Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

The mechanical and inflammatory low back pain (MIL) index: development and validation

Antonio Cuesta-Vargas126*, Andre Farasyn3, Charles Philip Gabel4 and Juan V Luciano56

Author Affiliations

1 School Clinical Science at Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

2 Faculty of Health Science, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain

3 Department of Human Physiology and Sport Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium

4 Faculty of Science, Health and Education, Centre for Healthy Activities, Sport and Exercise, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Australia

5 Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu & Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain

6 Red de Investigación en Actividades Preventivas y Promoción de la Salud (RedIAPP), Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2014, 15:12  doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-12

Published: 9 January 2014

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was the development of a valid and reliable “Mechanical and Inflammatory Low Back Pain Index” (MIL) for assessment of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). This 7-item tool assists practitioners in determining whether symptoms are predominantly mechanical or inflammatory.

Methods

Participants (n = 170, 96 females, age = 38 ± 14 years-old) with NSLP were referred to two Spanish physiotherapy clinics and completed the MIL and the following measures: the Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ), SF-12 and “Backache Index” (BAI) physical assessment test. For test-retest reliability, 37 consecutive patients were assessed at baseline and three days later during a non-treatment period. Face and content validity, practical characteristics, factor analysis, internal consistency, discriminant validity and convergent validity were assessed from the full sample.

Results

A total of 27 potential items that had been identified for inclusion were subsequently reduced to 11 by an expert panel. Four items were then removed due to cross-loading under confirmatory factor analysis where a two-factor model yielded a good fit to the data (χ2 = 14.80, df = 13, p = 0.37, CFI = 0.98, and RMSEA = 0.029). The internal consistency was moderate (α = 0.68 for MLBP; 0.72 for ILBP), test-retest reliability high (ICC = 0.91; 95%CI = 0.88-0.93) and discriminant validity good for either MLBP (AUC = 0.74) and ILBP (AUC = 0.92). Convergent validity was demonstrated through similar but weak correlations between the ILBP and both the RMQ and BAI (r = 0.34, p < 0.001) and the MLBP and BAI (r = 0.38, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The MIL is a valid and reliable clinical tool for patients with NSLBP that discriminates between mechanical and inflammatory LBP.

Keywords:
Low back pain; Psychometrics properties; Pain measurement; Screening tool; Inflammatory; Mechanical