%0 Journal Article
%T Ability of Therapists Trained in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy to Guess Pain Catastrophizing and Kinesiophobia Scores for Patients with Low Back Pain
%A Katsuya Suzuki
%A Hiroshi Takasaki
%J Open Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation
%P 119-130
%@ 2332-1830
%D 2020
%I Scientific Research Publishing
%R 10.4236/ojtr.2020.84011
%X <span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><strong>Objective:</strong></span><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> To investigate whether a physical therapist trained
through the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) diploma program could guess
psychological Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) scores of individuals
with low back pain (LBP) by taking patient history and completing a physical
evaluation.</span></span></span><span><span><span style=\"font-family:&quot;\"> </span></span></span><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><b><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">Methods: </span></b></span></span><span><span><span style=\"font-family:&quot;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">Ten participants with LBP
completed PROMs immediately before history taking and again after a physical
evaluation. PROMs included the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale
for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Pain Coping
Strategy Questionnaire. A physical therapist who completed the MDT diploma
program took the patients＊ history and completed their physical evaluation. The
therapist completed the same PROMs immediately after both history taking and
physical evaluation. Correlations between patient and therapist scores were
calculated using Spearman＊s </span><i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">老</span></i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">. </span><b><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">Results:</span></b><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> Statistically significant positive correlations were detected in </span></span></span></span><span><span><span style=\"font-family:&quot;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">the PCS (</span><i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">老</span></i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> = 0.65) and TSK (</span><i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">老</span></i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> = 0.78) before
history taking, and in the PCS (</span><i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">老</span></i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> =
0.81) and TSK (</span><i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">老</span></i><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"> = 0.74) after
physical evaluation.</span></span></span></span><span><span><span style=\"font-family:&quot;\"> </span></span></span><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><b><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\">Discussion: </span></b></span></span><span style=\"font-family:Verdana;\"><span
%K History Taking
%K McKenzie Approach
%K Physical Evaluation
%K Post-Graduate Training
%K Psychological Status
%U http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=102562