Clinical prediction rules: What are they and what do they tell us?

Evaluating the use of the ABCD2 score as a clinical decision aid in the emergency department: Retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Clinical decision aids (CDAs) can help clinicians with patient risk assessment. However, there is little data on CDA calculation, interpretation and documentation in real-world ED settings. The ABCD2 score (range 0-7) is a CDA used for patients with transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and assesses risk of stroke, with a score of 0-3 being low risk. The aim of this study was to describe ABCD2 score documentation in patients with an ED diagnosis of TIA.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of patients with a working diagnosis of a TIA in two Australian EDs. Data were gathered using routinely collected data from health informatics sources and medical records reviewed by a trained data abstractor. ABCD2 scores were calculated and compared with what was documented by the treating clinician. Data were presented using descriptive analysis and scatter plots.

RESULTS

Among the 367 patients with an ED diagnosis of TIA, clinicians documented an ABCD2 score in 45% (95% CI 40-50%, n = 165). Overall, there was very good agreement between calculated and documented scores (Cohen's kappa 0.90). The mean documented and calculated ABCD2 score were similar (3.8, SD = 1.5, n = 165 vs 3.7, SD = 1.8, n = 367). Documented scores on the threshold of low and high risk were more likely to be discordant with calculated scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The ABCD2 score was documented in less than half of eligible patients. When documented, clinicians were generally accurate with their calculation and application of the ABCD2. No independent predictors of ABCD2 documentation were identified.

Assessing the Risk of Developing Delirium on Admission to Inpatient Rehabilitation: A Clinical Prediction Model

OBJECTIVES

To develop a clinical model to predict the risk of an individual patient developing delirium during inpatient rehabilitation, based on patient characteristics and clinical data available on admission.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study based on electronic health record data.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We studied a previously validated data set of inpatients including incident delirium episodes during rehabilitation. These patients were admitted to ZURZACH Care, Rehaklinik Bad Zurzach, a Swiss inpatient rehabilitation clinic, between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018.

METHODS

We performed logistic regression analysis using backward and forward selection with alpha = 0.01 to remove any noninformative potential predictor. We subsequentially used the Akaike information criterion (AIC) to select the final model among the resulting "intermediate" models. Discrimination of the final prediction model was evaluated using the C-statistic.

RESULTS

Of the 20 candidate predictor variables, 6 were included in the final prediction model: a linear spline of age with 1 knot at 60 years and a linear spline of the functional independence measure (FIM), a measure of the functional degree of patients independency, with 1 knot at 64 points, diagnosis of disorders of fluid, electrolyte, and acid-base balance (E87), use of other analgesic and antipyretics (N02B), use of anti-parkinson drugs (N04B), and an anticholinergic burden score (ACB) of ≥3 points.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our clinical prediction model could, upon validation, identify patients at risk of incident delirium at admission to inpatient rehabilitation, and thus enable targeted prevention strategies.

Exploring the general practitioners' point of view about clinical scores: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Clinical scores help physicians to make clinical decisions, and some are recommended by health authorities for primary care use. As an increasing number of scores are becoming available, there is a need to understand general practitioner expectations for their use in primary care. The aim of this study was to explore general practitioner opinions about using scores in general practice.

METHOD

This qualitative study, with a grounded theory approach, used focus groups with general practitioners recruited from their own surgeries to obtain verbatim. Two investigators performed verbatim analysis to ensure data triangulation. The verbatim was double-blind labeled for inductive categorization to conceptualize score use in general practice.

RESULTS

Five focus groups were planned, 21 general practitioners from central France participated. Participants appreciated scores for their clinical efficacy but felt that they were difficult to use in primary care. Their opinions revolved around validity, acceptability, and feasibility. Participants have little regard for score validity, they felt many scores are difficult to accept and do not capture contextual and human elements. Participants also felt that scores are unfeasible for primary care use. There are too many, they are hard to find, and either too short or too long. They also felt that scores were complex to administer and took up time for both patient and physician. Many participants felt learned societies should choose appropriate scores.

DISCUSSION

This study conceptualizes general practitioner opinions about score use in primary care. The participants weighed up score effectiveness with efficiency. For some participants, scores helped make decisions faster, others expressed being disappointed with the lack of patient-centeredness and limited bio-psycho-social approach.

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs): Use during the physical therapy practice and associated factors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current level of routine use of psychosocial-related patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in physical therapy practice and which physical therapist-level factors are associated with the use of these measurement instruments.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey study among Spanish physical therapists involved in the treatment of LBP patients in Public Health Service, Mutual Insurance Companies, and private practice during 2020. Descriptive analyses were conducted for reporting the number and instruments utilized. Thus, sociodemographic and professional features differences between PTs using and not using PROM were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 485 physiotherapists completing the questionnaire nationwide, 484 were included. A minority of therapists routinely used psychosocial-related PROMs (13.8%) in LBP patients and only 6.8% did so through standardized measurements instruments. The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (28.8%) and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (15.1%) were used most frequently. Physiotherapists working in Andalucía and País Vasco regions, in private practice environments, educated in psychosocial factors evaluation and management, considering psychosocial factors during the clinical practice and expecting patients' collaborative attitudes demonstrated significantly greater use of PROMS (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the majority of physiotherapists in Spain do not use PROMs for evaluating LBP (86.2%). From those physiotherapists using PROMs, approximately the half use validated instruments such as the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia or the Pain Catastrophizing Scale while the other half limit their evaluation to anamnesis and non-validated questionnaires. Therefore, developing effective strategies to implement and facilitate the use of psychosocial-related PROMs would enhance the evaluation during the clinical practice.

The Predictive Validity of Functional Outcome Measures With Discharge Destination for Hospitalized Medical Patients

Objective

To investigate the predictive validity for discharge to home or facility of 4 functional mobility outcome measures.

Design

Retrospective, observational study.

Setting

Urban, academic hospital in the United States.

Participants

Adult patients (N=3999) admitted to medical units between June 1, 2019, and February 29, 2020, with 2 or more recorded scores on each of 4 tools: Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) 6-Clicks Basic Mobility and Daily Activity, Henry Ford Mobility Level, and The Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Mobility scores and discharge destination.

Results

For the 3999 subjects, 51.4% went home at discharge and had higher mean scores on each measure than those not returning home. Both early (I) and later (II) time point for each measure had positive predictability for discharge home. AM-PAC 6-Clicks had the highest confidence intervals for early and later recorded scores. The c-statistic value for Basic Mobility I (cut point=16) was 0.74 and for II (cut point=18) was, 0.79. The value for Daily Activity I (cut point=18) was 0.75 and for Daily Activity II (cut point=18) was 0.80). The Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility and Henry Ford Mobility Level measures were less discriminative at initial score (c-statistic 0.704 and 0.665, respectively) and final score (c-statistic 0.74 and 0.75, respectively).

Conclusions

Functional outcome measures have good predictive validity for discharge destination. The AM-PAC Basic mobility score appears to have a slightly higher confidence interval than the other tools in this study design.

Do expectations of recovery improve risk assessment for people with whiplash-associated disorders? Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

WhipPredict, which includes prognostic factors of pain-related disability, age and hyperarousal symptoms, was developed and validated for prediction of outcome in people with whiplash associated disorders (WAD). Patient expectations of recovery was not an included factor, though is known to mediate outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine whether the addition of expectations of recovery could improve the accuracy of WhipPredict.

Methods

Two hundred twenty-eight participants with acute WAD completed questionnaires (WhipPredict and expectations of recovery) at baseline. Health outcomes (neck disability index (NDI) and Global Perceived Recovery (GPR)) were assessed at 6- and 12-months post injury. Cut-off points for expectations of recovery predictive of both full recovery (NDI ≤10 % , GPR ≥ 4) and poor outcome (NDI ≥30 % , GPR ≤  − 3) were determined, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to compare models with and without this variable.

