预测与脊柱疼痛相关的工作残疾:对大多数临床相关工具的系统回顾。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Thomas Gerard, Pierre-Luc Lachance, Martin Rabey, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme
{"title":"预测与脊柱疼痛相关的工作残疾:对大多数临床相关工具的系统回顾。","authors":"Thomas Gerard, Pierre-Luc Lachance, Martin Rabey, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme","doi":"10.1007/s10926-025-10294-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Musculoskeletal disorders, especially spinal conditions, are leading causes of disability, contributing significantly to work absenteeism and socio-economic burden. Rehabilitation is essential for promoting sustainable return to work (RTW). However, clinicians need reliable tools with appropriate psychometric properties to determine patients' risk of persistent work disability and tailor interventions. This systematic review objectives were to (1) identify clinically useful questionnaires that enable clinicians to identify individuals with spinal pain (back or neck pain) at risk of work disability, and (2) document the psychometric properties of the identified questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in three databases from inception to 01/10/2025, to retrieve relevant studies. Studies were included if they reported self-administered questionnaires with ≤ 15 items predicting RTW outcomes in spinal disorders. Tools were evaluated based on psychometric properties (calibration, discrimination), and pragmatic characteristics (number of items, readability).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies were retrieved including 16 unique questionnaires of which four demonstrated sufficient discrimination capability. From these, the Örebro musculoskeletal pain questionnaire 10-items (ÖMPQ- 10), STarT Back screening tool (SBST), and a single item from the ÖMPQ- 25 demonstrated acceptable to excellent discrimination for low back pain populations, but showed lower discrimination for mixed or neck pain populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SBST, ÖMPQ- 10, and single items from the ÖMPQ- 25 performed best in predicting RTW outcomes for low back pain. No questionnaire had sufficient discriminatory capability for neck pain. These results should be interpreted with caution, as the overall risk of bias assessment remains unclear for the OMPQ- 10 and high for the SBST. Further research is necessary to develop or validate tools specific to neck pain and mixed populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicting Work Disability Related to Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review of the Most Clinically Relevant Tools.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Gerard, Pierre-Luc Lachance, Martin Rabey, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10926-025-10294-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Musculoskeletal disorders, especially spinal conditions, are leading causes of disability, contributing significantly to work absenteeism and socio-economic burden. Rehabilitation is essential for promoting sustainable return to work (RTW). However, clinicians need reliable tools with appropriate psychometric properties to determine patients' risk of persistent work disability and tailor interventions. This systematic review objectives were to (1) identify clinically useful questionnaires that enable clinicians to identify individuals with spinal pain (back or neck pain) at risk of work disability, and (2) document the psychometric properties of the identified questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in three databases from inception to 01/10/2025, to retrieve relevant studies. Studies were included if they reported self-administered questionnaires with ≤ 15 items predicting RTW outcomes in spinal disorders. Tools were evaluated based on psychometric properties (calibration, discrimination), and pragmatic characteristics (number of items, readability).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies were retrieved including 16 unique questionnaires of which four demonstrated sufficient discrimination capability. From these, the Örebro musculoskeletal pain questionnaire 10-items (ÖMPQ- 10), STarT Back screening tool (SBST), and a single item from the ÖMPQ- 25 demonstrated acceptable to excellent discrimination for low back pain populations, but showed lower discrimination for mixed or neck pain populations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SBST, ÖMPQ- 10, and single items from the ÖMPQ- 25 performed best in predicting RTW outcomes for low back pain. No questionnaire had sufficient discriminatory capability for neck pain. These results should be interpreted with caution, as the overall risk of bias assessment remains unclear for the OMPQ- 10 and high for the SBST. Further research is necessary to develop or validate tools specific to neck pain and mixed populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-025-10294-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-025-10294-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:肌肉骨骼疾病,特别是脊柱疾病,是导致残疾的主要原因,在很大程度上造成了旷工和社会经济负担。康复对于促进可持续的重返工作岗位至关重要。然而,临床医生需要具有适当心理测量特性的可靠工具来确定患者持续工作残疾的风险并定制干预措施。本系统综述的目的是:(1)确定临床有用的问卷,使临床医生能够识别有工作残疾风险的脊柱疼痛(背部或颈部疼痛)患者;(2)记录确定问卷的心理测量特性。方法:系统检索自建库至2025年10月1日的3个数据库,检索相关研究。如果研究报告有≤15项预测脊柱疾病RTW结果的自我管理问卷,则纳入研究。工具的评估基于心理测量特性(校准、辨别)和语用特征(项目数量、可读性)。结果:共检索到17份研究,其中有16份独特的问卷,其中4份具有足够的鉴别能力。其中,Örebro肌肉骨骼疼痛问卷10个项目(ÖMPQ- 10)、STarT Back筛查工具(SBST)和ÖMPQ- 25中的一个项目对腰痛人群表现出良好的可接受性,但对混合疼痛或颈部疼痛人群的歧视程度较低。结论:SBST、ÖMPQ- 10和ÖMPQ- 25中的单项在预测腰痛RTW预后方面效果最好。没有问卷对颈部疼痛有足够的区分能力。这些结果应谨慎解读,因为OMPQ- 10的偏倚评估总体风险尚不清楚,而SBST的偏倚评估风险较高。需要进一步的研究来开发或验证针对颈部疼痛和混合人群的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Predicting Work Disability Related to Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review of the Most Clinically Relevant Tools.

Purpose: Musculoskeletal disorders, especially spinal conditions, are leading causes of disability, contributing significantly to work absenteeism and socio-economic burden. Rehabilitation is essential for promoting sustainable return to work (RTW). However, clinicians need reliable tools with appropriate psychometric properties to determine patients' risk of persistent work disability and tailor interventions. This systematic review objectives were to (1) identify clinically useful questionnaires that enable clinicians to identify individuals with spinal pain (back or neck pain) at risk of work disability, and (2) document the psychometric properties of the identified questionnaires.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in three databases from inception to 01/10/2025, to retrieve relevant studies. Studies were included if they reported self-administered questionnaires with ≤ 15 items predicting RTW outcomes in spinal disorders. Tools were evaluated based on psychometric properties (calibration, discrimination), and pragmatic characteristics (number of items, readability).

Results: Seventeen studies were retrieved including 16 unique questionnaires of which four demonstrated sufficient discrimination capability. From these, the Örebro musculoskeletal pain questionnaire 10-items (ÖMPQ- 10), STarT Back screening tool (SBST), and a single item from the ÖMPQ- 25 demonstrated acceptable to excellent discrimination for low back pain populations, but showed lower discrimination for mixed or neck pain populations.

Conclusion: The SBST, ÖMPQ- 10, and single items from the ÖMPQ- 25 performed best in predicting RTW outcomes for low back pain. No questionnaire had sufficient discriminatory capability for neck pain. These results should be interpreted with caution, as the overall risk of bias assessment remains unclear for the OMPQ- 10 and high for the SBST. Further research is necessary to develop or validate tools specific to neck pain and mixed populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law.  A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
×
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