Study Design Quasi-experimental. Objectives To explore for associations between demographic, patient history, and physical examination variables and short-term improvement in self-reported disability following dry needling therapy performed on individuals with low back pain (LBP). Background Dry needling is an intervention used with increasing frequency in patients with LBP, however, the characteristics of patients who are most likely to respond are not known. Methods Seventy-two volunteers with mechanical LBP participated in the study. Potential prognostic factors were collected from baseline questionnaires, patient history, and physical examination tests. Treatment consisted of dry needling to the lumbar multifidus muscles bilaterally which was administered during a single treatment session. Improvement was based on percent change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 1 week. The univariate and multivariate associations between 33 potential prognostic factors and improved disability were assessed with correlation coefficients and multivariate linear regression. Results Increased LBP with the multifidus lift test (MLT) (rpb = 0.31, P = .01) or during passive hip flexion performed with the patient supine (rpb = 0.23, P = .06), as well as positive beliefs about acupuncture/dry needling (ρ = 0.22, P = .07) demonstrated univariate associations with ODI improvement. Aggravation of LBP with standing (rpb = -0.27, P = .03), presence of leg pain (rpb = -0.29, P = .02), and any perception of hypermobility in the lumbar spine (rpb = -0.21, P=.09) were associated with less improvement. The multivariate model identified 2 predictors of improved disability with dry needling: pain with MLT and no aggravation with standing (R(2) = 0.16, P = .01). Conclusion Increased LBP with the MLT was the strongest predictor of improved disability after dry needling suggesting that the finding of pain during muscle contraction should be studied in future dry needling studies. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, Epub 25 Jun 2015. doi:10.2519/jospt.2015.5801.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,977,207
of 34,518,147 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
#654
of 2,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,650
of 303,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy
#10
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,518,147 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 303,735 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
