Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Best Practices for Treating Non-Specific Low Back Pain

Emma W. White, PT, DPT, OCS, & Andy Bonin, MD  |  Issue: December 2015  |  December 16, 2015

JPC-PROD/shutterstock.com

Image Credit: JPC-PROD/shutterstock.com

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common reasons for physician appointments. However, treatment results remain suboptimal, resulting in high rates of chronic pain, narcotic usage, surgery, depression and disability—all at great cost to individuals and the nation. One reason for this is the current practice of grouping all low back pain patients without a specific etiologic diagnosis into the single nebulous category of “non-specific LBP,” for which the evidence base does not support any specific treatment. This methodological flaw has perpetuated the notion that no intervention is superior to the passage of time.5 Recent evidence reflects the need for categorizing non-specific LBP into distinct subgroups and, thus, direct treatment that will likely produce favorable results.

The purpose of this clinical commentary is to introduce and describe an LBP classification system that focuses on non-specific LBP that points to specific treatment pathways and to discuss the impact of early access to physical therapy on this patient population.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Introduction

figure 1: The Revised Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire

(click for larger image)
figure 1: The Revised Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire

According to recent studies, just about everyone reading this article will experience at least one episode of low back pain during their lifetime. Perhaps even more disturbing is that although many do indeed “recover on their own,” an estimated 60–85% of those individuals will have a recurrence.1 LBP is the fifth most common reason for all physician visits in the U.S.3 It’s also the most common problem seen in physical therapy clinics.4

Chou defines non-specific LBP as, “LBP that cannot reliably be attributed to a specific disease or spinal abnormality”; 85% of LBP patients fall into this category.3 Fritz and colleagues concluded, “nonspecific LBP is not a homogenous entity, but instead consists of subtypes, or classifications, that can be identified based on specific signs and symptoms.”5,6

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Treatment-Based Classification System

A promising classification system that has gained popularity is the Treatment-Based Classification System (TBC), which is based on the original work of Delitto and colleagues in 1995.6-8 This approach uses information gathered from the physical examination and from patient self-reports of pain (10-point pain scale and pain diagram) and disability (modified Oswestry questionnaire, see Figure 1). This information allows patient subgrouping, which then guides patient treatment.6-9 This system combines and modifies different schools of thought into a more practical, evidence-based system.

TABLE 1: Physical Therapist Decision Tree

(click for larger image)
TABLE 1: Physical Therapist Decision Tree

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:Clinical Criteria/GuidelinesConditions Tagged with:Clinical GuidelinesLBPlow back painpatient careTreatment

Related Articles

    Reading Rheum

    August 1, 2009

    Handpicked Reviews of Contemporary Literature

    Meet the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Challenge

    August 1, 2007

    Limited evidence and diagnostic options make this increasing condition difficult to treat

    Guidelines on Advice for Low Back Pain at Odds with Clinical Trial Results

    July 30, 2017

    NEW YORK (Reuters Health)—Advice is considered an effective treatment for acute low back pain (LBP), but neither clinical trials nor guidelines include adequate detail on what this advice should be, or how doctors should deliver it, according to a new review. And half of the advice topics included in guidelines were discordant with evidence from…

    How Clinical Nurse Specialists Aid Rheumatology Patients

    June 11, 2018

    With advanced training and education, a clinical nurse specialist can be a valuable member of a patient’s healthcare team and a rheumatologist’s practice, acting as an extension of the rheumatologist to ensure a patient’s needs are met…

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences