An international survey of the comprehensiveness of the McKenzie classification system and the proportions of classifications and directional preferences in patients with spinal pain

Abstract

BackgroundClassification of spinal pain has been a key goal identified in the research. However it is not clear if existing classification systems are comprehensive. ObjectiveTo examine the comprehensiveness and distribution of classifications within the McKenzie classification system (MDT), and the directional preference in consecutive patients with spine pain. Study designProspective, observational study. MethodsClinicians with a Diploma in MDT provided data on patients that they had assessed, classified, managed, and then confirmed their classification at discharge. They provided data on the spinal area, the MDT classification, and the loading strategy used in management. ResultsFifty-four clinicians from at least 15 different countries provided data on 750 patients: lumbar 64.8%, cervical 29.6%, thoracic 5.6%. The distribution of classifications was as follows: Derangement 75.4%, OTHER 22.8%, Dysfunction 1.7%, Postural syndrome 0.1%. In Derangements 82.5% had a directional preference for extension, 12.9% for lateral forces, and 4.6% for flexion. Those patients classified as one of the OTHER subgroups were given specific classifications. ConclusionDerangement was the most common classification and extension was by far the most common directional preference. A substantial proportion were classified as OTHER subgroups, for whom management is less straightforward.