TY - JOUR
T1 - Sub-grouping patients with non-specific low back pain based on cluster analysis of discriminatory clinical items
AU - Billis, Evdokia
AU - McCarthy, Christopher J.
AU - Roberts, Chris
AU - Gliatis, John
AU - Papandreou, Maria
AU - Gioftsos, George
AU - Oldham, Jacqueline A.
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - Objective: To identify potential subgroups amongst patients with non-specific low back pain based on a consensus list of potentially discriminatory examination items. Design: Exploratory study. Participants: A convenience sample of 106 patients with nonspecific low back pain (43 males, 63 females, mean age 36 years, standard deviation 15.9 years) and 7 physiotherapists. Methods: Based on 3 focus groups and a two-round Delphi involving 23 health professionals and a random stratified sample of 150 physiotherapists, respectively, a comprehensive examination list comprising the most "discriminatory" items was compiled. Following reliability analysis, the most reliable clinical items were assessed with a sample of patients with non-specific low back pain. K-means cluster analysis was conducted for 2-, 3- and 4-cluster options to explore for meaningful homogenous subgroups. Results: The most clinically meaningful cluster was a twosubgroup option, comprising a small group (n = 24) with more severe clinical presentation (i.e. more widespread pain, functional and sleeping problems, other symptoms, increased investigations undertaken, more severe clinical signs, etc.) and a larger less dysfunctional group (n = 80). Conclusion: A number of potentially discriminatory clinical items were identified by health professionals and sub-classified, based on a sample of patients with non-specific low back pain, into two subgroups. However, further work is needed to validate this classification process. © 2013 The Authors.
AB - Objective: To identify potential subgroups amongst patients with non-specific low back pain based on a consensus list of potentially discriminatory examination items. Design: Exploratory study. Participants: A convenience sample of 106 patients with nonspecific low back pain (43 males, 63 females, mean age 36 years, standard deviation 15.9 years) and 7 physiotherapists. Methods: Based on 3 focus groups and a two-round Delphi involving 23 health professionals and a random stratified sample of 150 physiotherapists, respectively, a comprehensive examination list comprising the most "discriminatory" items was compiled. Following reliability analysis, the most reliable clinical items were assessed with a sample of patients with non-specific low back pain. K-means cluster analysis was conducted for 2-, 3- and 4-cluster options to explore for meaningful homogenous subgroups. Results: The most clinically meaningful cluster was a twosubgroup option, comprising a small group (n = 24) with more severe clinical presentation (i.e. more widespread pain, functional and sleeping problems, other symptoms, increased investigations undertaken, more severe clinical signs, etc.) and a larger less dysfunctional group (n = 80). Conclusion: A number of potentially discriminatory clinical items were identified by health professionals and sub-classified, based on a sample of patients with non-specific low back pain, into two subgroups. However, further work is needed to validate this classification process. © 2013 The Authors.
KW - Classification
KW - Cluster analysis
KW - Greece
KW - Non-specific low back pain
KW - Subgrouping
U2 - 10.2340/16501977-1100
DO - 10.2340/16501977-1100
M3 - Article
C2 - 23321847
SN - 1650-1977
VL - 45
SP - 177
EP - 185
JO - Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
JF - Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
IS - 2
ER -