Results

Expectations of recovery improved or maintained the accuracy of predictions of poor outcome (6-months: sensitivity 78 to 83%, specificity maintained at 79.5%; 12-months: sensitivity maintained at 80%, specificity 69 to 73%). The sensitivity of predictions of full recovery improved (6-months: 68 to 76%; 12-months: 57 to 81%), though specificity did not change appreciably at 6 months (80 to 81%) and declined at 12 (83 to 76%). ROC curves indicated a larger and more consistent improvement in model performance when expectations of recovery were added to the pathway predictive of full recovery.

Conclusions

The addition of expectations of recovery may improve the accuracy of WhipPredict, though further validation is required.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05242-8.

Development of a clinical prediction rule to identify physical activity after total hip arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

To develop clinical prediction rule (CPR) of physical activity at 1-year after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University hospital with orthopedic surgery.

PARTICIPANTS

The study group included 321 patients (56 men) who underwent primary THA.

INTERVENTION

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The data collected included age, body mass index, clinical score from the questionnaires, hip pain, range of motion, muscle strength, and Physical functions (10-Meter Walk Test, Timed Up and Go test and Sit-to-stand). Patients were classified into sufficient and insufficient activity groups based on their University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score 1 year after THA. Variables measured preoperatively and at 3 weeks postoperatively were analyzed using univariate and multivariate methods to derive CPR for physical activity.

RESULTS

A CPR was developed using the following five factors and cut-offs: age, ≤70.5 years; preoperative UCLA activity score, ≥3.5; preoperative hip abduction strength, ≥0.54 Nm/kg; preoperative knee extension strength, ≥1.04 Nm/kg; and 10-Meter Walk Test, ≤8.49 s at 3 weeks after surgery. The presence of four of the five factors predicted a sufficient physical activity level at 1-year, with a positive likelihood ratio of 5.94 and probability of 85.4%. The presence of five predictor variables increased the probability of sufficient physical activity after THA to 94.7%.

CONCLUSION

This study developed a CPR for physical activity at 1-year after THA. Having four or more of the five measurements were useful indicators for predicting of physical activity at 1 year postoperatively.

Composite Outcomes in Clinical Prediction Modeling: Are We Trying to Predict Apples and Oranges?

Composite outcomes are widely used in clinical research. Existing literature has considered the pros and cons of composite outcomes in clinical trials, but their extensive use in clinical prediction has received much less attention. Clinical prediction assists decision-making by directing patients with higher risks of adverse outcomes toward interventions that provide the greatest benefits to those at the greatest risk. In this article, we summarize our existing understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of composite outcomes, consider how these relate to clinical prediction, and highlight the problem of key predictors having markedly different associations with individual components of the composite outcome. We suggest that a "composite outcome fallacy" may occur when a clinical prediction model is based on strong associations between key predictors and one component of a composite outcome (such as mortality) and used to direct patients toward intervention when these predictors actually have an inverse association with a more relevant component of the composite outcome (such as the use of a lifesaving intervention). We propose that clinical prediction scores using composite outcomes should report their accuracy for key components of the composite outcome and examine for inconsistencies among predictor variables.

Prognostic Impact of the Combination of MGMT Methylation and TERT Promoter Mutation in Glioblastoma

Background  The concept of combinational analysis between the methylation of O ⁶ -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase ( MGMT ) and telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter ( pTERT ) mutation in glioblastoma (GBM) has been reported. The main study objective was to determine the prognosis of patients with GBM based on MGMT/pTERT classification, while the secondary objective was to estimate the temozolomide effect on the survival time of GBM with MGMT/pTERT classification. Methods  A total of 50 GBM specimens were collected after tumor resection and were selected for investigating MGMT methylation and pTERT mutation. Clinical imaging and pathological characteristics were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with MGMT/pTERT classification were analyzed using survival analysis to develop the nomogram for forecasting and individual prognosis. Results  All patients underwent resection (total resection: 28%, partial resection: 64%, biopsy: 8%). Thirty-two percent of all cases received adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy. Sixty-four percent of the case was found methylated MGMT , and 56% of the present cohort found pTERT mutation. Following combinational analysis of biomarkers, results showed that the GBMs with methylated MGMT and wild-type pTERT had a superior prognosis compared with other subtypes. Using Cox regression analysis with multivariable analysis, the extent of resection, postoperative chemoradiotherapy, MGMT/pTERT classification were associated with a favorable prognosis. Hence, a web-based nomogram was developed for deploying individual prognostication. Conclusions  The interaction of MGMT methylation and pTERT mutation was confirmed for predicting prognosis. The results from the present study could help physicians create treatment strategies for GBM patients in real-world situations.

Understanding GPs' views and experiences of using clinical prediction rules in the management of respiratory infections: a qualitative study

Background

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) account for 60% of antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Several clinical prediction rules (CPRs) have been developed to help reduce unnecessary prescribing for RTIs, but there is a lack of studies exploring whether or how these CPRs are being used in UK general practice.

Aim

To explore UK GPs’ views and experiences with regards to RTI CPRs, and to identify barriers and facilitators to their use in practice.

Design & setting

A qualitative analysis of interviews with in-hours GPs working in the South and South West of England.

Method

Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were conducted, digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Patient and public involvement representatives contributed to study design and interpretation of findings.

Results

Thirty-two GPs were interviewed. Some CPRs were more commonly used than others. Participants used CPRs to facilitate patient—clinician discussion, confirm and support their decision, and document the consultation. GPs also highlighted concerns including lack of time, inability of CPRs to incorporate patient complexity, a shift in focus from the patient during consultations, and limited use in remote consultation (during the COVID-19 pandemic).

Conclusion

This study highlights the need for user-friendly CPRs that are readily integrated into computer systems, and easily embedded into routine practice to complement clinical decision-making. Existing CPRs need to be validated for other populations where demographics and clinical characteristics may differ, as well different settings including remote consultations and self-assessment.

A comprehensive scoping review of Bayesian networks in healthcare: Past, present and future

No comprehensive review of Bayesian networks (BNs) in healthcare has been published in the past, making it difficult to organize the research contributions in the present and identify challenges and neglected areas that need to be addressed in the future. This unique and novel scoping review of BNs in healthcare provides an analytical framework for comprehensively characterizing the domain and its current state. A literature search of health and health informatics literature databases using relevant keywords found 3810 articles that were reduced to 123. This was after screening out those presenting Bayesian statistics, meta-analysis or neural networks, as opposed to BNs and those describing the predictive performance of multiple machine learning algorithms, of which BNs were simply one type. Using the novel analytical framework, we show that: (1) BNs in healthcare are not used to their full potential; (2) a generic BN development process is lacking; (3) limitations exist in the way BNs in healthcare are presented in the literature, which impacts understanding, consensus towards systematic methodologies, practice and adoption; and (4) a gap exists between having an accurate BN and a useful BN that impacts clinical practice. This review highlights several neglected issues, such as restricted aims of BNs, ad hoc BN development methods, and the lack of BN adoption in practice and reveals to researchers and clinicians the need to address these problems. To map the way forward, the paper proposes future research directions and makes recommendations regarding BN development methods and adoption in practice.

Existing validated clinical prediction rules for predicting response to physiotherapy interventions for musculoskeletal conditions have limited clinical value: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that have undergone validation testing for predicting response to physiotherapy-related interventions for musculoskeletal conditions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were systematically searched to September 2020. Search terms included musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, physiotherapy interventions and clinical prediction rules. Controlled studies that validated a prescriptive CPR for physiotherapy treatment response in musculoskeletal conditions were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility. Original derivation studies of each CPR were identified. Risk of bias was assessed with the PROBAST tool (derivation studies) and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care group criteria (validation studies).

RESULTS

Nine studies aimed to validate seven prescriptive CPRs for treatment response for MSK conditions including back pain, neck pain, shoulder pain and carpal tunnel syndrome. Treatments included manipulation, traction and exercise. Seven studies failed to demonstrate an association between CPR prediction and outcome. Methodological quality of derivation studies was poor and for validation studies was good overall.

CONCLUSION

Results do not support the use of any CPRs identified to aid physiotherapy treatment selection for common musculoskeletal conditions, due to methodological shortcomings in the derivation studies and lack of association between CPR and outcome in validation studies.

Prognostic approach to Class III malocclusion through case-based reasoning

OBJECTIVE

This investigation evaluates the evidence of case-based reasoning (CBR) in providing additional information on the prediction of future Class III craniofacial growth.

SETTINGS AND SAMPLE POPULATION

The craniofacial characteristics of 104 untreated Class III subjects (7-17 years of age), monitored with two lateral cephalograms obtained during the growth process, were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were compared with the skeletal characteristics of subjects who showed a high degree of skeletal imbalance ('prototypes') obtained from a large data set of 1263 Class III cross-sectional subjects (7-17 years of age).

RESULTS

The degree of similarity of longitudinal subjects with the most unbalanced prototypes allowed the identification of subjects who would develop a subsequent unfavourable skeletal growth (accuracy: 81%). The angle between the palatal plane and the sella-nasion line (PP-SN angle) and the Wits appraisal were two additional craniofacial features involved in the early prediction of the adverse progression of the Class III skeletal imbalance.

CONCLUSIONS

Case-based reasoning methodology, which uses a personalized inference method, may bring additional information to approximate the skeletal progression of Class III malocclusion.

Evaluating the Impact of the Grading and Assessment of Predictive Tools Framework on Clinicians and Health Care Professionals' Decisions in Selecting Clinical Predictive Tools: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

While selecting predictive tools for implementation in clinical practice or for recommendation in clinical guidelines, clinicians and health care professionals are challenged with an overwhelming number of tools. Many of these tools have never been implemented or evaluated for comparative effectiveness. To overcome this challenge, the authors developed and validated an evidence-based framework for grading and assessment of predictive tools (the GRASP framework). This framework was based on the critical appraisal of the published evidence on such tools.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to examine the impact of using the GRASP framework on clinicians' and health care professionals' decisions in selecting clinical predictive tools.

METHODS

A controlled experiment was conducted through a web-based survey. Participants were randomized to either review the derivation publications, such as studies describing the development of the predictive tools, on common traumatic brain injury predictive tools (control group) or to review an evidence-based summary, where each tool had been graded and assessed using the GRASP framework (intervention group). Participants in both groups were asked to select the best tool based on the greatest validation or implementation. A wide group of international clinicians and health care professionals were invited to participate in the survey. Task completion time, rate of correct decisions, rate of objective versus subjective decisions, and level of decisional conflict were measured.

RESULTS

We received a total of 194 valid responses. In comparison with not using GRASP, using the framework significantly increased correct decisions by 64%, from 53.7% to 88.1% (88.1/53.7=1.64; t₁₉₃=8.53; P<.001); increased objective decision making by 32%, from 62% (3.11/5) to 82% (4.10/5; t₁₈₉=9.24; P<.001); decreased subjective decision making based on guessing by 20%, from 49% (2.48/5) to 39% (1.98/5; t₁₈₈=-5.47; P<.001); and decreased prior knowledge or experience by 8%, from 71% (3.55/5) to 65% (3.27/5; t₁₈₇=-2.99; P=.003). Using GRASP significantly decreased decisional conflict and increased the confidence and satisfaction of participants with their decisions by 11%, from 71% (3.55/5) to 79% (3.96/5; t₁₈₈=4.27; P<.001), and by 13%, from 70% (3.54/5) to 79% (3.99/5; t₁₈₈=4.89; P<.001), respectively. Using GRASP decreased the task completion time, on the 90th percentile, by 52%, from 12.4 to 6.4 min (t₁₉₃=-0.87; P=.38). The average System Usability Scale of the GRASP framework was very good: 72.5% and 88% (108/122) of the participants found the GRASP useful.

CONCLUSIONS

Using GRASP has positively supported and significantly improved evidence-based decision making. It has increased the accuracy and efficiency of selecting predictive tools. GRASP is not meant to be prescriptive; it represents a high-level approach and an effective, evidence-based, and comprehensive yet simple and feasible method to evaluate, compare, and select clinical predictive tools.

Treatment based classification systems for patients with non-specific neck pain. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify published classification systems with a targeted treatment approach (treatment-based classification systems (TBCSs)) for patients with non-specific neck pain, and assess their quality and effectiveness.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro and the grey literature were systematically searched from inception to December 2019.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

The main selection criterium was a TBCS for patients with non-specific neck pain with physiotherapeutic interventions. For data extraction of descriptive data and quality assessment we used the framework developed by Buchbinder et al. We considered as score of ≤3 as low quality, a score between 3 and 5 as moderate quality and a score ≥5 as good quality. To assess the risk of bias of studies concerning the effectiveness of TBCSs (only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included) we used the PEDro scale. We considered a score of ≥ six points on this scale as low risk of bias.

RESULTS

Out of 7664 initial references we included 13 studies. The overall quality of the TBCSs ranged from low to moderate. We found two RCTs, both with low risk of bias, evaluating the effectiveness of two TBCSs compared to alternative treatments. The results showed that both TBCSs were not superior to alternative treatments.

CONCLUSION

Existing TBCSs are, at best, of moderate quality. In addition, TBCSs were not shown to be more effective than alternatives. Therefore using these TBCSs in daily practice is not recommended.

A Delphi study to establish consensus on an educational package of musculoskeletal clinical prediction rules for physiotherapy clinical educators

BACKGROUND

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are evidence-based tools to aid clinical decision-making, and there are many that are relevant for physiotherapists, especially in the musculoskeletal field. However, a lack of awareness and understanding by physiotherapy clinical educators could limit students' exposure to these potentially valuable tools. An educational package tailored for clinical educators could help them recognise the value of CPRs and implement them in clinical practice with students.

OBJECTIVES

To determine consensus on the essential content and optimal delivery of an educational package on musculoskeletal CPRs for physiotherapy clinical educators.

DESIGN

An online survey of physiotherapy experts who have published on CPRs, using a Delphi approach.

METHOD

Sixteen experts were recruited for a two-round reactive Delphi study in which they rated previously identified elements, as well as suggesting new items for an educational package.

FINDINGS

A pre-defined consensus of ≥70% identified that the content of an educational package should cover fundamental aspects of CPRs including why, when and how to use them clinically, and their limitations. Information on the evidence-base of different types of CPRs, with specific examples, was also identified as important. Online delivery was recommended via self-directed learning and webinars, along with electronic versions of actual CPRs. A self-assessment component was also supported.

CONCLUSIONS

An educational package on musculoskeletal CPRs for clinical educators was supported with key elements outlined by an international panel of experts.

IMPLICATIONS

Improving clinical educators' knowledge of CPRs may lead to physiotherapy students having a greater understanding and ability to use CPRs.

