Top

Published in:

01-10-2008 | Author's Reply

Answer to the letter to the editor of J. Hebert et al. concerning “Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, McAuley JH (2008) Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Epub ahead of publication DOI:10.1007/s00586-008-0679-9”

Authors: M. J. Hancock, C. G. Maher, R. D. Herbert

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2008

Excerpt

The primary concern of the letter to editor from Drs Hebert and Perle revolves around the fact that in our trial [4] the spinal manipulative therapy was delivered in a manner that was at the discretion of the therapists. In our trial, most patients received low velocity techniques while in the original trial by Childs et al. [2] all therapists were required to use the same single high velocity technique. We see this as strength of the analysis, not a weakness, because the aim of our analysis was to see if the clinical prediction rule developed by Childs and colleagues [2] would generalize to other forms of spinal manipulative therapy selected by highly skilled and experienced clinicians. …

Childs JD, Cleland JA (2006) Development and application of clinical prediction rules to improve decision making in physical therapist practice. Phys Ther 86:122–131PubMed

Childs JD, Fritz JM, Flynn TW, Irrgang JJ, Johnson KK, Majkowski GR 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 141:920–928PubMed

Cleland JA, Fritz JM, Childs JD, Kulig K (2006) Comparison of the effectiveness of three manual physical therapy techniques in a subgroup of patients with low back pain who satisfy a clinical prediction rule: study protocol of a randomized clinical trial [NCT00257998]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7:11PubMedCrossRef

Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, McAuley JH (2008) Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Epub ahead of publication doi:10.1007/s00586-008-0679-9:

Harvey E, Burton AK, Moffett JK, Breen A (2003) Spinal manipulation for low-back pain: a treatment package agreed to by the UK chiropractic, osteopathy and physiotherapy professional associations. Manual Ther 8:46–51CrossRef

Kent P, Marks D, Pearson W, Keating J (2005) Does clinician treatment choice improve the outcomes of manual therapy for nonspecific low back pain? A metaanalysis. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 28:312–322PubMedCrossRef

Laupacis A, Sekar N, Stiell IG (1997) Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 277:488–494PubMedCrossRef

McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS (2000) Users’ guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 284:79–84PubMedCrossRef

Reilly BM, Evans AT (2006) Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med 144:201–209PubMed

Title: Answer to the letter to the editor of J. Hebert et al. concerning “Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, Herbert RD, McAuley JH (2008) Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial. Epub ahead of publication DOI:10.1007/s00586-008-0679-9”
Authors: M. J. Hancock
C. G. Maher
R. D. Herbert
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/s00586-008-0728-4

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2008

Does abdominal obesity cause increase in the amount of epidural fat?

Modic changes: a systematic review of the literature

Announcements

Percutaneous pedicle screw insertion of the spine

SAPHO syndrome associated spondylitis

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