STUDY DESIGN: Reliability study. OBJECTIVES: To determine intrarater test-retest and interrater reliability of the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) among novice raters. BACKGROUND: The FMS is used by various examiners to assess movement and predict time-loss injuries in diverse populations (eg, youth to professional athletes, firefighters, military service members) of active participants. Unfortunately, critical analysis of the reliability of the FMS is currently limited to 1 sample of active college-age participants. METHODS: Sixty-four active-duty service members (mean ± SD age, 25.2 ± 3.8 years; body mass index, 25.1 ± 3.1 kg/m²) without a history of injury were enrolled. Participants completed the 7 component tests of the FMS in a counterbalanced order. Each component test was scored on an ordinal scale (0 to 3 points), resulting in a composite score ranging from 0 to 21 points. Intrarater test-retest reliability was assessed between baseline scores and those obtained with repeated testing performed 48 to 72 hours later. Interrater reliability was based on the assessment from 2 raters, selected from a pool of 8 novice raters, who assessed the same movements on day 2 simultaneously. Descriptive statistics, weighted kappa (κ_w), and percent agreement were calculated on component scores. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), standard error of the measurement, minimal detectable change (MDC₉₅), and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated on composite scores. RESULTS: The average ± SD score on the FMS was 15.7 ± 0.2 points, with 15.6% (n = 10) of the participants scoring less than or equal to 14 points, the recommended cutoff for predicting time-loss injuries. The intrarater test-retest and interrater reliability of the FMS composite score resulted in an ICC_3,1 of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.63, 0.85) and an ICC_2,1 of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.83), respectively. The standard error of the measurement of the composite test was within 1 point, and the MDC₉₅ values were 2.1 and 2.5 points on the 21-point scale for interrater and intrarater reliability, respectively. The interrater agreement of the component scores ranged from moderate to excellent (κ_w = 0.45-0.82). CONCLUSION: Among novice raters, the FMS composite score demonstrated moderate to good interrater and intrarater reliability, with acceptable levels of measurement error. The measures of reliability and measurement error were similar for both intrarater reliability that repeated the assessment of the movement patterns over a 48-to-72–hour period and interrater reliability that had 2 raters assess the same movement pattern simultaneously. The interrater agreement of the FMS component scores was good to excellent for the push-up, quadruped, shoulder mobility, straight leg raise, squat, hurdle, and lunge. Only 15.6% (n = 10) of the participants were identified to be at risk for injury based on previously published cutoff values.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42(6):530-540, Epub 14 May 2012. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.3838

KEY WORDS: injury prediction, injury prevention, injury risk, interrater, intrarater

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To derive a preliminary clinical prediction rule for identifying a subgroup of patients with low back pain (LBP) likely to benefit from Pilates-based exercise. BACKGROUND: Pilates-based exercise has been shown to be effective for patients with LBP. However, no previous work has characterized patient attributes for those most likely to have a successful outcome from treatment. METHODS: Ninety-six individuals with nonspecific LBP participated in the study. Treatment response was categorized based on changes in the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores after 8 weeks. An improvement of 50% or greater was categorized as achieving a successful outcome. Thirty-seven variables measured at baseline were analyzed with univariate and multivariate methods to derive a clinical prediction rule for successful outcome with Pilates exercise. Accuracy statistics, receiver-operator curves, and regression analyses were used to determine the association between standardized examination variables and treatment response status. RESULTS: Ninety-five of 96 participants completed the study, with 51 (53.7%) achieving a successful outcome. A preliminary clinical prediction rule with 5 variables was identified: total trunk flexion range of motion of 70° or less, duration of current symptoms of 6 months or less, no leg symptoms in the last week, body mass index of 25 kg/m2 or greater, and left or right hip average rotation range of motion of 25° or greater. If 3 or more of the 5 attributes were present (positive likelihood ratio, 10.64), the probability of experiencing a successful outcome increased from 54% to 93%. CONCLUSION: These data provide preliminary evidence to suggest that the response to Pilates-based exercise in patients with LBP can be predicted from variables collected from the clinical examination. If subsequently validated in a randomized clinical trial, this prediction rule may be useful to improve clinical decision making in determining which patients are most likely to benefit from Pilates-based exercise.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42(5):425-436, Epub 25 January 2012. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.3826

