Cited by 53Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Individualised physiotherapy as an adjunct to guideline-based advice for low back disorders in primary care: a randomised controlled trial

Ford, Jon J, Hahne, Andrew J, Surkitt, Luke D, Chan, Alexander Y P, Richards, Matthew C, Slater, Sarah L, Hinman, Rana S, Pizzari, Tania +2 more·2016·British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background Many patients with low-back disorders persisting beyond 6 weeks do not recover. This study investigates whether individualised physiotherapy plus guideline-based advice results in superior outcomes to advice alone in participants with low-back disorders. Methods This prospective parallel group multicentre randomised controlled trial was set in 16 primary care physiotherapy practices in Melbourne, Australia. Random assignment resulted in 156 participants receiving 10 sessions of physiotherapy that was individualised based on pathoanatomical, psychosocial and neurophysiological barriers to recovery combined with guideline-based advice, and 144 participants receiving 2 sessions of physiotherapist-delivered advice alone. Primary outcomes were activity limitation (Oswestry Disability Index) and numerical rating scales for back and leg pain at 5, 10, 26 and 52 weeks postbaseline. Analyses were by intention-to-treat using linear mixed models. Results Between-group differences showed significant effects favouring individualised physiotherapy for back and leg pain at 10 weeks (back: 1.3, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.8; leg: 1.1, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.7) and 26 weeks (back: 0.9, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.4; leg: 1.0, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.6). Oswestry favoured individualised physiotherapy at 10 weeks (4.7; 95% CI 2.0 to 7.5), 26 weeks (5.4; 95% CI 2.6 to 8.2) and 52 weeks (4.3; 95% CI 1.4 to 7.1). Responder analysis at 52 weeks showed participants receiving individualised physiotherapy were more likely to imp…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bjsports-2015-095058

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ford, J. J., Hahne, A. J., Surkitt, L. D., Chan, A. Y. P., Richards, M. C., Slater, S. L., Hinman, R. S., Pizzari, T., Davidson, M., & Taylor, N. F.
Affiliations
  • La Trobe University (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Ford, Jon J
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-10-20
Volume
50
Issue
4
Pages
237-245
ISSN
  • 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0480
OpenAlex
W1817679562
Cited by
53
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7
FWCI
4.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • La Trobe University
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
low back disorders, primary care, back pain, leg pain, activity limitation, Oswestry Disability Index, psychosocial factors, neurophysiological factors, treatment duration, responder analysis, chronic low back pain, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Primary Health Care, Prospective Studies, Victoria, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Physical Therapy Modalities, Young Adult, Precision Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review