Exploring the origin of low back pain sub-classification: a scoping review protocol.

Mary-Anne Jess, Sharon Hamilton, Cormac G Ryan, Shaun Wellburn, Denis Martin
{"title":"Exploring the origin of low back pain sub-classification: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Mary-Anne Jess, Sharon Hamilton, Cormac G Ryan, Shaun Wellburn, Denis Martin","doi":"10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aims to map the different working definitions currently being used for the duration of acute, subacute and chronic low back pain (LBP), and to establish where these definitions originated and the rationale provided for the timeframes used.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Low back pain is a major social and economic problem worldwide. One of the most commonly used approaches to classify and manage patients with LBP is the traditional duration-based classification (acute, subacute and chronic). There are significant differences between studies in the timeframes used for what constitutes acute, subacute and chronic LBP. These discrepancies lead to heterogeneity in study results, making it difficult to compare or summarize findings.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Studies that include participants with non-specific LBP, regardless of sex, will be considered. Studies that include children or participants with specific causes of LBP will be excluded.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The following electronic databases will be searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. All types of studies will be included, provided they give a rationale for the definition of duration that they use. Studies will be limited to those published in English. Two independent reviewers will screen the retrieved articles against the eligibility criteria for the scoping review. A narrative synthesis will describe the definitions used in the study and the rationale given for the timeframes reported. This scoping review will give an insight into the background of the variation of timeframes used for duration-based classification of LBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":73539,"journal":{"name":"JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports","volume":" ","pages":"1600-1606"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI database of systematic reviews and implementation reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003805","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This scoping review aims to map the different working definitions currently being used for the duration of acute, subacute and chronic low back pain (LBP), and to establish where these definitions originated and the rationale provided for the timeframes used.

Introduction: Low back pain is a major social and economic problem worldwide. One of the most commonly used approaches to classify and manage patients with LBP is the traditional duration-based classification (acute, subacute and chronic). There are significant differences between studies in the timeframes used for what constitutes acute, subacute and chronic LBP. These discrepancies lead to heterogeneity in study results, making it difficult to compare or summarize findings.

Inclusion criteria: Studies that include participants with non-specific LBP, regardless of sex, will be considered. Studies that include children or participants with specific causes of LBP will be excluded.

Methods: The following electronic databases will be searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. All types of studies will be included, provided they give a rationale for the definition of duration that they use. Studies will be limited to those published in English. Two independent reviewers will screen the retrieved articles against the eligibility criteria for the scoping review. A narrative synthesis will describe the definitions used in the study and the rationale given for the timeframes reported. This scoping review will give an insight into the background of the variation of timeframes used for duration-based classification of LBP.

探索腰背痛亚分类的起源:范围界定审查协议。
目的:本范围界定综述旨在绘制目前对急性、亚急性和慢性腰背痛(LBP)的持续时间所使用的不同工作定义,并确定这些定义的起源以及所使用的时间范围的理由:腰背痛是全球范围内的一个主要社会和经济问题。在对腰背痛患者进行分类和管理时,最常用的方法之一是传统的病程分类法(急性、亚急性和慢性)。不同的研究对急性、亚急性和慢性枸杞痛的时间范围有很大差异。这些差异导致了研究结果的异质性,从而难以对研究结果进行比较或总结:包括非特异性 LBP 患者(不分男女)的研究将被考虑。纳入标准:包括非特异性椎间盘突出症患者(不分男女)的研究将被考虑,包括儿童或有特定椎间盘突出症病因的患者的研究将被排除:将检索以下电子数据库:方法:将检索以下电子数据库:MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL 和 PsycINFO。所有类型的研究都将被包括在内,但前提是这些研究必须说明其使用的持续时间定义的理由。研究仅限于以英文发表的研究。两名独立审查员将根据范围界定审查的资格标准对检索到的文章进行筛选。叙述性综述将描述研究中使用的定义以及报告时限的理由。该范围界定综述将有助于深入了解基于持续时间的枸杞多糖症分类所使用的不同时间框架的背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信