Case Study: Oswestry Low Back Pain

For each article, answer the following questions:
1. What is/ are the Objective/s of the Study?
The objectives of this study were first to describe the level of disability, physical impairment, and rate of return to work for compensated workers before and after the completion of a physical therapy program with multiple interventions and second to evaluate the influence of compliance, chronicity, and pain distribution on the level of disability, impairment, and work status.
2. Identify and discuss the Theoretical/Conceptual Framework used in the study.

The input serves as independent variable that has multiple interventions for lower back pain, to determine the result the researchers use Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, maximum
It is appropriate but the researchers stated that the efficacy of each co intervention was not evaluated. Issues concerning the scope of physical therapy that is needed to obtain optimal clinical results will require further study of patient classification systems and specific analysis of co interventions.
4. What is the Sampling Technique used in the study? Discuss the steps used by the researcher in choosing the sample.
Non-probability Accidental sampling, the subjects this study is attending in private practice clinical in Minneapolis, Minn, between March and October 1993. The participants approve and sign the consent they should also meet the criteria: (1) their primary complaint was LBP, and (2) they were receiving compensation. The researchers re-evaluate the participants without pre-selection.
5. What is the Research Instrument used in the study? Was it able to obtain the data needed to achieve the objectives of the
In the assessment, the subject indicated the duration of LBP, pain history, and any co interventions. According to the researchers they use the Oswestry Low Back Pain the subscale is rated from 0 (no limitation) to 5 (severe limitation). The use of FTFD measurements is single trial for each subject to show if the patients’ previous works have an increase in pain on the first attempt show greater FTFD (less motion) compared with patients who do not report pain during forward bending. The first attempt, therefore, provides a measurement that appears to be sensitive to symptom provocation. Each subject asked to stand in a comfortable position and to bend forward as far as possible without bending the knees. The distance of the middle finger to the floor was assessed using a tape measure marked in 0.10-cm increments. During the MIL assessment, each subject was tested using a spring-loaded dynamometer attached to a level wooden platform. The range of operation was 0 lb (0 N) to 660 lb (2.932 N), with 5-11lb (22.22-N) increments. The subject was instructed to stand on the platform, pick LIP the dynamometer handle, and pull upward on the handle as much as possible without causing pain or modifying existing symptoms. The dynamometer handle was fixed at 38.1 cm (15 in) from the platform base in order to standardize lift height. A single trial was collected for the MIL because the