Developing a framework for evidence-based grading and assessment of predictive tools for clinical decision support

BACKGROUND

Clinical predictive tools quantify contributions of relevant patient characteristics to derive likelihood of diseases or predict clinical outcomes. When selecting predictive tools for implementation at clinical practice or for recommendation in clinical guidelines, clinicians are challenged with an overwhelming and ever-growing number of tools, most of which have never been implemented or assessed for comparative effectiveness. To overcome this challenge, we have developed a conceptual framework to Grade and Assess Predictive tools (GRASP) that can provide clinicians with a standardised, evidence-based system to support their search for and selection of efficient tools.

METHODS

A focused review of the literature was conducted to extract criteria along which tools should be evaluated. An initial framework was designed and applied to assess and grade five tools: LACE Index, Centor Score, Well's Criteria, Modified Early Warning Score, and Ottawa knee rule. After peer review, by six expert clinicians and healthcare researchers, the framework and the grading of the tools were updated.

RESULTS

GRASP framework grades predictive tools based on published evidence across three dimensions: 1) Phase of evaluation; 2) Level of evidence; and 3) Direction of evidence. The final grade of a tool is based on the highest phase of evaluation, supported by the highest level of positive evidence, or mixed evidence that supports a positive conclusion. Ottawa knee rule had the highest grade since it has demonstrated positive post-implementation impact on healthcare. LACE Index had the lowest grade, having demonstrated only pre-implementation positive predictive performance.

CONCLUSION

GRASP framework builds on widely accepted concepts to provide standardised assessment and evidence-based grading of predictive tools. Unlike other methods, GRASP is based on the critical appraisal of published evidence reporting the tools' predictive performance before implementation, potential effect and usability during implementation, and their post-implementation impact. Implementing the GRASP framework as an online platform can enable clinicians and guideline developers to access standardised and structured reported evidence of existing predictive tools. However, keeping GRASP reports up-to-date would require updating tools' assessments and grades when new evidence becomes available, which can only be done efficiently by employing semi-automated methods for searching and processing the incoming information.

Methodological standards for the development and evaluation of clinical prediction rules: a review of the literature

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that predict the absolute risk of a clinical condition or future outcome for individual patients are abundant in the medical literature; however, systematic reviews have demonstrated shortcomings in the methodological quality and reporting of prediction studies. To maximise the potential and clinical usefulness of CPRs, they must be rigorously developed and validated, and their impact on clinical practice and patient outcomes must be evaluated. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the stages involved in the development, validation and evaluation of CPRs, and to describe in detail the methodological standards required at each stage, illustrated with examples where appropriate. Important features of the study design, statistical analysis, modelling strategy, data collection, performance assessment, CPR presentation and reporting are discussed, in addition to other, often overlooked aspects such as the acceptability, cost-effectiveness and longer-term implementation of CPRs, and their comparison with clinical judgement. Although the development and evaluation of a robust, clinically useful CPR is anything but straightforward, adherence to the plethora of methodological standards, recommendations and frameworks at each stage will assist in the development of a rigorous CPR that has the potential to contribute usefully to clinical practice and decision-making and have a positive impact on patient care.

Grading and assessment of clinical predictive tools for paediatric head injury: a new evidence-based approach

BACKGROUND

Many clinical predictive tools have been developed to diagnose traumatic brain injury among children and guide the use of computed tomography in the emergency department. It is not always feasible to compare tools due to the diversity of their development methodologies, clinical variables, target populations, and predictive performances. The objectives of this study are to grade and assess paediatric head injury predictive tools, using a new evidence-based approach, and to provide emergency clinicians with standardised objective information on predictive tools to support their search for and selection of effective tools.

METHODS

Paediatric head injury predictive tools were identified through a focused review of literature. Based on the critical appraisal of published evidence about predictive performance, usability, potential effect, and post-implementation impact, tools were evaluated using a new framework for grading and assessment of predictive tools (GRASP). A comprehensive analysis was conducted to explain why certain tools were more successful.

RESULTS

Fourteen tools were identified and evaluated. The highest-grade tool is PECARN; the only tool evaluated in post-implementation impact studies. PECARN and CHALICE were evaluated for their potential effect on healthcare, while the remaining 12 tools were only evaluated for predictive performance. Three tools; CATCH, NEXUS II, and Palchak, were externally validated. Three tools; Haydel, Atabaki, and Buchanich, were only internally validated. The remaining six tools; Da Dalt, Greenes, Klemetti, Quayle, Dietrich, and Güzel did not show sufficient internal validity for use in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The GRASP framework provides clinicians with a high-level, evidence-based, comprehensive, yet simple and feasible approach to grade, compare, and select effective predictive tools. Comparing the three main tools which were assigned the highest grades; PECARN, CHALICE and CATCH, to the remaining 11, we find that the quality of tools' development studies, the experience and credibility of their authors, and the support by well-funded research programs were correlated with the tools' evidence-based assigned grades, and were more influential, than the sole high predictive performance, on the wide acceptance and successful implementation of the tools. Tools' simplicity and feasibility, in terms of resources needed, technical requirements, and training, are also crucial factors for their success.

Clinical spinal instability: 10 years since the derivation of a clinical prediction rule. A narrative literature review

BACKGROUND

Between 2005 and 2015 significant changes in the clinical decision making paradigm for the treatment of spinal instability occurred. This was largely motivated by a clinical prediction rule (CPR) derivation study that was developed to specifically identify patients with low back pain who are more likely to respond positively to lumbar stabilization exercises.

OBJECTIVE

This is a narrative literature review on the recent advances physiotherapy has made in the treatment of clinical spinal instability.

METHODS

Literature discussing the conservative treatment of lumbar spinal instability published from 2005-2015 was identified with electronic searches of PubMed (MEDLINE) Advanced search, Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, MEDLINE (EBSCO), SportDISCUS (EBSCO), CINAHL (EBSCO), PEDro, Scopus and Cochrane and reviewed.

RESULTS

Five systematic reviews, 2 with meta-analyses, and 1 systematic review on the quality of systematic reviews were found. There seems to be some benefit from specific stabilization exercise programs in regards to pain reduction, but they might not be more effective than other forms of exercise. The currently existing CPR for stabilization exercises is not far enough developed to use in clinical practice and is not validated as of yet.

CONCLUSION

Stabilization exercises seem to decrease chronic low back pain, although it is not clear that this pain has to be caused by clinical spinal instability. Caution should be exercised when using CPRs in the clinic; they are not meant to be strict treatment guidelines, but rather a tool that helps facilitate clinical decision-making.

Predictive models for short-term and long-term improvement in women under physiotherapy for chronic disabling neck pain: a longitudinal cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To develop predictive models for short-term and long-term clinically important improvement in women with non-specific chronic disabling neck pain during the clinical course of physiotherapy.

DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study based on data from a randomised controlled trial evaluating short-term and long-term effects on sensorimotor function over 11 weeks of physiotherapy.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS

Eighty-nine women aged 31-65 years with non-specific chronic disabling neck pain from Gävle, Sweden.

MEASURES

The outcome, clinically important improvement, was measured with the Patient Global Impression of Change Scale (PGICS) and the Neck Disability Index (NDI), assessed by self-administered questionnaires at 3, 9 and 15 months from the start of the interventions (baseline). Twelve baseline prognostic factors were considered in the analyses. The predictive models were built using random-effects logistic regression. The predictive ability of the models was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Internal validity was assessed with cross-validation using the bootstrap resampling technique.

RESULTS

Factors included in the final PGICS model were neck disability and age, and in the NDI model, neck disability, depression and catastrophising. In both models, the odds for short-term and long-term improvement increased with higher baseline neck disability, while the odds decreased with increasing age (PGICS model), and with increasing level of depression (NDI model). In the NDI model, higher baseline levels of catastrophising indicated increased odds for short-term improvement and decreased odds for long-term improvement. Both models showed acceptable predictive validity with an AUC of 0.64 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.73) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.75), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Age, neck disability and psychological factors seem to be important predictors of improvement, and may inform clinical decisions about physiotherapy in women with chronic neck pain. Before using the developed predictive models in clinical practice, however, they should be validated in other populations and tested in clinical settings.

The preferences of physiotherapy clinical educators on a learning package for teaching musculoskeletal clinical prediction rules - A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

There is a growing number of clinical prediction rules (CPRs) relevant to physiotherapy, particularly in the musculoskeletal area, but many students are not learning about them due to lack of awareness or understanding by clinical educators. An educational package specifically designed for physiotherapy clinical educators would aid their understanding of CPRs and ability to utilise them clinically, and also to be able to teach them to students.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the desired content and preferred methods of delivery of an educational package for clinical educators on musculoskeletal CPRs.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive approach using semi-structured group and individual interviews with clinical educators.

METHOD

Educators working in the clinical area of musculoskeletal physiotherapy who had an awareness of or interest in CPRs were recruited and interviewed on their views regarding the content and delivery of an educational package on musculoskeletal CPRs. Audio files were transcribed and analysed using framework analysis to explore and develop themes and subthemes.

FINDINGS

Content of an educational package should include general information on CPRs to improve familiarity and understanding, including a brief description, purpose, stages of development, application, limitations, and Information to dispel common myths and misunderstandings, as well as some specific examples of commonly-used CPRs. The package should be available in multiple formats to allow for different learning styles, both online via video, webinars, and podcasts, and face-to-face in practical sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical educators would find an educational package useful in assisting them to learn about musculoskeletal CPRs and to teach them to students.

Predictors of functional improvement in people with chronic low back pain following a graded Pilates-based exercise programme

BACKGROUND

Several studies have investigated subgroups of patients with low back pain (LBP) most likely to benefit from Pilates or movement control exercises, but none have determined prognostic factors specifically for chronic LBP. This prospective cohort study aimed to determine predictors of change in disability in people with chronic LBP following a Pilates-based exercise programme and reports summarised integrated prediction statistics to aid clinical utility for determination of subgroups likely to benefit or not benefit from treatment.

METHODS

Healthy adults (n = 55) with non-specific chronic LBP undertook a graded 6-week programme involving two 1-hour Pilates sessions/week (1 mat and 1 equipment-based) led in small groups by a trained Pilates instructor. Predictors of change in Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) were identified through regression analysis and used to develop clinical prediction statistics.

RESULTS

Clinically important improvement (n = 14 of 48 analysed) was predicted by four variables: gradual rather than sudden onset of LBP, PSFS <3.7 points, absence of aberrant motions on forward bending, and body mass index >24.5 kg/m². Presence of ≥3 improved probability of success from 29% to 73%. Failure to improve (n = 18) was predicted by three variables: sudden onset of low back pain, patient-specific functional score ≥3.7, and difference between left and right active straight leg raise >7°. Presence of all three increased probability of failure from 38% to 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of five, easily measured variables were able to predict disability outcome following a graded programme of Pilates-based exercises in people with chronic LBP. Two common movement deficits were inversely related to positive changes in function which may call into question the structural mechanism of improvements observed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12616001588482.

Prediction of clinical outcomes in individuals with chronic low back pain: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent and recurrent conditions in the general population, with personal, professional, social and economic impact. However, there is a lack of consistent evidence about chronic low back pain (CLBP) prognosis, especially highlighting predictors that influence CLBP outcome. Existing systematic reviews are scarce, outdated and incomplete. The primary aim of this systematic review is to identify multivariable models and/or predictors associated with clinical outcomes in subjects with CLBP (namely pain intensity, disability, return to work, psychological well-being and quality of life).

METHODS

We will systematically search Ovid MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus and Web of Science databases for longitudinal studies, published until June 2017, including adults with CLBP (defined as persistent pain with ≥ 3 months duration), which studied the association between multivariable models and/or predictors with at least one of the selected clinical outcomes after ≥ 3 months of follow-up. Articles' screening and selection will be conducted by two reviewers, blindly and independently. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Models' discriminative ability will be assessed using C-statistic. The link between multivariable models and predictors with the clinical outcome will be analysed through association measures. Qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the available evidence will be performed. Meta-analysis will be conducted to aggregate each type of measure. In the absence or in the presence of only slight to moderate of heterogeneity, we will use the fixed or random effects model, respectively. In case of moderate to severe heterogeneity, an attempt to explain variability in detail will be made through subgroups and sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analysis will be conducted according to clinical outcome, follow-up duration (≤ 6 months versus > 6 months) and type of context (pain management clinics versus other therapeutic settings).

DISCUSSION

We consider that it is urgent to highlight the available evidence about CLBP prognosis. This systematic review will help identify multivariable models and individual predictors that may enhance pain management success. One potential limitation will be the difficulty of aggregating quantitative measures from several prognostic models and predictors, with different clinical outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017079233.

Health practitioners' perceptions of adopting clinical prediction rules in the management of musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative study in Australia

OBJECTIVES

To investigate health practitioners' understanding and practice behaviours with regards to clinical prediction rules (CPRs) and explore their perceptions of adopting a new whiplash CPR.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using six semistructured focus groups.

SETTING

Primary and secondary care in New South Wales and Queensland, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Physiotherapists (n=19), chiropractors (n=6) and osteopaths (n=3) were purposively sampled to include health practitioners who provide routine treatment to people with whiplash-associated disorders.

METHODS

Focus group discussions (n=6) were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using an inductive thematic approach.

RESULTS

Health practitioners' understanding and use of CPRs were mixed. Clinicians considered components relating to acceptability ('whether I agree with it') and implementation ('how I'll use it') when deciding on whether to adopt a new CPR. Acceptability was informed by four themes: knowledge and understanding, CPR type, congruence and weighted value. Consideration of matters that promote implementation occurred once a CPR was deemed to be acceptable. Three themes were identified as potentially enhancing whiplash CPR implementation: the presence of an external driver of adoption, flexibility in how the CPR could be administered and guidance regarding communication of CPR output to patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Education on CPR purpose and fit with practice is needed to enhance the perceived acceptability of CPRs. Strategies that facilitate practitioner motivation, enable administrative flexibility and assist clinicians in communicating the results of the whiplash CPR could promote adoption of the whiplash CPR.

Clinical prediction rules for prognosis and treatment prescription in neck pain: A systematic review

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) developed to identify sub-groups of people with neck pain for different prognoses (i.e. prognostic) or response to treatments (i.e. prescriptive) have been recommended as a research priority to improve health outcomes for these conditions. A systematic review was undertaken to identify prognostic and prescriptive CPRs relevant to the conservative management of adults with neck pain and to appraise stage of development, quality and readiness for clinical application. Six databases were systematically searched from inception until 4th July 2016. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, risk of bias (PEDro and QUIPS), methodological quality and stage of development. 9840 records were retrieved and screened for eligibility. Thirty-two studies reporting on 26 CPRs were included in this review. Methodological quality of included studies varied considerably. Most prognostic CPR development studies employed appropriate designs. However, many prescriptive CPR studies (n = 12/13) used single group designs and/or analysed controlled trials using methods that were inadequate for identifying treatment effect moderators. Most prognostic (n = 11/15) and all prescriptive (n = 11) CPRs have not progressed beyond the derivation stage of development. Four prognostic CPRs relating to acute whiplash (n = 3) or non-traumatic neck pain (n = 1) have undergone preliminary validation. No CPRs have undergone impact analysis. Most prognostic and prescriptive CPRs for neck pain are at the initial stage of development and therefore routine clinical use is not yet supported. Further validation and impact analyses of all CPRs are required before confident conclusions can be made regarding clinical utility.

