挥鞭相关疾病的核心结果测量集——社论

IF 1.5 Q3 REHABILITATION
M. Sterling
{"title":"挥鞭相关疾病的核心结果测量集——社论","authors":"M. Sterling","doi":"10.1080/21679169.2022.2117448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global disability burden of musculoskeletal pain conditions has been well documented in recent years [1]. Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) is a common musculoskeletal condition, traumatic in onset usually from a road traffic crash, that incurs substantial costs related to treatment of physical and mental health as well as lost productivity [2]. Whilst the cardinal symptom of WAD is neck pain, the condition appears to be more complex than neck pain of nontraumatic onset, at least for some individuals. For example, people with WAD report higher pain, disability [3] and distress [4], greater cognitive problems [5], and more marked features of nociplastic pain including greater pain sensitivity [6] and loss of endogenous modulation [5]. The Global Burden of Disease initiative does not differentiate traumatic and non-traumatic musculoskeletal pain, but it is likely that WAD contributes significantly to global disability burden. Progress in improving health outcomes after whiplash injury has been slow. The majority of treatments including physical and psychological approaches have mostly small effects on pain and disability [7,8]. Inconsistency and heterogeneity in the use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials of treatments for WAD has hampered comparisons between clinical trials and limited capacity for data pooling in systematic reviews [9,10]. To address this problem, in 2017, we established an International Steering Committee that aimed to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for clinical trials of interventions for patients with WAD (the CATWAD initiative). The committee adhered to the recommendations of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMETs), the protocol was registered in the COMET database and published in detail [11]. The first step in the process of COS development is to agree upon core outcome domains that should be measured. Through a 3-stage Delphi consensus process with stakeholder groups including clinical researchers, clinicians, patients and insurance personnel, six core domains were recommended: Physical Functioning, Perceived Recovery, Work and Social Functioning, Psychological Functioning, Quality of Life and Pain [12]. Following this process, systematic reviews were conducted for each core domain to identify potential core outcome instruments and evaluate their measurement properties, feasibility, and ease of use. In terms of identifying core outcome instruments shown to have sound psychometric properties in WAD, the results of the systematic reviews were disappointing. Numerous PROMS were identified covering the six core domains, but none had undergone evaluation of content validity in patients with WAD, although some had moderate to high quality evidence for sufficient internal structure. The reviews found that PROMs for pain and disability had undergone more extensive evaluation than some of the other domains [13,14]. In particular, psychological PROMs were not well evaluated in patients with WAD [15], concerning for a condition where psychological factors have been shown to be an important factor associated with health outcomes. Based on these results, the International Steering Committee reached 100% consensus to recommend the following COS: Neck Disability Index and Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (Physical Functioning), Global Rating of Change Scale (Perceived Recovery), one of five PROMS [PFACTS-C, Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Harvard Trauma Questionnaire, and the Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale] (Psychological Functioning), EQ-5D-5L of SF-6D (Quality of Life), Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Visual Analogue Scale (Pain) and single item questions and SF-6D (Work and Social Functioning). With respect to psychological PROMs, it is suggested that one of the five be selected based on the nature of the intervention being tested. For example, if the intervention is targeting fear of movement, then the PFACTS-C could be used. There is clear need for further evaluation of measurement properties of some of the recommended PROMs in patients with WAD. As this occurs with time, the CATWAD recommendations will be updated. Nevertheless, a core outcome measurement set for WAD is available for use and agreed by an international and multidisciplinary group of researchers, clinicians, and patients. The use of core sets has been shown to improve outcome standardisation in clinical trials [16] and can greatly benefit future evidence syntheses for patients with WAD.","PeriodicalId":45694,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":"24 1","pages":"260 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A core outcome measurement set for whiplash associated disorders—Editorial\",\"authors\":\"M. Sterling\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21679169.2022.2117448\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The global disability burden of musculoskeletal pain conditions has been well documented in recent years [1]. Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) is a common musculoskeletal condition, traumatic in onset usually from a road traffic crash, that incurs substantial costs related to treatment of physical and mental health as well as lost productivity [2]. Whilst the cardinal symptom of WAD is neck pain, the condition appears to be more complex than neck pain of nontraumatic onset, at least for some individuals. For example, people with WAD report higher pain, disability [3] and distress [4], greater cognitive problems [5], and more marked features of nociplastic pain including greater pain sensitivity [6] and loss of endogenous modulation [5]. The Global Burden of Disease initiative does not differentiate traumatic and non-traumatic musculoskeletal pain, but it is likely that WAD contributes significantly to global disability burden. Progress in improving health outcomes after whiplash injury has been slow. The majority of treatments including physical and psychological approaches have mostly small effects on pain and disability [7,8]. Inconsistency and heterogeneity in the use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials of treatments for WAD has hampered comparisons between clinical trials and limited capacity for data pooling in systematic reviews [9,10]. To address this problem, in 2017, we established an International Steering Committee that aimed to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for clinical trials of interventions for patients with WAD (the CATWAD initiative). The committee adhered to the recommendations of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMETs), the protocol was registered in the COMET database and published in detail [11]. The first step in the process of COS development is to agree upon core outcome domains that should be measured. Through a 3-stage Delphi consensus process with stakeholder groups including clinical researchers, clinicians, patients and insurance personnel, six core domains were recommended: Physical Functioning, Perceived Recovery, Work and Social Functioning, Psychological Functioning, Quality of Life and Pain [12]. Following this process, systematic reviews were conducted for each core domain to identify potential core outcome instruments and evaluate their measurement properties, feasibility, and ease of use. In terms of identifying core outcome instruments shown to have sound psychometric properties in WAD, the results of the systematic reviews were disappointing. Numerous PROMS were identified covering the six core domains, but none had undergone evaluation of content validity in patients with WAD, although some had moderate to high quality evidence for sufficient internal structure. The reviews found that PROMs for pain and disability had undergone more extensive evaluation than some of the other domains [13,14]. In particular, psychological PROMs were not well evaluated in patients with WAD [15], concerning for a condition where psychological factors have been shown to be an important factor associated with health outcomes. Based on these results, the International Steering Committee reached 100% consensus to recommend the following COS: Neck Disability Index and Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (Physical Functioning), Global Rating of Change Scale (Perceived Recovery), one of five PROMS [PFACTS-C, Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Harvard Trauma Questionnaire, and the Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale] (Psychological Functioning), EQ-5D-5L of SF-6D (Quality of Life), Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Visual Analogue Scale (Pain) and single item questions and SF-6D (Work and Social Functioning). With respect to psychological PROMs, it is suggested that one of the five be selected based on the nature of the intervention being tested. For example, if the intervention is targeting fear of movement, then the PFACTS-C could be used. There is clear need for further evaluation of measurement properties of some of the recommended PROMs in patients with WAD. As this occurs with time, the CATWAD recommendations will be updated. Nevertheless, a core outcome measurement set for WAD is available for use and agreed by an international and multidisciplinary group of researchers, clinicians, and patients. The use of core sets has been shown to improve outcome standardisation in clinical trials [16] and can greatly benefit future evidence syntheses for patients with WAD.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"260 - 261\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21679169.2022.2117448\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21679169.2022.2117448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,肌肉骨骼疼痛的全球残疾负担已得到充分记录[1]。鞭笞相关障碍(WAD)是一种常见的肌肉骨骼疾病,通常由道路交通事故引起,会导致与身心健康治疗相关的大量费用以及生产力损失[2]。虽然WAD的主要症状是颈部疼痛,但至少对一些人来说,这种情况似乎比非创伤性发作的颈部疼痛更复杂。例如,WAD患者报告了更高的疼痛、残疾[3]和痛苦[4],更大的认知问题[5],以及更显著的非综合性疼痛特征,包括更大的疼痛敏感性[6]和内源性调节丧失[5]。全球疾病负担倡议没有区分创伤性和非创伤性肌肉骨骼疼痛,但WAD很可能对全球残疾负担有重大贡献。在改善挥鞭损伤后的健康状况方面进展缓慢。包括生理和心理方法在内的大多数治疗方法对疼痛和残疾的影响大多很小[7,8]。WAD治疗的临床试验中使用患者报告的结果指标的不一致性和异质性阻碍了临床试验之间的比较,系统综述中数据汇集的能力有限[9,10]。为了解决这个问题,2017年,我们成立了一个国际指导委员会,旨在为WAD患者干预措施的临床试验制定核心结果集(COS)(CATWAD倡议)。委员会遵守了有效性试验核心结果指标(COMET)的建议,该方案已在COMET数据库中注册并详细发布[11]。COS开发过程的第一步是就应该衡量的核心成果领域达成一致。通过与包括临床研究人员、临床医生、患者和保险人员在内的利益相关者群体进行的三阶段德尔菲共识过程,推荐了六个核心领域:身体功能、感知康复、工作和社会功能、心理功能、生活质量和疼痛[12]。在此过程之后,对每个核心领域进行了系统审查,以确定潜在的核心成果工具,并评估其测量特性、可行性和易用性。在确定WAD中显示出良好心理测量特性的核心结果工具方面,系统审查的结果令人失望。已经确定了涵盖六个核心领域的许多PROMS,但没有一个对WAD患者的内容有效性进行评估,尽管有些PROMS具有足够的内部结构的中高质量证据。综述发现,与其他一些领域相比,疼痛和残疾的PROMs经过了更广泛的评估[13,14]。特别是,WAD患者的心理PROMs没有得到很好的评估[15],这涉及到心理因素已被证明是与健康结果相关的重要因素的情况。基于这些结果,国际指导委员会达成了100%的共识,推荐了以下COS:颈部残疾指数和鞭笞残疾问卷(身体功能)、全球变化评分量表(感知恢复),五种PROMS之一[PFCACTS-C,疼痛自我效能问卷,疼痛灾难量表,哈佛创伤问卷,创伤后应激诊断量表](心理功能),SF-6D的EQ-5D-5L(生活质量),数字疼痛评定量表和视觉模拟量表(疼痛),单项问题和SF-6D(工作和社会功能)。关于心理PROM,建议根据测试干预的性质从五种PROM中选择一种。例如,如果干预针对的是对运动的恐惧,那么可以使用PFACTS-C。显然需要进一步评估WAD患者中一些推荐PROM的测量特性。随着时间的推移,CATWAD的建议将得到更新。然而,WAD的核心结果测量集可供使用,并得到国际和多学科研究人员、临床医生和患者小组的同意。核心集合的使用已被证明可以提高临床试验的结果标准化[16],并可以极大地有利于WAD患者未来的证据综合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A core outcome measurement set for whiplash associated disorders—Editorial
