- •Low back pain is a debilitating condition with poor patient outcomes despite the high medical cost.
- •One reason for these poor outcomes may be the lack of objective metrics.
- •Motion-based metric can provide a unique perspective to assessing functional recovery.
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
- Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.Academic press, 2013
- Overtreating chronic back pain: time to back off?.J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 2009; 22: 62-68https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2009.01.080102
- US spending on personal health care and public health, 1996-2013.Jama-J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2016; 316: 2627-2646https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.16885
- The Oswestry disability index.Spine. 2000; 25: 2940-2952https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017
- Spine kinematics predict symptom and lost time recurrence: how much recovery is enough?.J. Occup. Rehabil. 2013; 23: 329-335https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-012-9413-x
- Longitudinal quantitative measures of the natural course of low back pain recovery.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25: 1950-1956
- Validity and reliability of sincerity test for dynamic trunk motions.Disabil. Rehabil. 2003; 25: 236-241https://doi.org/10.1080/0963828021000030945
- Differences among outcome measures in occupational low back pain.J. Occup. Rehabil. 2005; 15: 329-341https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-005-5940-4
- Quantification of a meaningful change in low back functional impairment.Spine. 2009; 34: 2060-2065
- Low back functional health status of patient handlers.J. Occup. Rehabil. 2015; 25: 296-302https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9538-1
- Patient and practitioner experience with clinical lumbar motion monitor wearable technology.Health Technol-Ger. 2019; 9: 289-295https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-019-00330-7
- Responsiveness of a patient specific outcome measure compared with the oswestry disability index v2.1 and roland and morris disability questionnaire for patients with subacute and chronic low back pain.Spine. 2008; 33: 2450-2457https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818916fd
- The relationship between objective and subjective evaluation criteria in lumbar spinal stenosis.Acta Orthop. Traumatol. Turc. 2006; 40: 111-116
- The 6-minute walk - a new measure of exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart-failure.Can. Med. Assoc. J. 1985; 132: 919-923
- What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention.Lancet. 2018; 391: 2356-2367https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30480-X
- Validity of PROMIS in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a preliminary evaluation.J. Neurosurg. Spine. 2018; 29: 28-33https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.11.SPINE17989
- Biomechanical assessments of lumbar spinal function. How low back pain sufferers differ from normals. Implications for outcome measures research. Part I: kinematic assessments of lumbar function.J. Manipulative Physiol. Ther. 2004; 27: 57-62
- A normal database of dynamic trunk motion characteristics during repetitive trunk flexion and extension as a function of task asymmetry, age and gender.IEEE Trans. Rehab. Eng. 1994; 2: 137-146
- The classification of anatomic-based and symptom-based low-Back disorders using motion measure models.Spine. 1995; 20: 2531-2546https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199512000-00013
- The quantification of low back disorder using motion measures - methodology and validation.Spine. 1999; 24: 2091-2100https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199910150-00005
- Impairment magnification during dynamic trunk motions.Spine. 2000; 25: 587-595https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200003010-00009
- Low back pain recurrence in occupational environments.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32: 2387-2397https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181557be9
- Current epidemiology of low back pain.J Hosp Management Health Policy. 2020; 4: 15
- The McGill pain questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods.Pain. 1975; 1: 277-299https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5
- Lumbar spine range of motion as a measure of physical and functional impairment: an investigation of validity.Clin. Rehabil. 1999; 13: 211-218
- Disability measurement in persons with back pain: a validity study of spinal range of motion and velocity.Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2000; 81: 1394-1400
- The five-repetition sit-to-stand test: evaluation of a simple and objective tool for the assessment of degenerative pathologies of the lumbar spine.J. Neurosurg. Spine. 2018; 29: 380-387https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.2.SPINE171416
- Objective measures of functional impairment for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature.Spine J. 2019; 19: 1276-1293
- Validity and reliability of a measurement of objective functional impairment in lumbar degenerative disc disease: the timed up and go (TUG) test COMMENTS.Neurosurgery. 2016; 79: 278
- A fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire (Fabq) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low-Back-pain and disability.Pain. 1993; 52: 157-168https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(93)90127-B
- Low back pain in the United States: incidence and risk factors for presentation in the emergency setting.Spine J. 2012; 12: 63-70https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2011.09.002
- Analysis of the convergent and discriminant validity of published lumbar flexion, extension, and lateral flexion scores.Spine. 2001; 26: E472-E478