Recovery Pathways and Prognosis After Whiplash Injury

Synopsis Recovery from a whiplash injury is varied and complex. Some individuals recover quickly and fully, while others experience ongoing pain and disability. Three distinct patterns of predicted recovery (trajectories) have been identified using disability and psychological outcome measures. These trajectories are not linear, and show that recovery, if it is going to occur, tends to happen within the first 3 months of the injury, with little improvement after this period. Identification of factors associated with poor recovery is accumulating, and since 2000 there have been at least 10 published systematic reviews on prognostic factors for whiplash-associated disorder. Poor recovery has been consistently reported to be associated with high initial neck pain intensity and neck-related disability, posttraumatic stress symptoms, pain catastrophizing, and, to a lesser extent, low self-efficacy and cold hyperalgesia. Evidence regarding factors, including compensation status, psychological factors, structural pathology, and preinjury health status, remains equivocal. Given the huge number of predictive factors and various interpretations of recovery, adapting these data for use in clinical practice is difficult. Tools such as clinical prediction rules (CPRs), by statistically quantifying relevant data, may help to predict the probability of diagnosis, prognosis, or response to treatment. Numerous CPRs have been derived for individuals with whiplash; however, to date, only 3 prognostic CPRs have undergone external validation, and none have yet undergone impact analysis, a necessary step in providing information about the rules' ability to improve clinically relevant outcomes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(10):851-861. Epub 3 Sep 2016. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6918.

An assessment of population-based screening guidelines versus clinical prediction rules for chlamydia and gonorrhea case finding

INTRODUCTION

Much remains to be learned regarding the epistemology and utility of guidelines and clinical prediction rules (CPR), as well as the extent to which knowledge about risk at a population level might be pertinent to any given patient in terms of case finding accuracy. In the current paper, we offer an empirical examination that juxtaposes population-based guidelines and CPR for sexual health decision-making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed electronic medical records from asymptomatic patient visits involving tests for chlamydia or gonorrhea between 2000 and 2012 at nine publicly funded STI clinics in British Columbia to compare the case-finding accuracy for infection risk under two scenarios: (1) if the population had been screened using the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) screening guidelines for chlamydia and gonorrhea; or (2) if the population has been screened using a CPR. Performance metrics evaluated included the area under the ROC curve (AUC).

RESULTS

In total, 35,818 individuals met the study inclusion criteria. The overall infection rate was 3.0%. Using the PHAC guidelines, the discriminatory performance of using any versus no risk factors and counts of risk factors were: AUC=0.55, 95% CI: 0.54-0.56 and AUC=0.64, 95% CI: 0.63-0.66, respectively. The model used to derive the CPR demonstrated good discrimination (AUC=0.73, 95% CI: 0.71-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

The current paper provides empirical evidence that demonstrates that population-based guidelines may not necessarily be a perfect fit for application at the individual level. Thus, we recommend risk estimation algorithms for use in sexual health services and programs.

A review of statistical updating methods for clinical prediction models

A clinical prediction model is a tool for predicting healthcare outcomes, usually within a specific population and context. A common approach is to develop a new clinical prediction model for each population and context; however, this wastes potentially useful historical information. A better approach is to update or incorporate the existing clinical prediction models already developed for use in similar contexts or populations. In addition, clinical prediction models commonly become miscalibrated over time, and need replacing or updating. In this article, we review a range of approaches for re-using and updating clinical prediction models; these fall in into three main categories: simple coefficient updating, combining multiple previous clinical prediction models in a meta-model and dynamic updating of models. We evaluated the performance (discrimination and calibration) of the different strategies using data on mortality following cardiac surgery in the United Kingdom: We found that no single strategy performed sufficiently well to be used to the exclusion of the others. In conclusion, useful tools exist for updating existing clinical prediction models to a new population or context, and these should be implemented rather than developing a new clinical prediction model from scratch, using a breadth of complementary statistical methods.

Clinical Prediction Rules That Don't Hold Up-Where to Go From Here?

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) are created to help guide clinical decision making. To do this, they use the presence or absence of certain factors that have been shown to meaningfully predict a patient's prognosis, diagnosis, or response to treatment. While representing a seminal methodological step forward in individualized care, one of the main drawbacks of CPRs continues to be validation studies that do not support the initially derived CPR. This is particularly important because validation of CPRs in an independent patient population prior to clinical implementation is essential. Why is it quite common for existing CPRs to fall down at the validation stage? And what does this mean for research that aims to individualize treatment? J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(7):502-505. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.0606.

The evolving role of physical therapists in the long-term management of chronic low back pain: longitudinal care using assisted self-management strategies

Background

Longitudinal studies have shown that the symptoms of chronic low back pain (CLBP) will follow an episodic trajectory characterized by periods of high and low pain intensity that can persist for many years. There is a growing belief that the contemporary approach of limiting physical therapy to short, but intense courses of treatment for (CLBP) may be sub-optimal because these limited “windows” of clinical care are not congruent with the natural history of this condition. Recent research has suggested that people with CLBP undergo substantial, and individualized long-term variations in the neural processing of nociception over time. This has led to the concept of a “unique biosignature of pain” that may explain much of the variation in a person’s clinical picture. These and other findings have led to the reconceptualization of CLBP as an individualized, and continually evolving condition that may be more suitably managed by empowering the patient toward self-management strategies that can be modified as needed over time by the PT.

Objectives

The purpose of this Master Class Paper is to describe an emerging approach for the treatment of CLBP that emphasizes the formation of a long-term therapeutic alliance between the patient and the PT with an emphasis on individualized, patient-preferred approaches for activity-based self-management as an alternative to the contemporary approach of short, intense episodes of care directed toward pain reduction.

Conclusion

Longitudinal care using assisted self-management strategies is more congruent with the natural history of CLBP than are traditional approaches for PT intervention. This approach may empower patients to undergo lifestyle changes that will favorably influence long-term outcomes; however additional research is needed.

Implementation of an Advanced Nursing Directive for Children With Right Lower Quadrant Pain: Identifying Those Requiring Further Investigation and Improving Flow Metrics

OBJECTIVES

Advanced nursing directives (ANDs) empower nursing staff to provide advanced levels of care before physician assessment. The objectives of this study were (1) to determine whether an AND for right lower quadrant (RLQ) pain could identify children who required any further investigation to diagnose appendicitis and (2) to determine whether children meeting AND criteria had better emergency department (ED) flow metrics compared with those who did not meet the criteria.

METHODS

Health records of children aged 3 to 17 years presenting to the ED with abdominal pain who were managed using the departmental AND for RLQ pain were reviewed. Primary outcomes included (1) the proportion of patients requiring further investigation to diagnose appendicitis and (2) the time interval from triage to blood draw. Secondary outcomes included additional ED flow metrics, perforation rate, and negative appendectomy rate.

RESULTS

An AND was completed for 210 children. Those who met the AND criteria were more likely to undergo further investigation to rule out appendicitis than those who did not meet the criteria (92/137 [67.2%] vs 32/73 [43.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-4.90). Time to blood draw was significantly lower for those children meeting the AND criteria (74 vs 162 minutes, P < 0.001) as was time to hospital admission (271 vs 395 minutes, P = 0.008) and appendectomy (498 vs 602 minutes, P = 0.015). The negative appendectomy rate was 8.6% (5/58) for children meeting the AND criteria and 9.1% (2/22) for those not meeting the criteria (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.14-10.67); the perforation rate was 29.3% (17/58) and 4.5% (1/22), respectively (OR, 8.17; 95% CI, 1.17-380.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Children presenting to the ED with RLQ pain who meet the AND criteria are more likely to require further investigation to rule out appendicitis and have better department flow metrics than those who do not meet the criteria. Our results provide further evidence of the utility of ANDs in the ED.

Thoracic manual therapy in the management of non-specific shoulder pain: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Non-specific shoulder pain (NSSP) is often persistent and disabling leading to high socioeconomic costs. Cervical manipulation has demonstrated improvements in patients with NSSP, although risks associated with thrust techniques are documented. Thoracic manual therapy (TMT) may utilise similar neurophysiological effects with less risk. The current evidence for TMT in treating NSSP is limited to systematic reviews of manual therapy (MT) applied to the upper quadrant. These reviews included trials that used shoulder girdle manual therapy (SG-MT) in the TMT group. This limits the scope of their conclusions with regard to the exclusive effectiveness of TMT for NSSP.

METHODS

This review used a steering group for subject and methodological expertise and was reported in line with Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Key databases were searched (1990-2014) using relevant search terms and medical subject headings (MeSH); eligibility was evaluated independently by two reviewers based on pre-defined criteria. Study participants had NSSP including impingement syndrome and excluding cervical pain. Interventions included cervicothoracic junction and TMT with or without supplementary exercises. Studies that included MT applied to the shoulder girdle including the glenohumeral joint, acromioclavicular joint or sternoclavicular joint in the TMT group, without a control, were excluded. Included studies utilised outcome measures that monitored pain and disability scores. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical studies were eligible. Using a standardised form, each reviewer independently extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using GRADE and PEDro scale. Results were tabulated for semi-quantitative comparison.

RESULTS

Over 912 articles were retrieved: three RCTs, one single-arm trial and three pre-post test studies were eligible. Studies varied from poor to high quality. Three RCTs demonstrated that TMT reduced pain and disability at 6, 26 and 52 weeks compared with usual care. Two pre-post test studies found between 76% and 100% of patients experienced significant pain reduction immediately post-TMT. An additional pre-post test study and a single-arm trial showed reductions in pain and disability scores 48 hours post-TMT.

DISCUSSION

Thoracic manual therapy accelerated recovery and reduced pain and disability immediately and for up to 52 weeks compared with usual care for NSSP. Further, high-quality RCTs investigating the effect of TMT in isolation for the treatment of patients with NSSP are now required.

Subjective criteria associated with return-to-play in sports physical therapy

AbstractIntroduction The Subjective Daily Assessment Scale (ESAD) is based on the visual analog scale (VAS) and assesses six parameters (pain, edema, heat, mobility, sensitivity, and confidence).Objective This study aimed to examine the association between the analyzed variables as assessed by the ESAD and physical therapy clinical discharge and return-to-play of injured athletes.Method Eighty-one patient records of athletes were analyzed; mean sample age was 23.9 ± 6.3 years. The athletes received treatment through the Sports Physical Therapy program of Santa Catarina State University, Brazil, between 2008 and 2011. Six parameters were ranked on a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being the best possible condition and 10 the worst. Data analysis was conducted using stepwise Cox regression.Results At the time of the injury, the mean score for confidence was 5.82 ± 0.48, and at the time of return-to-play, it was 0.48 ± 1.1; the mean score for pain decreased from 3.7 ± 2.64 to 0.34 ± 0.83. However, due to the strong association between pain and confidence, only confidence remained in the final model. For each reduction in the value reported for confidence, the probability of return-to-play was 0.62 times greater.Conclusion The results showed that confidence was the best variable for predicting athlete return-to-play.

Systematic review of clinical prediction tools and prognostic factors in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

Background:

Clinical prediction tools assist in clinical outcome prediction. They quantify the relative contributions of certain variables and condense information that identifies important indicators or predictors to a targeted condition. This systematic review synthesizes and critically appraises the methodologic quality of studies that derive both clinical predictors and clinical predictor tools used to determine outcome prognosis in patients suffering from aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH).

Methods:

This systematic review included prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating prognostic factors and clinical prediction tools associated with determining the neurologic outcome in adult patients with aneurysmal SAH.

Results:

Twenty-two studies were included in this systemic review. Independent, confounding, and outcome variables were studied. Methodologic quality of individual studies was also analyzed. Included were 3 studies analyzing databases from RCTs, 8 prospective cohort studies, and 11 retrospective cohort studies. The most frequently retained significant clinical prognostic factors for long-term neurologic outcome prediction include age, neurological grade, blood clot thickness, and aneurysm size.

Conclusions:

Systematic reviews for clinical prognostic factors and clinical prediction tools in aneurysmal SAH face a number of methodological challenges. These include within and between study patient heterogeneity, regional variations in treatment protocols, patient referral biases, and differences in treatment, and prognosis viewpoints across different cultures.

External validation of a clinical prediction rule to predict full recovery and ongoing moderate/severe disability following acute whiplash injury

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective secondary analysis of data.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the external validity of the whiplash clinical prediction rule (CPR).

BACKGROUND

We recently derived a whiplash CPR to consolidate previously established prognostic factors for poor recovery from a whiplash injury and predicted 2 recovery pathways. Prognostic factors for full recovery were being less than 35 years of age and having an initial Neck Disability Index (NDI) score of 32% or less. Prognostic factors for ongoing moderate/severe pain and disability were being 35 years of age or older, having an initial NDI score of 40% or more, and the presence of hyperarousal symptoms. Validation is required to confirm the reproducibility and accuracy of this CPR. Clinician feedback on the usefulness of the CPR is also important to gauge acceptability.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data from 101 individuals with acute whiplash-associated disorder who had previously participated in either a randomized controlled clinical trial or prospective cohort study was performed using accuracy statistics. Full recovery was defined as NDI score at 6 months of 10% or less, and ongoing moderate/severe pain and disability were defined as an NDI score at 6 months of 30% or greater. In addition, a small sample of physical therapists completed an anonymous survey on the clinical acceptability and usability of the tool. Results The positive predictive value of ongoing moderate/severe pain and disability was 90.9% in the validation cohort, and the positive predictive value of full recovery was 80.0%. Surveyed physical therapists reported that the whiplash CPR was simple, understandable, would be easy to use, and was an acceptable prognostic tool.

CONCLUSION

External validation of the whiplash CPR confirmed the reproducibility and accuracy of this dual-pathway tool for individuals with acute whiplash-associated disorder. Further research is needed to assess prospective validation, the impact of inclusion on practice, and to examine the efficacy of linking treatment strategies with predicted prognosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognosis, level 1b.

Validation and impact analysis of prognostic clinical prediction rules for low back pain is needed: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To identify prognostic forms of clinical prediction rules (CPRs) related to the nonsurgical management of adults with low back pain (LBP) and to evaluate their current stage of development.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review using a sensitive search strategy across seven databases with hand searching and citation tracking.

RESULTS

A total of 10,005 records were screened for eligibility with 35 studies included in the review. The included studies report on the development of 30 prognostic LBP CPRs. Most of the identified CPRs are in their initial phase of development. Three CPRs were found to have undergone validation--the Cassandra rule for predicting long-term significant functional limitations and the five-item and two-item Flynn manipulation CPRs for predicting a favorable functional prognosis in patients being treated with lumbopelvic manipulation. No studies were identified that investigated whether the implementation of a CPR resulted in beneficial patient outcomes or improved resource efficiencies.