The global disability burden of musculoskeletal pain conditions has been well documented in recent years [1]. Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) is a common musculoskeletal condition, traumatic in onset usually from a road traffic crash, that incurs substantial costs related to treatment of physical and mental health as well as lost productivity [2]. Whilst the cardinal symptom of WAD is neck pain, the condition appears to be more complex than neck pain of nontraumatic onset, at least for some individuals. For example, people with WAD report higher pain, disability [3] and distress [4], greater cognitive problems [5], and more marked features of nociplastic pain including greater pain sensitivity [6] and loss of endogenous modulation [5]. The Global Burden of Disease initiative does not differentiate traumatic and non-traumatic musculoskeletal pain, but it is likely that WAD contributes significantly to global disability burden. Progress in improving health outcomes after whiplash injury has been slow. The majority of treatments including physical and psychological approaches have mostly small effects on pain and disability [7,8]. Inconsistency and heterogeneity in the use of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials of treatments for WAD has hampered comparisons between clinical trials and limited capacity for data pooling in systematic reviews [9,10]. To address this problem, in 2017, we established an International Steering Committee that aimed to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for clinical trials of interventions for patients with WAD (the CATWAD initiative). The committee adhered to the recommendations of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMETs), the protocol was registered in the COMET database and published in detail [11]. The first step in the process of COS development is to agree upon core outcome domains that should be measured. Through a 3-stage Delphi consensus process with stakeholder groups including clinical researchers, clinicians, patients and insurance personnel, six core domains were recommended: Physical Functioning, Perceived Recovery, Work and Social Functioning, Psychological Functioning, Quality of Life and Pain [12]. Following this process, systematic reviews were conducted for each core domain to identify potential core outcome instruments and evaluate their measurement properties, feasibility, and ease of use. In terms of identifying core outcome instruments shown to have sound psychometric properties in WAD, the results of the systematic reviews were disappointing. Numerous PROMS were identified covering the six core domains, but none had undergone evaluation of content validity in patients with WAD, although some had moderate to high quality evidence for sufficient internal structure. The reviews found that PROMs for pain and disability had undergone more extensive evaluation than some of the other domains [13,14]. In particular, psychological PROMs were not well evaluated in patients with WAD [15], concerning for a condition where psychological factors have been shown to be an important factor associated with health outcomes. Based on these results, the International Steering Committee reached 100% consensus to recommend the following COS: Neck Disability Index and Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (Physical Functioning), Global Rating of Change Scale (Perceived Recovery), one of five PROMS [PFACTS-C, Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Harvard Trauma Questionnaire, and the Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale] (Psychological Functioning), EQ-5D-5L of SF-6D (Quality of Life), Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Visual Analogue Scale (Pain) and single item questions and SF-6D (Work and Social Functioning). With respect to psychological PROMs, it is suggested that one of the five be selected based on the nature of the intervention being tested. For example, if the intervention is targeting fear of movement, then the PFACTS-C could be used. There is clear need for further evaluation of measurement properties of some of the recommended PROMs in patients with WAD. As this occurs with time, the CATWAD recommendations will be updated. Nevertheless, a core outcome measurement set for WAD is available for use and agreed by an international and multidisciplinary group of researchers, clinicians, and patients. The use of core sets has been shown to improve outcome standardisation in clinical trials [16] and can greatly benefit future evidence syntheses for patients with WAD.
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
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
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