Dataset Information

Tests for central sensitization in general practice: a Delphi study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Central sensitization (CS) may explain the persistence of symptoms in patients with chronic pain and persistent physical symptoms (PPS). There is a need for assessing CS in the consultation room. In a recently published systematic review, we made an inventory of tests for CS. In this study we aimed to assess which tests might have added value, might be feasible and thus be suitable for use in general practice.

Methods

We conducted a Delphi study consisting of two e-mail rounds to reach consensus among experts in chronic pain and PPS. We invited 40 national and international experts on chronic pain and PPS, 27 agreed to participate. We selected 12 tests from our systematic review and additional searches; panellists added three more tests in the first round. We asked the panellists, both clinicians and researchers, to rate these 15 tests on technical feasibility for use in general practice, added value and to provide an overall judgement for suitability in general practice.

Results

In two rounds the panellists reached consensus on 14 of the 15 tests: three were included, eleven excluded. Included were the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments. No consensus was reached on the Sensory Hypersensitivity Scale.

Conclusion

In a Delphi study among an international panel of experts, three tests for measuring CS were considered to be suitable for use in general practice: the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments.

SUBMITTER: den Boer C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8527602 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tests for central sensitization in general practice: a Delphi study.

den Boer Carine C Terluin Berend B van der Wouden Johannes C JC Blankenstein Annette H AH van der Horst Henriëtte E HE

BMC family practice 20211019 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Central sensitization (CS) may explain the persistence of symptoms in patients with chronic pain and persistent physical symptoms (PPS). There is a need for assessing CS in the consultation room. In a recently published systematic review, we made an inventory of tests for CS. In this study we aimed to assess which tests might have added value, might be feasible and thus be suitable for use in general practice.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a Delphi study consisting of two e-ma ...[more]

PMID: 34666688

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe majority of severely ill and dying people in Germany can be administered primary palliative care (PPC) by general practitioners (GP). However, the current provision of PPC does not match the needs of the population. Although several public health strategies aim at strengthening the role of GPs in PPC provision, it remains challenging for GP teams to integrate PPC into their daily routines.AimA Delphi study with GPs was conducted to achieve consensus on specific measures for improving the integration of PPC into everyday GP practice.MethodsThe study is part of the junior research project "Primary Palliative Care in General Practice" (ALLPRAX). After having developed, tested and evaluated 26 practical measures for GP practices to improve their PPC, a Delphi consensus study among GPs took place. In 2020, 569 GPs were asked to rate the relevance and feasibility of the measures on a 4-point Likert scale via an anonymous online questionnaire. Consensus was defined as a sum percentage of 'strongly agree' and 'somewhat agree' responses ≥75% after two rounds. Between these rounds, measures that were not consented in the first round were adapted in light of respondents' free text comments and suggestions.ResultsThe response rate was 11.3% in round 1 (n = 64) and 53.1% in round 2 (n = 34). From the initial n = 26 measures, n = 20 measures achieved consensus and were included in the final intervention package. The consented measures pertained to four main topics: advance care planning with patients, consulting and informing patients and family caregivers, GP office organisation and continuing education. N = 6 measures did not achieve consensus, predominantly due to time and workload constraints.ConclusionThe consented measures provide valuable support to improve the provision of PPC by GPs. They can be used freely and flexibly, according to the needs of individual GP teams, and are thus suitable for implementation nationwide.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (Registration N° DRKS00011821; 4 December 2017; https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/ ) and the German Register of Health Care Research (Registration N° VfD_ALLPRAX_16_003817; 30 March 2017).

Project description:AbstractTo assess diagnostic criteria and currently used tools for the identification of central sensitization (CS) in patients with joint pain due to osteoarthritis (OA).Qualitative, cross-sectional and multicenter study based on a 2-round Delphi surveyPublic and private medical centers attending patients with joint pain.A total of 113 specialists in traumatology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, pain management, rheumatology, primary care physicians and geriatrics were enrolled in the study.Participants completed an ad-hoc 26-item questionnaire available from a microsite in Internet.The questionnaire was divided into 6 sections with general data on CS, impact of CS in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), diagnostic criteria for CS, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment of CS and usefulness of the concept of CS in the integral management of patients with KOA. Consensus was defined as 75% agreement.Diagnostic criteria included pain of disproportionate intensity to the radiological joint lesion (agreement 86.7%), poor response to usual analgesics (85.8%), progression of pain outside the site of the lesion (76.1%) and concurrent anxiety and depression (76.1%). Based on the opinion of the specialists, about 61% of patients with KOA present moderate-to-severe pain, 50% of them show poor response to conventional analgesics, and 40% poor clinical-radiological correlation. Patients with KOA and CS showed higher functional disability and impairment of quality of life than those without CS (88.5%) and have a poor prognosis of medical, rehabilitation and surgical treatment (86.7%). Early diagnosis and treatment of CS may preserve function and quality of life during all steps of the disease (90.3%).The management of patients with osteoarthritis pain and CS requires the consideration of the intensity of pain related to the joint lesion, response to analgesics, progression of pain to other areas and concurrent anxiety and depression to establish an adequate therapeutic approach based on diagnostic criteria of CS.

Project description:BackgroundIn the UK, there is ongoing integration of pharmacists into general practice as a new healthcare service in primary care. Evaluation of the service involves national measures that require pharmacists to record their work, on the general practice clinical computer systems, using electronic activity codes. No national agreement, however, has been established on what activities to record. The purpose of this study was to attempt to reach consensus on what activities general practice-based pharmacists should record.MethodsThe e-Delphi method was chosen as it is an excellent technique for achieving consensus. The study began with an initial stage in which screening of a general practice clinical computer system and discussion groups with pharmacists from two 'pharmacists in general practice' sites identified 81 codes potentially relevant to general practice-based pharmacists' work. Twenty-nine experts (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians from the two sites along with experts recruited through national committees) were then invited by e-mail to participate as a panel in three e-Delphi questionnaire rounds. In each round, panellists were asked to grade or rank codes and justify their choices. In every round, panellists were provided with anonymised feedback from the previous round which included their individual choices along with their co-panellists' views. Final consensus (in Round 3) was defined as at least 80% agreement. Commentaries on the codes from all e-Delphi rounds were pooled together and analysed thematically.ResultsTwenty-one individual panellists took part in the study (there were 12 responses in Round 1, 18 in Round 2 and 16 in Round 3). Commentaries on the codes included three themes: challenges and facilitators; level of detail; and activities related to funding. Consensus was achieved for ten codes, eight of which related to activities (general and disease specific medication reviews, monitoring of high-risk drugs and medicines reconciliation) and two to patient outcomes (presence of side effects and satisfactory understanding of medication).ConclusionsA formal consensus method revealed general practice-based pharmacists' preferences for activity coding. Findings will inform policy so that any future shaping of activity coding for general practice-based pharmacists takes account of pharmacists' actual needs and preferences.

Dataset Information

Tests for central sensitization in general practice: a Delphi study.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Tests for central sensitization in general practice: a Delphi study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets