Dataset Information

Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding baseline patient characteristics associated with recovery and non-recovery, as defined by measures of pain intensity, disability and global perceived improvement.

Methods and analysis

Six electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro Database, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, will be searched, with terms related to the review question such as neck pain, prognostic or predictive research, from inception to 28 September of 2018. Studies will be included if they have investigated an association between patient characteristics and outcomes, with at least one follow-up time point. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. Data from included papers will be extracted using standardised forms, including study and participants' characteristics, outcomes, prognostic factors and effect size of the association. The risk of bias of each study will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted considering the strength, consistency of results and the methodological quality.

Ethics and dissemination

This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal, as a chapter of a doctoral thesis and through presentations at national and international conferences.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018091183.

SUBMITTER: Domingues L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6254493 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review.

Domingues Lucia L Cruz Eduardo B EB Pimentel-Santos Fernando M FM Ramiro Sofia S Donato Helena H Manica Santiago Rodrigues SR Hayden Jill Alison JA Buchbinder Rachelle R Branco Jaime C JC

BMJ open 20181125 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review ai ...[more]

PMID: 30478116

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionNeck-specific exercises (NSEs) are commonly used for the treatment of chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP). However, it remains unclear whether baseline features can predict the response to neck-specific exercise (NSE) in people with CNSNP. This systematic review aims to assess whether baseline features such as age, gender, muscle activity, fatigability, endurance and fear of movement can predict pain and disability reduction following a NSE intervention.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis will be reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Protocols guidelines checklist. The Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases; key journals; and grey literature will be searched up until June 2023, including medical subject heading terms and keywords combinations. Included studies will investigate an association between the baseline features and pain and disability outcomes following NSE in people with CNSNP. Two independent reviewers will oversee the searching, screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and Risk-Of-Bias tool for randomised trials 2 (ROB 2). The quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE). Using standardised forms, details regarding study characteristics, baseline features (predictive factors), intervention, primary outcome and effect size (OR and 95% CI of each predictive factor and p value) will be extracted from included studies. Meta-analyses will be considered, if the studies are sufficiently homogeneous and if three or more studies investigate the same or comparable factors that predict the same response (pain intensity or disability). In the event that less than three studies investigated the same factors, a narrative synthesis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required as this review will be based on published studies. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42023408332.

Project description:IntroductionNon-specific neck pain (NSNP) is a common musculoskeletal condition resulting in pain, physical limitations and associated functional disability. Current guidelines recommend manipulation and/or mobilisation as part of the multimodal management of NSNP. This study focuses on intervention at the articular level and aims to identify whether joint mobilisation or joint manipulation has a greater effect on function, range of movement or pain outcomes in the management of NSNP.Methods and analysisA systematic review protocol has been designed and is reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. A targeted search strategy will enable searching of key databases from inception to 31 March 2020: CINAHL, PEDro, AMED, EMBASE, OVID, MEDLINE, Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. Key journals will be searched using predefined keywords determined from preliminary scoping searches for randomised controlled trials of manipulation and mobilisation modalities for adults with NSNP in the absence of radiculopathy or whiplash, published in English. Grey literature and unpublished studies will also be searched. Studies will be screened by title and abstract and full text. Two independent reviewers will conduct the searches independently, extract data, assess risk of bias (Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2) and assess overall strength of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Meta-analysis will be performed where individual studies measure comparable outcomes including performance-based outcome measures such as range of movement or patient reported outcome measures such as Neck Disability Index; and where interventions are comparable in their delivery such as number of oscillations and Maitland grading. Where not possible, data will be presented descriptively.Ethics and disseminationThis study does not require ethical approval. Findings will be submitted for publication to relevant peer-reviewed journals and will be presented at profession-specific conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42020164457.

Project description:BackgroundNeck pain (NP) is a very common musculoskeletal condition with potential for a high burden in disability and length of disorder. Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) give recommendations to clinicians for providing optimal care for patients however best practice recommendations are often contradictory. The purpose for this review was to conduct a SR of CPGs to assess the management recommendations for NP (diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, imaging).MethodsStandard SR methodology was employed including a grey literature search (including the National Guideline Clearing House). Medline, Cinahl, Embase, ILC, Cochrane, Central, and Lilacs were searched from 1995-to March 2018. Two raters evaluated all citations and a third rater resolved any disagreements. The AGREE II was used to assess risk of bias of each CPG. Data was extracted and included CPG purpose, type of NP problem and clinical recommendations. The AGREE II critical appraisal tool was used to assess risk of bias of each CPG.ResultsFrom 640 articles, 241 were available for screening. A total of 46 guidelines were selected. CPG's were categorized by the NP population (General NP, whiplash, interventional, headache and risk for vertebral insufficiency) and type of clinical aim (diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, imaging). Each clinical NP population had a large overlap of clinical aims presented. The CPGs were directed to a variety of clinicians that included physicians, physiotherapists and chiropractors. Results suggest heterogeneity in CPG recommendations within each clinical aim. CPG characteristics accounting for these differences are outlined.ConclusionThe majority of CPGs were developed for general NP that focused on treatment recommendations, with fewer number aimed at recommendations for diagnosis, prognosis, and outcomes. Heterogeneity of recommendations within the categories were noted as were potential factors associated with these differences, including CPG quality as assessed by the AGREE II.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The prevalence of neck pain is increasing rapidly with a high percentage of patients going on to experience recurrent or chronic symptoms. The resulting pain and disability are commonly managed using a variety of treatments including exercise. Resistance training exercise aimed at the neck and shoulders is advocated to treat chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP), however the dosage of prescribed exercise varies considerably between studies. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of resistance training in CNSNP and to determine an optimal dosage that should be prescribed in clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A systematic review with qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Excerpta Medica Database, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, PEDro, Zetoc, Index to Chiropractic Literature ChiroAcces, PubMed, grey literature sources and key journals will be searched. Randomised clinical trials investigating resistance training exercise in adults with CNSNP using outcome measures of pain and/or disability will be eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen for eligibility, extract data and assess risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool) with a third reviewer mediating in cases of disagreement. Data will be synthesised qualitatively to investigate intervention effectiveness and to determine the effect of exercise dosage on pain and disability. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model will be conducted where sufficient clinical homogeneity exists. The strength of the overall body of evidence will be assessed and reported using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study raises no ethical issues. Results will inform exercise prescription to improve management of CNSNP. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018096187.

Dataset Information

Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets