (2006) The use of a lumbar spine manipulation technique by physical therapists in patients who satisfy a clinical prediction rule: a case series. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36(4):209–214PubMed

Flynn T et al (2002) A clinical prediction rule for classifying patients with low back pain who demonstrate short term improvement with spinal manipulation. Spine 27:2835–2843PubMedCrossRef

Flynn TW et al (2008) Manual physical therapy: we speak gibberish. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 38(3):97–98PubMed

Fritz JM, Childs JD, Flynn TW (2005) Pragmatic application of a clinical prediction rule in spinal manipulation intervention primary care to identify patients with low back pain with a good prognosis following a brief spinal manipulation intervention. BMC Fam Pract 6(1):29PubMedCrossRef

Fritz JM, Brennan GP, Leaman H (2006) Does the evidence for spinal manipulation translate into better outcomes in routine clinical care for patients with occupational low back pain? A case-control study. Spine J 6(3):289–295PubMedCrossRef

Fritz JM, Cleland JA, Childs JD (2007) Subgrouping patients with low back pain: evolution of a classification approach to physical therapy. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 37(6):290–302PubMed

Hancock MJ et al (2007) Assessment of diclofenac or spinal manipulative therapy, or both, in addition to recommended first-line treatment for acute low back pain: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 370(9599):1638–1643PubMedCrossRef

Hancock MJ et al (2008) Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Eur Spine J (in press)

10.

Kent P et al (2005) Does clinician treatment choice improve the outcomes of manual therapy for nonspecific low back pain? A metaanalysis. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 28(5):312–322PubMedCrossRef

11.

Vega CP (2008) NSAIDs and Manipulation ineffective for acute low back pain: a best evidence review. Best Evid Rev. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/572783. Accessed 10 May 2008

Title: Letter to the editor concerning “Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial” (M. Hancock et al.)
Authors: Jeffrey J. Hebert
Stephen M. Perle
Publication date: 01-10-2008
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2008
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-008-0727-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Letter to the editor concerning “Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial” (M. Hancock et al.)

Excerpt

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2008

MRI follow-up of subchondral signal abnormalities in a selected group of chronic low back pain patients

Intra- and inter-observer reliability of determining radiographic sagittal parameters of the spine and pelvis using a manual and a computer-assisted methods

Announcements

Percutaneous pedicle screw insertion of the spine

The course of the acute vertebral body fragility fracture: its effect on pain, disability and quality of life during 12 months