Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 18719, 2024 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39134589

ABSTRACT

In chronic musculoskeletal conditions, the prognosis tends to be more informative than the diagnosis for the future course of the disease. Many studies have identified clusters of patients who seemingly share similar pain trajectories. In a dataset of low back pain (LBP) patients, pain trajectories have been identified, and distinct trajectory types have been defined, making it possible to create pattern recognition software that can classify patients into respective pain trajectories reflecting their condition. It has been suggested that the classification of pain trajectories may create clinically meaningful subgroups of patients in an otherwise heterogeneous population of patients with LBP. A software tool was created that combined the ability to recognise the pain trajectory of patients with a system that could create subgroups of patients based on their characteristics. This tool is primarily meant for researchers to analyse trends in large heterogeneous datasets without large losses of data. Prospective analysis of pain trajectories is not directly helpful for clinicians. However, the tool might aid in the identification of patient characteristics which have predictive capabilities of the most likely trajectory a patient might experience in the future. This will help clinicians to tailor their advice and treatment for a specific patient.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Software , Humans , Low Back Pain/diagnosis , Female , Male , Pain Measurement/methods , Middle Aged , Adult , Prognosis
2.
PLoS One ; 16(2): e0244633, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33544707

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Studies using magnetic resonance imaging to assess lumbar multifidus cross-sectional area frequently utilize T1 or T2-weighted sequences, but seldom provide the rationale for their sequence choice. However, technical considerations between their acquisition protocols could impact on the ability to assess lumbar multifidus anatomy or its fat/muscle distinction. Our objectives were to examine the concurrent validity of lumbar multifidus morphology measures of T2 compared to T1-weighted sequences, and to assess the reliability of repeated lumbar multifidus measures. METHODS: The lumbar multifidus total cross-sectional area of 45 patients was measured bilaterally at L4 and L5, with histogram analysis determining the muscle/fat threshold values per muscle. Images were later re-randomized and re-assessed for intra-rater reliability. Matched images were visually rated for consistency of outlining between both image sequences. Bland-Altman bias, limits of agreement, and plots were calculated for differences in total cross-sectional area and percentage fat between and within sequences, and intra-rater reliability analysed. RESULTS: T1-weighted total cross-sectional area measures were systematically larger than T2 (0.2 cm2), with limits of agreement <±10% at both spinal levels. For percentage fat, no systematic bias occurred, but limits of agreement approached ±15%. Visually, muscle outlining was consistent between sequences, with substantial mismatches occurring in <5% of cases. Intra-rater reliability was excellent (ICC: 0.981-0.998); with bias and limits of agreement less than 1% and ±5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Total cross-sectional area measures and outlining of muscle boundaries were consistent between sequences, and intra-rater reliability for total cross-sectional area and percentage fat was high indicating that either MRI sequence could be used interchangeably for this purpose. However, further studies comparing the accuracy of various methods for distinguishing fat from muscle are recommended.


Subject(s)
Adipose Tissue/diagnostic imaging , Low Back Pain/diagnostic imaging , Lumbar Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Paraspinal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging
3.
Syst Rev ; 6(1): 21, 2017 01 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28122640

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of pain and disability, resulting in a major socioeconomic impact. The Cochrane Review which examined the effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for chronic LBP concluded that SMT is moderately effective, but was based on conventional meta-analysis of aggregate data. The use of individual participant data (IPD) from trials allows for a more precise estimate of the treatment effect and has the potential to identify moderators and/or mediators. The aim is (1) to assess the overall treatment effect of SMT for primary and secondary outcomes in adults with chronic LBP, (2) to determine possible moderation of baseline characteristics on treatment effect, (3) to identify characteristics of intervention (e.g., manipulation/mobilization) that influence the treatment effect, and (4) to identify mediators of treatment effects. METHODS: All trials included in the Cochrane Review on SMT for chronic LBP will be included which were published after the year 2000, and the search will be updated. No restrictions will be placed on the type of comparison or size of the study. Primary outcomes are pain intensity and physical functioning. A dataset will be compiled consisting of individual trials and variables included according to a predefined coding scheme. Variables to be included are descriptive of characteristics of the study, treatment, comparison, participant characteristics, and outcomes at all follow-up periods. A one-stage approach with a mixed model technique based on the intention-to-treat principle will be used for the analysis. Subsequent analyses will focus on treatment effect moderators and mediators. DISCUSSION: We will analyze IPD for LBP trials in which SMT is one of the interventions. IPD meta-analysis has been shown to be more reliable and valid than aggregate data meta-analysis, although this difference might also be attributed to the number of studies that can be used or the amount of data that can be utilized. Therefore, this project may identify important gaps in our knowledge with respect to prognostic factors of treatment effects. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015025714.


Subject(s)
Manipulation, Spinal , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Chronic Disease , Humans , Low Back Pain/therapy , Manipulation, Spinal/methods , Treatment Outcome
4.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 24(3): 210-3, 2001.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11313618

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To review the case of a missed cervical spine fracture in a patient with neck pain. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 21-year-old thatcher with neck pain presented to a chiropractic clinic after a fall from a roof 4 m high. The hospital radiographs were read as normal. The chiropractor suspected a Jefferson fracture of the atlas after evaluation of the same radiographs. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The chiropractor retook the anteroposterior open-mouth radiograph to confirm the suspected fracture. The patient was referred for further imaging and underwent neurosurgical treatment, after which he recovered well. CONCLUSION: Normal radiologic reports from a hospital cannot be relied on for contraindications to manipulative treatment in all instances, as shown in this case of a missed fracture. Chiropractors should therefore always evaluate radiographs that are brought to them.


Subject(s)
Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Cervical Vertebrae/injuries , Chiropractic , Fractures, Bone/diagnostic imaging , Adult , Diagnostic Errors , Fractures, Bone/surgery , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL