Conclusions For most clinical tests in LBP there is not consistent evidence for an association with outcome .
Central ization and non-organic signs are exceptions from that .
Background There is a strong tradition of performing a clinical examination of low back pain ( LBP ) patients and this is generally recommended in guidelines .
However , establishing a pathoanatomic diagnosis does not seem possible in most LBP patients and clinical tests may potentially be more relevant as prognostic factors .
The aim of this review of the literature was to systematic ally assess the association between low-tech clinical tests commonly used in adult patients with acute , recurrent or chronic LBP and short- and long-term outcome .
A Clinical Prediction Rule for Classifying Patients with Low Back Pain Who Demonstrate Short-Term Improvement With Spinal Manipulation
Study Design . A prospect i ve , cohort study of patients with nonradicular low back pain referred to physical therapy . Objective . Develop a clinical prediction rule for identifying patients with low back pain who improve with spinal manipulation .  Summary of Background Data . Development of clinical prediction rules for classifying patients with low back pain who are likely to respond to a particular intervention , such as manipulation  , would improve clinical decision-making and research . Methods . Patients with nonradicular low back pain underwent a st and ardized examination and then underwent a st and ardized spinal manipulation treatment program . Success with treatment was determined using percent change in disability scores over three sessions and served as the reference st and ard for determining the accuracy of examination variables . Examination variables were first analyzed for univariate accuracy in predicting success and then combined into a multivariate clinical prediction rule . Results . Seventy-one patients participated . Thirty-two had success with the manipulation intervention . A clinical prediction rule with five variables ( symptom duration , fear – avoidance beliefs , lumbar hypomobility , hip internal rotation range of motion , and no symptoms distal to the knee ) was identified . The presence of four of five of these variables ( positive likelihood ratio = 24.38 ) increased the probability of success with  manipulation  from 45 % to 95 % . Conclusion . It appears that patients with low back pain likely to respond to manipulation can be accurately identified before treatment
Conclusions For most clinical tests in LBP there is not consistent evidence for an association with outcome .
Central ization and non-organic signs are exceptions from that .
Background There is a strong tradition of performing a clinical examination of low back pain ( LBP ) patients and this is generally recommended in guidelines .
However , establishing a pathoanatomic diagnosis does not seem possible in most LBP patients and clinical tests may potentially be more relevant as prognostic factors .
The aim of this review of the literature was to systematic ally assess the association between low-tech clinical tests commonly used in adult patients with acute , recurrent or chronic LBP and short- and long-term outcome .