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 .
The Centralization Phenomenon: Its Usefulness as a Predictor of Outcome in Conservative Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain (A Pilot Study)
Study Design Two-hundred-forty-three patients with chronic low back pain were studied in a prospect i ve comparative survey to determine whether the “ central ization phenomenon ” was associated with outcome after an interdisciplinary work-hardning program . Objective The hypothesis was that patients who demonstrated central ization during initial mechanical assessment would have better outcomes than non central izers . Summary of Background Data Overall subjects had decreased pain intensity ratings ( mean 10 % ) , increased lifting ability ( 6–8 kg ) , and a 59.2 % return-to-work rate at a mean of 9.7 months follow-up . Methods . Patients were classified as either central izers or non central izer  , based on results of their initial assessment , changes in pain ratings , one-time maximal weights lifted , Oswestry scores , and returen-to-work status were compared between groups . Results The central izers reported significant decreases in their maximum pain ratings ( central izers , 16 % non central izers , 6 % ) and had higher return-to-work rate ( central izers , 68 % ; non central izers , 52 % ) than the non central izers . Conclusion . Centrelization can help identify subgroups within the population with chronic low back pain and could be a useful goal setting and case management toll in the rehabilitation of low back pain
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 .