Dataset for the performance of 15 lumbar movement control tests in non-specific chronic low back pain
Description
Value of the Data • The dataset may help to better understand the complexity of LMC ability. • The dataset can be processed to investigate the structure of LMC and how single test results can be combined. • The dataset can be used to compare the ability of LMC in participants with NSCLBP with other groups. The data of other groups or subgroups can be calibrated using the data provided with this article. • The dataset will be beneficial for researchers and practitioners evaluating and measuring LMC. Abstract The ability to actively control movements of the lumbar spine (LMC) is believed to play an important role in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). However, because NSCLBP is a multifactorial problem and LMC a complex ability, different aspects of LMC are still debated including the influence of pain, the question whether LMC is a cause or consequence of NSCLBP or whether differences in LMC are due to population variance. The complexity of LMC is reflected in the large number of described tests, hence it is not possible to evaluate LMC by a single test. LMC ability should be understood as a latent construct. The structure of LMC and how to summarize results of different single LMC tests is unknown. The dataset provided in this article was used to analyse the structural validity of LMC in NSCLBP. 277 participants (age 42.4 years (± 15.8), 61% female) performed 15 different test movements. 21 experienced physiotherapists rated the performance of each test movement on a nominal scale (correct / incorrect including the direction of test movement). A test was rated as “incorrect” if movement in the lumbar spine occurred prematurely and / or excessively based on the visual observation of a trained physiotherapist. In addition to the judgement whether the test performance was correct / incorrect the direction of test movement and the presence of pain was noted. For statistical analysis, raw data was converted to a binary scale (correct / incorrect). Item response theory (IRT) is recommended to analyse the data because the underlying statistical model is reflective, the single LMC tests are binary scaled (correct / incorrect) and the underlying ability (LMC) measured on a continuous scale. First dimensionality and local independence were analysed, followed by selection of the best fitting IRT model. Finally, IRT modelling was used to describe the psychometric properties of each item and each battery of tests. The datasets provided in this article are useful for calibration and for group comparisons. Besides they support a better understanding of LMC.
Files
Steps to reproduce
The type of data were tables and figures. How data were acquired Data were collected based on the subjective judgement of a trained investigator. Decision on an incorrect test result was based on eyeballed estimation. All test results were documented using a standardized test protocol (see Appendix 2). Data format Raw and Analyzed (binary data without direction and binary data with direction) Microsoft Excel datasheet Parameters for data collection Participants were recruited from 19 outpatient physiotherapy clinics in Germany and Austria between April and September 2019. They met the following inclusion criteria: age ≥18 years; ability to understand instructions; NSLBP with or without radiating leg pain; symptoms ≥3 month. Subjects were excluded if they had specific spinal pathologies. All 21 examiners (raters) were physiotherapists (mean age 39.5 years (SD=10.4), 12 males, with a mean of 15.5 (SD=9.8) years of experience). They were trained towards or had attained recognized manual therapy qualification. All physiotherapist were trained in the procedures (test movements and test ratings) for one and a half hours, and provided with additional web-based material. The test performance was rated on a nominal scale (correct / incorrect plus direction of test movement). Description of data collection The participants performed 15 active test movements in five different starting positions (standing, sitting, supine, prone and side lying). Participants were evaluated with these tests in individual treatment rooms, performing all LMC tests in one session. The order of testing and instruction were standardized. Each test could be repeated (if failed) up to three times. All test results were documented using a standardized test protocol (see Appendix 2). A test was rated as “incorrect” if movement of the lumbar spine occurred prematurely and / or excessively based on the subjective judgement of a trained rater. If the test performance was rated to be incorrect the direction of observed incorrect test movement was also noted.