Study Design: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial. Objectives: To examine the influence of experience and specialty certification on outcomes for patients with low back pain receiving a standardized manipulation or stabilization exercise intervention program. Background: Little research has examined the impact of therapist-related factors on the outcomes of clinical care for patients with low back pain. It is assumed that therapists with more clinical experience or specialty certification will achieve better clinical outcomes; however, few studies have examined this hypothesis. Methods and Measures:One hundred thirty-one participants in a randomized trial were included (70 randomized to receive manipulation, 61 stabilization). All subjects completed an Oswestry Disability Questionnaire at baseline, and after 1 and 4 weeks of treatment. Therapists were categorized based on total years of experience, years of experience with manual therapy, and specialty certification status. Two-way repeated-measures analyses of covariance were performed within each intervention group to examine the effects of the therapist characteristics on outcomes. Hierarchical linear regression models were used to examine the relative effects of therapist characteristics and intervention on clinical outcomes. Results: Thirteen therapists participated (average 6.0 years of experience [standard deviation, 4.0], 4 (30.8%) with specialty certification). A significant interaction between time and specialty certification status (P = .04) was detected for subjects receiving the manipulation intervention. No significant interactions were detected in the stabilization group. The regression models found that the intervention group significantly contributed to explaining clinical outcomes, but that therapist characteristics did not. Conclusions: With the standardized protocol utilized in this study, it appears that the therapist-related factors of increased experience and specialty certification status do not result in an improvement in patients’ disability associated with low back pain.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(11):662-675.

Key Words: experience, expertise, low back pain manipulation, stabilization

It is likely that patients with neck pain are not a homogeneous group, but, instead, consist of a variety of subgroups, each of which may benefit from a specific intervention matched to the patient’s signs and symptoms. Studies to date have largely failed to account for this possibility, which may compromise the statistical power of research and ultimately fail to provide guidance for clinical decision making. Classification provides a means of breaking down a larger entity into more homogeneous subgroups of patients, based on examination data. Classification can guide the determination of a patient’s prognosis, and the selection of the most appropriate intervention strategy. Classification has received considerable attention in the management of patients with low back pain, and evidence is emerging regarding its benefits. There has been considerably less effort made toward examining classification as it pertains to patients with neck pain. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to examine the current literature and to propose a classification system for patients with neck pain, based on the overall goal of treatment. The approach is based on published evidence when possible and is also informed by clinical experience and expert opinion. Classification decisions are based on the integration of data from a variety of information from the history and physical examination. The end result of the classification process is to determine the treatment approach believed to be most likely to maximize the clinical outcome for an individual patient with neck pain.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(11):686-700.

Key Words: conservative treatment, decision making, diagnosis, neck pain, staging

Design: Retrospective ex-post facto design. Objectives: To retrospectively review the management of patients with lateral epicondylalgia, and to compare self-reported outcomes to assess the potential benefit of manual physical therapy to the cervical spine. Background: It has been postulated that dysfunction of the cervical spine may contribute to the symptoms associated with lateral epicondylalgia; however, the literature assessing the effectiveness of manual physical therapy to the cervicothoracic region in this patient population has been inconclusive. Documentation and analysis of outcomes of management strategies focusing on the cervical spine may lead to determining the most effective and efficient clinical practices. Methods and Measures: Of the 213 charts reviewed, 112 satisfied inclusion-exclusion criteria and were divided into 2 groups: those who received treatment solely directed at the elbow (local management [LM]), or those who received treatment directed at the elbow and cervical manual therapy (LM+C). Telephone follow-up interviews were used to determine the number of successful outcomes. Percentages of successful outcomes in each group were compared using chi-square analysis. An independent samples t test was used to compare the total number of visits per group. Results: Sixty-one of the 112 patients were in the LM group, while 51 received LM+C. Seventy-five percent of the patients available for follow-up in the LM group and 80% in the LM+C group reported a successful outcome. Patients in the LM group received a greater number of visits (mean, 9.7; SD, 2.4) than patients in the LM+C group (mean, 5.6; SD, 1.7; P<.01). Conclusions: The results of this retrospective review suggest that most patients had successful outcomes regardless of the inclusion of manual therapy interventions to the cervical spine. The LM+C group achieved the successful long-term outcome in significantly fewer visits.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(11):713-724.

Key Words: extensor carpi radialis brevis, joint mobilization, lateral epicondylitis, tennis elbow