KEY WORDS: classification, lumbar spine, Pilates-based exercise, stabilization

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case series. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation between improved disability and changes in abdominal and lumbar multifidus (LM) thickness using ultrasound imaging following spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) in patients with low back pain (LBP). BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing body of literature demonstrating physiologic effects following the application of SMT, few studies have attempted to correlate these changes with clinically relevant outcomes. METHODS: Eighty-one participants with LBP underwent 2 thrust SMT treatments and 3 assessment sessions within 1 week. Transversus abdominis (TrA), internal oblique (IO), and LM muscle thickness was assessed during each session, using ultrasound imaging of the muscles at rest and during submaximal contractions. The Modified Oswestry Disability Index was used to quantify participants’ improvement in LBP-related disability. Stepwise hierarchical multiple linear regression and repeated-measures analysis of variance were performed to examine the multivariate relationship between change in muscle thickness and clinical improvement over time. RESULTS: After controlling for the effects of age, sex, and body mass index, change in contracted LM muscle thickness was predictive of improved disability at 1 week (P = .02). As expected, larger increases in contracted LM muscle thickness at 1 week were associated with larger improvements in LBP-related disability. Contrary to our hypothesis, significant decreases in both contracted TrA and IO muscle thickness were observed immediately following SMT; but these changes were transient and unrelated to whether participants experienced clinical improvements. CONCLUSION: These findings provide evidence that clinical improvement following SMT is associated with increased thickening of the LM muscle during a submaximal task. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognosis, level 4.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(6):389-399, Epub 6 April 2011. doi:10.2519/jospt.2011.3632

KEY WORDS: low back pain, muscle contraction, transversus abdominis, ultrasound

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. OBJECTIVES: To determine if changes in transversus abdominis (TrA) and internal oblique (IO) muscle thickness and side-to-side symmetry differ in individuals with and without unilateral lumbopelvic pain while at rest and during the abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM). BACKGROUND: Although the ADIM has been found to produce a symmetrical change in TrA and IO muscle thickness in healthy subjects, how these muscles are activated in those with unilateral lumbopelvic pain during the ADIM remains unknown. METHODS: Fifteen subjects with lumbopelvic pain and 15 age- and gender-matched control subjects were recruited. To investigate a similar subgroup of patients with lumbopelvic pain that has been used in previous research, subjects were required to have unilateral symptoms, a positive sacroiliac provocation test, and a positive active straight-leg raise test. Ultrasound images were obtained bilaterally at 2 different points during each trial of the ADIM: (1) at rest and (2) while maintaining the ADIM. Average percent change in thickness of the TrA and IO muscles was obtained over 3 trials. RESULTS: The percent change in thickness of the TrA was 20.9% less in those with lumbopelvic pain compared to the control group (P = .035), while the percent change in IO thickness was equivalent between groups (P = .522). No differences were observed for the TrA or IO muscles between the symptomatic and asymptomatic sides in those with (TrA, P = .263; IO, P = .172) or without (TrA, P = .780; IO, P = .635) lumbopelvic pain during the ADIM. Changes in TrA muscle thickness were greater than the IO muscle during the ADIM for both groups (P<.001). Specifically, the increases in TrA muscle thickness in those with and without lumbopelvic dysfunction were 32.7% and 47.3% greater, respectively, compared to changes in the IO muscle. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with unilateral lumbopelvic pain demonstrated a smaller increase in thickness of the TrA muscle during the ADIM. This finding provides an element of construct validity for the use of the ADIM for assessing TrA muscle thickness in those with unilateral lumbopelvic pain. However, both groups demonstrated a symmetrical side-to-side change in TrA and IO muscle thickness despite the symptomatic group having unilateral symptoms. Further, we detected a preferential change in TrA muscle thickness during the ADIM in both groups.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2009;39(11):791-798, Epub 15 October 2009. doi:10.2519/jospt.2009.3128

KEY WORDS: internal oblique, lumbar stabilization exercise, sacroiliac dysfunction, transversus abdominis, ultrasound imaging

STUDY DESIGN: Case report. BACKGROUND: Patellar fracture is a rare but significant complication following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction when using a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft. The purpose of these case reports is to describe 2 cases in which patellar fracture occurred during rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction using a BPTB. CASE DESCRIPTION: Both patients were 23-year-old males referred for rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction using a BPTB autograft. They were both progressing satisfactorily in rehabilitation until sustaining a fracture of the patella. One fracture occurred during the performance of the eccentric phase of a knee extension exercise during the sixth week of rehabilitation (7 weeks postsurgery), whereas the other fracture occurred during testing of the patientís quadriceps maximum voluntary isometric contraction in the ninth week of rehabilitation (10 weeks postsurgery). Both patients were subsequently treated with open reduction and internal fixation of the patella. DISCUSSION: During rehabilitation following ACL reconstruction using BPTB autograft, clinicians should consider the need to balance the sometimes-competing goals of improving quadriceps strength while providing protection to the healing graft, minimization of patellofemoral pain, and protection of the patellar donor site. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Harm, level 4.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2009;39(4):278-286, Epub 15 December 2008. doi:10.2519/jospt.2009.2864

KEY WORDS: ACL, failure, knee, load, strain

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association presents this second set of clinical practice guidelines on neck pain, linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these practice guidelines is to describe evidence-based orthopaedic physical therapy clinical practice and provide recommendations for (1) examination and diagnostic classification based on body functions and body structures, activity limitations, and participation restrictions, (2) prognosis, (3) interventions provided by physical therapists, and (4) assessment of outcome for common musculoskeletal disorders.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(9):A1-A34. doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.0303

The original article was corrected in April 2009, and the amended article PDF is provided here. Please see: April 2009 Errata

KEY WORDS: APTA, cervical spine, clinical practice guidelines, ICD, ICF, Orthopaedic Section

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study design. OBJECTIVES: To characterize changes in muscle thickness in the transversus abdominis (TrA) and internal oblique (IO) muscles during common trunk-strengthening exercises, and to determine whether these changes differ based on age. BACKGROUND: Although trunk-strengthening exercises have been found to be useful in treating those with low back pain (LBP), our understanding of the relative responses of the TrA and IO muscles during different exercises is limited. METHODS AND MEASURES: Six commonly prescribed trunk-strengthening exercises were performed by 120 subjects (40 subjects per age group: 18-30, 31-40, and 41-50 years). Ultrasound imaging was used to measure the thickness of the TrA and IO during the resting and contracted state of each exercise. The average thickness of the muscles while in the contracted position was divided by the thickness values in the resting position for each exercise, based on 2 performances of each exercise. Two 3-by-6 repeated-measures analyses of variance were used to determine significant changes in muscle thickness of the TrA and IO, based on age group and exercise performed. RESULTS: For both muscles, the trunk exercise-by-age interaction effect (TrA, P = .358; IO, P = .217) and the main effect for age (TrA, P = .615; IO, P = .219) were not significant. A significant main effect for trunk exercise for both muscles (P<.001) was found. The horizontal side-support (mean ± SD contracted-rest thickness ratio: TrA, 1.95 ± 0.69; IO, 1.88 ± 0.52) and the abdominal crunch (mean ± SD contracted-rest thickness ratio: TrA, 1.74 ± 0.48; IO, 1.63 ± 0.41) exercises resulted in the greatest change in muscle thickness for both muscles. The abdominal drawing-in maneuver (mean ± SD contracted-rest thickness ratio: TrA, 1.73 ± 0.36; IO, 1.14 ± 0.33) and quadruped opposite upper and lower extremity lift (mean ± SD contracted-rest thickness ratio: TrA, 1.59 ± 0.49; IO, 1.25 ± 0.36) exercises resulted in changes in TrA muscle thickness with minimal changes in IO muscle thickness. CONCLUSION: Changes in TrA and IO muscle thickness differed across 6 commonly prescribed trunk-strengthening exercises among healthy subjects without LBP. These differences did not vary by age. This information may be useful for informing exercise prescription. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 5.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(10):596-605, published online 22 August 2008. doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.2897

KEY WORDS: internal oblique, low back pain, lumbar stabilization, sonography, therapeutic exercise, transversus abdominis

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort/predictive validity study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of common clinical examination items and to construct a preliminary clinical prediction rule for diagnosing hip osteoarthritis (OA) in individuals with unilateral hip pain. BACKGROUND: The current gold standard for the diagnosis of hip OA is a standing anteroposterior (AP) radiograph of the pelvis. Other than for Altman's criteria, little research has been done to determine the accuracy of clinical examination findings for diagnosing hip OA. METHODS AND MEASURES: Seventy-two subjects completed the study. Each subject received a standardized history, physical examination, and standing AP radiograph of the pelvis. Subjects with a Kellgren and Lawrence score of 2 or higher based on the radiographs were considered to have definitive hip OA. Likelihood ratios (LRs) were computed to determine which clinical examination findings were most diagnostic of hip OA. Potential predictor variables were entered into a logistic regression model to determine the most accurate set of clinical examination items for diagnosing hip OA. RESULTS: Twenty-one (29%) of the 72 subjects had radiographic evidence of hip OA. A clinical prediction rule consisting of 5 examination variables was identified. If at least 4 of 5 variables were present, the positive LR was equal to 24.3 (95% confidence interval: 4.4-142.1), increasing the probability of hip OA to 91%. CONCLUSION: The preliminary clinical prediction rule provides the ability to a priori identify patients with hip pain who are likely to have hip OA. A validation study should be done before the rule can be implemented in routine clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnosis, level 2b.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(9):542-550, published online 14 July 2008. doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.2753

