Logo of bmcmudisBioMed Centralsearchsubmit a manuscriptregisterthis articleBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
PMC full text:

Table 1

Return to:   Prediction of Pain Outcomes in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Dose-response
of Spinal Manipulation for the Care of Chronic Low Back Pain

Pretreatment characteristics and univariate pain prediction modelsa

Baseline Mean (SD) (N = 391)Responder model significanceFuture Pain Intensity model significance
Dose (per 6 spinal manipulation visits)
Time (in weeks
Pain/Disability
 Pain intensity (0–100 scale)51.6 (17.2)
 Functional disability (0–100)45.3 (22.7)
 Pain unpleasantness (0–100)41.4 (21.4)
 Days with pain (last 4 wk)24.1 ( 5.2)
 Days with disability (last 4 wk)6.8 ( 7.6)
 Duration (yr)11.8 ( 9.8)
Sociodemographics
 Age (yr)41.3 (14.1)
 Female, % (n)50 % (196)
 Non-white or Hispanic, % (n)15 % (58)
 College degree, % (n)56 % (219)
 Income $40 K or less, % (n)57 % (222)
General Health
 Comorbidities (#)0.9 ( 1.1)
 Smoking, % (n)11 % (43)
 SF-12 physical health componentb 43.3 ( 8.9)
 SF-12 mental health componentb 48.9 (10.5)
 EuroQol – VAS (0–100 visual analog scale)70.9 (15.8)
 EuroQol 5D – mobility (1–3)1.4 ( 0.5)
 EuroQol 5D – self-care (1–3)1.2 ( 0.4)
 EuroQol 5D – usual activities (1–3)1.7 ( 0.5)
 EuroQol 5D – pain (1–3)2.0 ( 0.2)
 EuroQol 5D – anxiety/depression (1–3)1.4 ( 0.5)
Psychosocial
 FABQ Work beliefs (0–100)32.9 (21.8)
 FABQ Activity beliefs (0–100)56.0 (20.3)
 Confidence in treatment success (−6 - +6)0.2 ( 0.8)
Objective Physical Exam c
 Lumbar ROM: flexion43.2 (16.3)
 Lumbar ROM: extension15.1 (10.2)
 Lumbar ROM: right lateral bending18.6 ( 9.4)
 Lumbar ROM: left lateral bending19.1 ( 8.9)
 LBP: Flexion (0–10)2.3 ( 2.4)
 LBP: Extension (0–10)3.0 ( 2.4)
 LBP: Right lateral bending (0–10)2.7 ( 2.4)
 LBP: Left lateral bending (0–10)2.6 ( 2.3)
 LBP: sum for 4 lumbar ROM 0–10 pain scores10.7 ( 7.9)
 LBP: maximum of 4 lumbar ROM pain scores4.0 ( 2.3)
 LBP: right – left lateral bending0.1 ( 1.9)
 LBP: |right – left lateral bending|1.2 ( 1.5)
 LBP: sum for right and left lateral bending pain scores5.3 ( 4.3)
 LBP: maximum of right and left lateral bending pain scores3.2 ( 2.4)
 Modified Schober Test (cm)5.7 ( 2.0)
 Lumbar hypomobility: L1, % (n)54 % (209)
 Lumbar hypomobility: L2, % (n)52 % (200)
 Lumbar hypomobility: L3, % (n)49 % (189)
 Lumbar hypomobility: L4, % (n)49 % (191)
 Lumbar hypomobility: L5, % (n)64 % (248)
 Total hypomobile joints: L1 thru L52.7 ( 1.3)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: right L1-L26.1 ( 2.8)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: left L1-L26.2 ( 2.9)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: right L3-L45.9 ( 3.0)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: left L3-L46.0 ( 3.2)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: right L5-S15.8 ( 3.2)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: left L5-S15.7 ( 3.3)
 Pain Pressure Threshold: minimum of 6 measures4.5 ( 2.5)
OR Odds ratio
r Pearson’s correlation coefficient
β regression coefficient
VAS visual analog scale
FABQ fear avoidance beliefs questionnaire
ROM range of motion
LBP low back pain
Variables with a statistically significant association with outcome
p-value < 0.05, after adjusting for dose
aLogistic and linear longitudinal regressions were adjusted for dose and were fitted using generalized estimating equations to account for correlation across time points. Only the statistically significant variables (p < .05) in this table are used as candidates for the subsequent inclusion into the relevant final multivariate prediction models
bScores are standardized to the US general population (mean = 50, SD = 10)
cROM was measured in degrees, LBP during ROM on a 0 to 10 scale for each of the 4 ROMs, and pain pressure threshold in kg. Hypomobility was identified using manual motion palpation