BACKGROUND: Stratification strategies based on identifying @entity1 's prognosis in order to guide @entity1 care constitute one of the most prominent and recent approach in @entity1643 research. The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) although promising, has not been studied in @entity1 with @entity1643 ( @entity1643 ). Considering how challenging it is to translate research into practice, the value of integrating a new tool should be thoroughly assessed. The purpose was therefore to assess associations between the short- and long-terms clinical status and two types of variables, physiologic measures and the SBST, in @entity1 with @entity1643 . The ability of both types of variables to discriminate between @entity1 with and without higher levels of disability, @entity158 , fear of movement and @entity1 's global impression of change was also investigated. METHODS: Fifty-three volunteers with @entity1643 participated in an initial evaluation and follow-ups at 2-, 4-, 6- and 12-month. Physiologic measures (maximal @entity2472 , maximal endurance and muscle activity evaluated during prone and lateral isometric tasks) and the SBST were assessed at baseline. Disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), @entity158 intensity (101-point Numerical Rating Scale, @entity13295 ), fear of movement (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, @entity28681 ) and @entity1 's global impression of change (7-point scale, PGIC) were evaluated at baseline and at each follow-up. Aside the use of correlation analyses to assess potential associations; ROC curves were performed to evaluate the discriminative ability of physiologic measures and the SBST. RESULTS: The SBST allowed for the identification of @entity1 presenting higher levels of disability (ODI >= 24  %), @entity158 ( @entity13295 >= 37  %) or fear of movement ( @entity28681 >= 41/68) over a 12-month period (AUC   =   0.71 to 0.84, ps   <   0.05). The SBST score was also correlated with disability at each follow-up (     =   0.22 to 0.33, ps   <   0.05) and with @entity158 intensity and fear of movement at follow-ups. Among physiologic measures, only maximal @entity2472 was correlated to disability, @entity158 intensity or fear of movement during the follow-up (       =   0.26 to 0.32, ps   <   0.05) and none was able to identify @entity1 presenting higher levels of outcomes (AUC ps   >   0.05). CONCLUSION: Physiologic measures obtained during prone and lateral tests have limited associations with the clinical status over a 12-month period in @entity1 with nonspecific @entity1643 . On the other hand, the STarT Back Screening Tool is useful for the identification of @entity1 who will present higher levels of disability, @entity158 intensity and fear of movement over a year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02226692.

XXXX clinical outcomes present higher associations with the STarT Back Screening Tool than with physiologic measures: a 12-month cohort study.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['participants', 'patients', 'patient'] @entity13295 :: ('83985', 'Gene') :: ['NRS'] @entity1643 :: ('MESH:D017116', 'Disease') :: ['chronic low back pain', 'low back pain', 'cLBP'] @entity28681 :: ('25987', 'Gene') :: ['TSK'] @entity158 :: ('MESH:D010146', 'Disease') :: ['pain'] @entity2472 :: ('MESH:C536214', 'Disease') :: ['voluntary contraction']
@entity1643 :: (MESH:D017116,Disease) :: ['Chronic low back pain']