KEYWORDS: arthritis, diagnosis, OA, predictive validity

In December of 2006, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT) convened a task force to create a framework for standardizing manual physical therapy procedures. The impetus came from many years of frustration with our ability to precisely communicate to each other, as well as to stakeholders outside our profession. To this end, a contribution titled "A Model for Standardizing Manipulation Terminology In Physical Therapy Practice" is published in this issue of the Journal.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(3):97-98. doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.0103

KEY WORDS: guidelines, manual physical therapy, terminology

In this issue of the journal, we explore rehabilitative ultrasound imaging's potential as a tool that physical therapists use in examining low back muscle function. As an assessment tool, RUSI can assist practitioners in recognizing impairments such as a decreased ability to increase muscle thickness (eg, transversus abdominis or multifidus) during specific physical tasks, excessive use of more global muscles (eg, rectus abdominis or erector spinae muscles) during low-level activities, and muscular atrophy. Identifying these impairments can help practitioners formulate a specific exercise program matched to the patient's underlying impairments during early stages of rehabilitation. From a treatment perspective, RUSI can provide feedback to both the physical therapist and patient that may help determine which verbal or tactile cues are most effective to facilitate proper performance of therapeutic exercises during the early phase of rehabilitation. Additionally, it may assist physical therapists in their decision-making process related to exercise prescription and progression. Finally, RUSI may help determine when specific impairments have been sufficiently addressed to permit the exercise progression necessary to achieve maximal pain-free function.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37(10):579-580. doi:10.2519/jospt.2007.0109

KEY WORDS: rehabilitative ultrasound imaging, low back

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007:37(8):472-479; published online 12 July 2007. doi:10.2519/jospt.2007.2523

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37(6):290-302, Epub 15 March 2007. doi:10.2519/jospt.2007.2498

The original article was corrected in December 2007, and the amended article PDF is provided here. Please see Erratum December 2007. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37(12):769.

KEY WORDS: clinical decision-making, lumbar spine, manipulation, stabilization, traction

Growing evidence suggests that spinal manipulation is effective in the management of low back pain (LBP). However, in the absence of evidence of an alternative approach, clinicians have primarily relied on diagnostic tests with questionable reliability and validity in the clinical decision-making process to identify potential candidates for spinal manipulation. These 2 cases highlight the use of a clinical prediction rule (CPR) developed by Flynn et al, which demonstrates that there are a few simple criteria from the history and physical examination that can be used to help clinicians decide if spinal manipulation and a range of motion (ROM) exercise may be helpful in the management of a patient with LBP. Importantly, these results provide clinicians with an easy-to-use procedure to accurately identify patients with LBP who are likely to achieve a dramatic improvement prior to treatment.

We believe this CPR offers clinicians an efficient and practical evidence-based tool that can be applied by even the novice physical therapist who is familiar with the CPR and the technique that was used in its development. This CPR should encourage clinicians who were previously reluctant to incorporate spinal manipulation into their clinical practice to use it more frequently based on a patient’s status with respect to the CPR.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2003;33(5):259-272.

Key Words: low back pain, spinal manipulation, clinical prediction rule

The purpose of this editorial is to offer several recommendations to improve the overall quality and usefulness of manuscripts submitted as case reports to the JOSPT and other peer-reviewed journals. Specifically, authors should distinguish how publication of their case report adds to the existing body of knowledge in the literature. They should incorporate reliable and valid health-related quality of life (HRQL) instruments specific to the patient's condition and representative of the patient's impairments and level of function/disability, where such instruments exist. Authors of case reports should resist the temptation to assume that what was done to the patient directly caused the observed outcome. And finally, and perhaps most important, authors should subject their case report to a substantive "in-house" peer review prior to submission.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(2):44-46. doi:10.2519/jospt.2004.0102

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.

Invited Commentary by Linda Resnik 

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(11):662-675. doi:10.2519/jospt.2004.1535

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.

