SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering / 2021 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3

Diagnosis of Mechanical Low Back Pain Using a Fuzzy Logic-Based Approach

Esmaeil FAKHARIAN
Ehsan NABOVATI
Mehrdad FARZANDİPOUR
Hossein AKBARI
Soheila SAEEDİ
Pages
116–120
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, this system can be helpful in clinical settings for diagnosing different types of mechanical LBP presenting with similar symptoms.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Abstract: Back pain is one of the main causes of disability, and its proper diagnosis and treatment are difficult tasks.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Modelling was done in MATLAB R2012 using the ANFIS.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, this system can be helpful in clinical settings for diagnosing different types of mechanical LBP presenting with similar symptoms.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Abstract: Back pain is one of the main causes of disability, and its proper diagnosis and treatment are difficult tasks. Intelligent methods can help physicians make a more precise diagnosis of diseases. The present study was conducted to diagnose the correct type of mechanical low back pain (LBP) using an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS). The diagnostic parameters of mechanical LBP were determined using library reviews and the views of experts based on the Delphi technique. Modelling was done in MATLAB R2012 using the ANFIS. After the modelling stage, the method was tested in terms of the percentage of corrected classification and diagnostic value indicators. Modelling is applied in the present study to diagnose different types of mechanical LBP, including back strain, spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis, disc herniation, and scoliosis. The modelling input included 17 diagnostic parameters, and its output contained various types of mechanical LBP. The percentage of corrected classification varied from 80.9% to 83.8% (disc herniation and spondylolisthesis). The system test in the present study showed an appropriate accuracy in diagnosing different types of mechanical LBP. As a result, this system can be helpful in clinical settings for diagnosing different types of mechanical LBP presenting with similar symptoms.

🔖

Cite This Article

FAKHARIAN, E., NABOVATI, E., FARZANDİPOUR, M., AKBARI, H., SAEEDİ, S. (2022). Diagnosis of Mechanical Low Back Pain Using a Fuzzy Logic-Based Approach. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3, 116–120. https://ajindex.com/articles/541292

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Tagliaferri SD, Miller CT, Owen PJ, Mitchell UH, Brisby H, Fitzgibbon B, et al. Domains of chronic low back pain and assessing treatment effectiveness: a clinical perspective. Pain Practice. 2020;20(2):211-25.
  2. Lardon A, Dubois J-D, Cantin V, Piché M,Descarreaux M. Predictors of disability and absenteeism in workers with nonspecific low back pain: A longitudinal 15-month study. Applied Ergonomics. 2018;68:176-85.
  3. Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Measuring the global burden of disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;369(5):448-57.
  4. Slade SC, Molloy E, Keating JL. The dilemma of diagnostic uncertainty when treating people with chronic low back pain: a qualitative study. Clinical rehabilitation. 2012;26(6):558-69.
  5. Berner ES, Graber ML. Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. Am J Med. 2008;121(5 Suppl):S2-23. Zavala AM, Day GE, Plummer D, Bamford-Wade A. Decisionmaking under pressure: medical errors in uncertain and dynamic environments. Australian Health Review. 2018;42(4):3.402- 95 Sung H-K, Jung B, Kim KH, Sung S-H, Sung A-D-M, Park J-K. Trends and Future Direction of the Clinical Decision Support System in Traditional Korean Medicine. Journal of pharmacopuncture. 2019;22(4):260-8.
  6. Sutton RT, Pincock D, Baumgart DC, Sadowski DC, Fedorak RN, Kroeker KI. An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success. npj Digital Medicine. 2020;3(1):17. Brunner J, Chuang E, Goldzweig C, Cain CL, Sugar C, Yano EM. User-centered design to improve clinical decision support in primary care. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2017;104:56-64. Ocak H. A medical decision support system based on support vector machines and the genetic algorithm for the evaluation of fetal wellbeing. Journal of medical systems. 2013;37(2):9913. Rossille D, Laurent J-F, Burgun A. Modelling a decision-support system for oncology using rule-based and case-based reasoning methodologies. International journal of medical informatics. 2005;74(2):299-3.06 Chao C-M, Yu Y-W, Cheng B-W, Kuo Y-L. Construction the model on the breast cancer survival analysis use support vector machine, logistic regression and decision tree. Journal of medical systems. 2014;38(10):106. Constantinou AC, Fenton N, Marsh W, Radlinski L. From complex questionnaire and interviewing data to intelligent Bayesian network models for medical decision support. Artificial intelligence in medicine. 2016;67:75-93.
  7. Eslamizadeh G, Barati R. Heart murmur detection based on wavel