Literature DB >> 27852530

Clinical prediction rules for prognosis and treatment prescription in neck pain: A systematic review.

Joan Kelly1, Carrie Ritchie2, Michele Sterling3.   

Abstract

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) developed to identify sub-groups of people with neck pain for different prognoses (i.e. prognostic) or response to treatments (i.e. prescriptive) have been recommended as a research priority to improve health outcomes for these conditions. A systematic review was undertaken to identify prognostic and prescriptive CPRs relevant to the conservative management of adults with neck pain and to appraise stage of development, quality and readiness for clinical application. Six databases were systematically searched from inception until 4th July 2016. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, risk of bias (PEDro and QUIPS), methodological quality and stage of development. 9840 records were retrieved and screened for eligibility. Thirty-two studies reporting on 26 CPRs were included in this review. Methodological quality of included studies varied considerably. Most prognostic CPR development studies employed appropriate designs. However, many prescriptive CPR studies (n = 12/13) used single group designs and/or analysed controlled trials using methods that were inadequate for identifying treatment effect moderators. Most prognostic (n = 11/15) and all prescriptive (n = 11) CPRs have not progressed beyond the derivation stage of development. Four prognostic CPRs relating to acute whiplash (n = 3) or non-traumatic neck pain (n = 1) have undergone preliminary validation. No CPRs have undergone impact analysis. Most prognostic and prescriptive CPRs for neck pain are at the initial stage of development and therefore routine clinical use is not yet supported. Further validation and impact analyses of all CPRs are required before confident conclusions can be made regarding clinical utility.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical prediction rule; Neck pain; Prognosis; Treatment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27852530     DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2016.10.066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Musculoskelet Sci Pract        ISSN: 2468-7812            Impact factor:   2.520


  9 in total

1.  Machine learning versus logistic regression for prognostic modelling in individuals with non-specific neck pain.

Authors:  Bernard X W Liew; Francisco M Kovacs; David Rügamer; Ana Royuela
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 2.721

Review 2.  Clinical Efficacy of Epidural Injections of Local Anesthetic Alone or Combined with Steroid for Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Bang-Zhi Li; Wen-Hai Tang; Yang Li; Lei Zhou; Ming-Guo Liu; Sheng-Xue Bao
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 3.246

3.  Return to Work in Employees on Sick Leave due to Neck or Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Multidisciplinary and Brief Intervention with One-Year Register-Based Follow-Up.

Authors:  Line Thorndal Moll; Ole Kudsk Jensen; Berit Schiøttz-Christensen; Christina Malmose Stapelfeldt; David Høyrup Christiansen; Claus Vinther Nielsen; Merete Labriola
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2018-06

4.  Predicting the evolution of neck pain episodes in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Francisco M Kovacs; Jesús Seco-Calvo; Borja M Fernández-Félix; Javier Zamora; Ana Royuela; Alfonso Muriel
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Clinical predictive modelling of post-surgical recovery in individuals with cervical radiculopathy: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Bernard X W Liew; Anneli Peolsson; David Rugamer; Johanna Wibault; Hakan Löfgren; Asa Dedering; Peter Zsigmond; Deborah Falla
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Identification of clinically-useful cut scores of the Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale (TIDS) for predicting rate of recovery following musculoskeletal trauma.

Authors:  David M Walton; James M Elliott; Joshua Lee; Mohamad Fakhereddin; Wonjin Seo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Mastering Prognostic Tools: An Opportunity to Enhance Personalized Care and to Optimize Clinical Outcomes in Physical Therapy.

Authors:  Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme; Catherine Houle; Chad Cook; Florian Naye; Annie LeBlanc; Simon Décary
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2022-05-05

8.  Measuring the impact of the French version of The Whiplash Book on both treatment approach and fear-avoidance beliefs among emergency physicians. A cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Charlotte Lanhers; Stéphane Poizat; Bruno Pereira; Candy Auclair; Christophe Perrier; Jeannot Schmidt; Laurent Gerbaud; Emmanuel Coudeyre
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Consensus of potential modifiable prognostic factors for persistent pain after a first episode of nonspecific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain: results of nominal group and Delphi technique approach.

Authors:  Martine Verwoerd; Harriet Wittink; Francois Maissan; Rob Smeets
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.