Invited Commentary by Michele Sterling

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(11):686-700. doi:10.2519/jospt.2004.1451

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

Growing evidence supports the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions in patients with neck pain; however, considerable attention has also been afforded to the potential risks, such as vertebrobasilar insufficiency (VBI). Despite the existence of guidelines advocating specific screening procedures, research does not support the ability to accurately identify patients at risk. The logical question becomes, ‘‘How does one proceed in the absence of certainty?’’ Given the lack of clear direction for decision making in the peer-reviewed literature, this commentary discusses the uncertainties that exist regarding the ability to identify patients at risk for VBI. The authors hope that this commentary adds additional perspective on manual therapy decision-making strategies in the presence of uncertainty.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005;35(5):300-306. doi:10.2519/jospt.2005.1312

Key Words: cervical spine, diagnostic accuracy, manipulation, mobilization, vertebral artery

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial among patients with low back pain (LBP). Objectives: (1) Determine the reliability of real-time ultrasound imaging for assessing activation of the lateral abdominal muscles; (2) characterize the extent to which the abdominal drawing-in maneuver (ADIM) results in preferential activation of the transverse abdominis (TrA); and (3) determine if ultrasound biofeedback improves short-term performance of the ADIM in patients with LBP. Background: Ultrasound imaging is reportedly useful for measuring and training patients to preferentially activate the TrA muscle. However, research to support these claims is limited. Methods and Measures: Thirty patients with LBP referred for lumbar stabilization training were randomized to receive either traditional training (n = 15) or traditional training with biofeedback (n = 15). Ultrasound imaging was used to measure changes in thickness of the lateral abdominal muscles. Differences in preferential changes in muscle thickness of the TrA between groups and across time were assessed using analysis of variance. Results: Intrarater reliability measuring lateral abdominal muscle thickness exceeded 0.93. On average, patients in both groups demonstrated a 2-fold increase in the thickness of the TrA during the ADIM. Performance of the ADIM did not differ between the groups. Conclusion: These data provide construct validity for the notion that the ADIM results in preferential activation of the TrA in patients with LBP. Although, the addition of biofeedback did not enhance the ability to perform the ADIM at a short-term follow-up, our data suggest a possible ceiling effect or an insufficient training stimulus. Further research is necessary to determine if there is a subgroup of patients with LBP who may benefit from biofeedback.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005;35(6):346-355. doi:10.2519/jospt.2005.1780

Key Words: lumbar stabilization, real-time ultrasound imaging, therapeutic exercise, transverse abdominis

We are excited to introduce 2 special issues in the Journal that feature articles relevant to direct access physical therapist practice. The rationale for covering these topics in the physical therapy literature is clear: the American Physical Therapy Association's (APTA's) Vision 2020 states that, ‘‘By 2020, physical therapy will be provided by physical therapists who are doctors of physical therapy, recognized by consumers and other health care professionals as the practitioners of choice to whom consumers have direct access for the diagnosis of, interventions for, and prevention of impairments, functional limitations, and disabilities related to movement, function, and health.'' To achieve this goal, APTA's Board of Directors suggests that we should focus our efforts on 5 key areas: professionalism, direct access, the doctor of physical therapy, evidence-based practice, and practitioner of choice. Because a majority of first professional degree programs have now transitioned to the professional doctoral degree and physical therapists can provide direct access care in 39 states, it is clear that we are quickly moving toward the Vision 2020. However, it would be helpful to reflect on where we are as a profession and what it is, exactly, that we want in our journey toward the goals set forth by our national organization.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005; 35(10):624-627. doi:10.2519/jospt.2005.0110

Key Words: direct access, physical therapy practice

Study Design: Case control design. Objectives: To investigate whether differences exist in lower extremity muscle strength and soft tissue length between patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) and age- and gender-matched control subjects. Background: Based on our clinical experience and emerging data, impairments such as muscular weakness surrounding the hip and limited flexibility of key lower extremity muscles may be important impairments to consider in the conservative management of PFPS. Methods and Measures: Thirty patients with PFPS and 30 age- and gender-matched controls without PFPS (17 females and 13 males in each group) participated in the study. Data were collected during 1 testing session by an examiner not blinded to group assignment. Demographic, health history, physical activity levels, and pain and function were assessed using patient-completed measures. Physical examination measures included assessment of hip external rotation strength, hip abduction strength, length of the iliotibial band/tensor fascia lata complex, gastrocnemius length, soleus length, and quadriceps and hamstrings muscles length. Results: Patients with PFPS demonstrated significantly less flexibility of the gastrocnemius, soleus, quadriceps, and hamstrings compared to healthy control subjects. No differences existed in flexibility of the iliotibial band/tensor fascia lata complex and strength of the hip external rotators and abductors. Multivariate stepwise discriminant analysis identified gastrocnemius length, hip abduction strength, and soleus length as being able to distinguish between patients with PFPS and healthy individuals without PFPS. Conclusion: This study suggests that further research is warranted regarding the association of these impairments of muscle strength and soft tissue length in patients with PFPS.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005;35(12):793-801. doi:10.2519/jospt.2005.2026

Key Words: ankle plantar flexors, anterior knee pain, case control, hip abduction, hip external rotation

Study Design: A case series of patients with low back pain (LBP) who satisfy a clinical prediction rule (CPR).

Background: A CPR that identifies patients with LBP who are likely to respond with rapid and prolonged reductions in pain and disability following spinal manipulation was developed and recently validated. The CPR developed to predict favorable response to manipulation investigated the effects of only 1 manipulation technique. The accuracy of the CPR for predicting outcomes using other manipulation techniques is not known. The purpose of the case series was to describe the outcomes of patients presenting to physical therapy with LBP who met the CPR and were treated with an alternative lumbar manipulation technique.

Case Description: Consecutive patients referred to physical therapy who satisfied the eligibility criteria, including the presence of at least 4 of the 5 criteria on the CPR, were invited to participate in the case series. Patients were treated for 2 visits with a side-lying lumbar manipulation technique, followed by a basic range of motion exercise. Patients who exhibited a 50% reduction or greater in disability, as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), were considered to have experienced a successful outcome.

Outcomes: A total of 12 patients participated in the case series. The mean age of the group was 39 years (SD, 8.9 years) and the median duration of symptoms was 19 days (range, 8-148 days). Of the 12 patients who participated in this case series, the mean reduction in disability as measured with the ODI was 57% (SD, 9%). Only 1 patient did not surpass the 50% reduction in ODI scores.Discussion: Eleven of the 12 patients (92%) in this case series who satisfied the CPR and were treated with an alternative lumbar manipulation technique demonstrated a successful outcome in 2 visits. It is plausible that patients with LBP who satisfy the CPR may obtain a successful outcome with either manipulation technique directed at the lumbopelvic region.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(4):209-214, doi:10.2519/jospt.2006.2163.

Key Words: low back pain, manual therapy, physical therapy

Study Design: Secondary analysis of pooled data from 3 randomized trials. Objective: This study investigated sex differences in response to physical therapy intervention for acute low back pain. Background: Sex differences in experimental pain sensitivity have been consistently described in the literature. However, clinical consequences of these sex differences have not been widely reported. Methods and Measures: Subjects (n = 165) were participants in 3 randomized trials of physical therapy interventions from outpatient physical therapy clinics in the general and military communities. Subjects were randomly assigned spinal manipulation with range-of-motion exercise, lumbar stabilization exercise, or directional-preference exercise. Outcomes were measured at 4 weeks through self-report of pain intensity and pain-related disability. Sex differences were investigated with independent t tests (baseline data), 2 x 3 analysis of variance (4-week reductions in pain and pain-related disability), and regression models (predictors of outcome). Results: Men and women had similar reductions of pain intensity (raw mean difference, 0.5; 95% CI, -1.4 to 0.4) and pain-related disability (raw mean difference, 5.3; 95% CI, -0.1 to 10.7) over 4 weeks. Baseline pain intensity, duration of symptoms, and baseline pain-related disability significantly predicted change in pain intensity for women (r² = 26%, P<.01). Baseline pain intensity and stabilization exercise predicted change in pain intensity for men (r² = 33%; P<.01). Baseline pain-related disability, duration of pain, and pain intensity predicted change in disability for women (r² = 24%, P<.01). Baseline pain-related disability, fear-avoidance beliefs, stabilization exercise, and leg pain predicted change in disability for men (r² = 32%, P<.01). Conclusion: For patients with acute low back pain, men and women had similar physical therapy outcomes for reductions in pain intensity and pain-related disability. However, men and women had different factors that predicted treatment outcome.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006; 36(6):354-363. doi:10.2519/jospt.2006.2270

Key Words: acute pain, gender differences, lumbar spine, rehabilitation, treatment response

J Ortho Sports Phys Ther. 2003;33(1):4-20.

Keywords: bias, decision making, evidence, grading, methodology