CONCLUSION

Most of the identified prognostic CPRs for LBP are in the initial phase of development and are consequently not recommended for direct application in clinical practice at this time. The body of evidence provides emergent confidence in the limited predictive performance of the Cassandra rule and the five-item Flynn manipulation CPR in comparable clinical settings and patient populations.

Diagnostic clinical prediction rules for specific subtypes of low back pain: a systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To identify diagnostic clinical prediction rules (CPRs) for low back pain (LBP) and to assess their readiness for clinical application.

BACKGROUND

Significant research has been invested into the development of CPRs that may assist in the meaningful subgrouping of patients with LBP. To date, very little is known about diagnostic forms of CPRs for LBP, which relate to the present status or classification of an individual, and whether they have been developed sufficiently to enable their application in clinical practice.

METHODS

A sensitive electronic search strategy using 7 databases was combined with hand searching and citation tracking to identify eligible studies. Two independent reviewers identified relevant studies for inclusion using a 2-stage selection process. The quality appraisal of included studies was conducted by 2 independent raters using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and checklists composed of accepted methodological standards for the development of CPRs.

RESULTS

Of 10 014 studies screened for eligibility, the search identified that 13 diagnostic CPRs for LBP have been derived. Among those, 1 tool for identifying lumbar spinal stenosis and 2 tools for identifying inflammatory back pain have undergone validation. No impact analysis studies were identified.

CONCLUSION

Most diagnostic CPRs for LBP are in their initial development phase and cannot be recommended for use in clinical practice at this time. Validation and impact analysis of the diagnostic CPRs identified in this review are warranted, particularly for those tools that meet an identified unmet need of clinicians who manage patients with LBP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnosis, level 2a-.

Preliminary development of a clinical prediction rule for treatment of patients with suspected SLAP tears

PURPOSE

To use the clinical prediction rule process to identify patient variables, measured on initial clinical presentation, that would be predictive of failure to achieve satisfactory improvement, while following a rehabilitation program, in the modification of SLAP injury symptoms and dysfunction.

METHODS

A cohort of patients received the clinical diagnosis of a SLAP lesion based on specific history and examination findings and/or magnetic resonance imaging. They underwent a physical examination of the kinetic chain and shoulder, including tests for labral injury. Patients followed a standardized physical therapy program emphasizing restoration of demonstrated strength, flexibility, and strength-balance deficits. At 6 weeks' follow-up, patients were re-evaluated and divided into those recommended for surgery (RS) and those not recommended for surgery (NRS). Bivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the best combination of predictive factors.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients (aged 39 ± 11 years, 45 men) were included. Of these, 31 (53%) were categorized as NRS and 27 (47%) as RS. The presence of a painful arc of motion (odds ratio, 3.95; P = .024) and the presence of increased forward scapular posture (odds ratio, 1.27; P = .094) on the injured side were predictive of being in the RS group. This finding indicates that the odds of being in the RS group increased 4 times when a positive painful arc was present and increased 27% with every 1-cm increase in involved anterior shoulder posture.

CONCLUSIONS

A structured rehabilitation program resulted in modification of symptoms and improved function at 6 weeks' follow-up in over half of patients in the study group. On initial evaluation, the presence of a painful arc of overhead motion, indicating loss of normal glenohumeral kinematics, and the presence of forward shoulder posture, indicating an altered scapular position, represent negative predictive factors for success of rehabilitation. Future validation of the model in a larger population is necessary.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective comparative study.

Validation of the diagnostic score for acute lower abdominal pain in women of reproductive age

Background. The differential diagnoses of acute appendicitis obstetrics, and gynecological conditions (OB-GYNc) or nonspecific abdominal pain in young adult females with lower abdominal pain are clinically challenging. The present study aimed to validate the recently developed clinical score for the diagnosis of acute lower abdominal pain in female of reproductive age. Method. Medical records of reproductive age women (15-50 years) who were admitted for acute lower abdominal pain were collected. Validation data were obtained from patients admitted during a different period from the development data. Result. There were 302 patients in the validation cohort. For appendicitis, the score had a sensitivity of 91.9%, a specificity of 79.0%, and a positive likelihood ratio of 4.39. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio in diagnosis of OB-GYNc were 73.0%, 91.6%, and 8.73, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating curves (ROC), the positive likelihood ratios, for appendicitis and OB-GYNc in the validation data were not significantly different from the development data, implying similar performances. Conclusion. The clinical score developed for the diagnosis of acute lower abdominal pain in female of reproductive age may be applied to guide differential diagnoses in these patients.

The Bandim TBscore--reliability, further development, and evaluation of potential uses

Background

The tuberculosis (TB) case detection rate has stagnated at 60% due to disorganized case finding and insensitivity of sputum smear microscopy. Of the identified TB cases, 4% die while being treated, monitored with tools that insufficiently predict failure/mortality.

Objective

To explore the TBscore, a recently proposed clinical severity measure for pulmonary TB (PTB) patients, and to refine, validate, and investigate its place in case finding.

Design

The TBscore’s inter-observer agreement was assessed and compared to the Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) (paper I). The TBscore’s variables underlying constructs were assessed, sorting out unrelated items, proposing a more easily assessable TBscoreII, which was validated internally and externally (paper II). Finally, TBscore and TBscoreII’s place in PTB-screening was examined in paper III.

Results

The inter-observer variability when grading PTB patients into severity classes was moderate for both TBscore (κ_W=0.52, 95% CI 0.46–0.56) and KPS (κ_W=0.49, 95% CI 0.33–0.65). KPS was influenced by HIV status, whereas TBscore was unaffected by it. In paper II, proposed TBscoreII was validated internally, in Guinea-Bissau, and externally, in Ethiopia. In both settings, a failure to bring down the score by ≥25% from baseline to 2 months of treatment predicted subsequent failure (p=0.007). Finally, in paper III, TBscore and TBscoreII were assessed in health-care-seeking adults and found to be higher in PTB-diagnosed patients, 4.9 (95% CI 4.6–5.2) and 3.9 (95% CI 3.8–4.0), respectively, versus patients not diagnosed with PTB, 3.0 (95% CI 2.7–3.2) and 2.4 (95% CI 2.3–2.5), respectively. Had we referred only patients with cough >2 weeks to sputum smear, we would have missed 32.1% of the smear confirmed cases in our cohort. A TBscoreII>=2 missed 8.6%.

Conclusions

TBscore and TBscoreII are useful monitoring tools for PTB patients on treatment, as they could fill the void which currently exists in risk grading of patients. They may also have a role in PTB screening; however, this requires our findings to be repeated elsewhere.

Uncertainty in clinical prediction rules: the value of credible intervals

Decision making in physical therapy is increasingly informed by evidence in the form of probabilities. Prior beliefs concerning diagnoses, prognoses, and treatment effects are quantitatively revised by the integration of new information derived from the history, physical examination, and other investigations in a well-recognized application of Bayes' theorem. Clinical prediction rule development studies commonly employ such methodology to produce quantified estimates of the likelihood of patients having certain diagnoses or achieving given outcomes. To date, the physical therapy literature has been limited to the discussion and calculation of the point estimate of such probabilities. The degree of precision associated with the construction of posterior probabilities, which requires consideration of both uncertainty associated with pretest probability and uncertainty associated with test accuracy, remains largely unrecognized and unreported. This paper provides an introduction to the calculation of the uncertainty interval, known as a credible interval, around posterior probability estimates. The method for calculating the credible interval is detailed and illustrated with example data from 2 clinical prediction rule development studies. Two relatively quick and simple methods for approximating the credible interval are also outlined. It is anticipated that knowledge of the credible interval will have practical implications for the incorporation of probabilistic evidence in clinical practice. Consistent with reporting standards for interventional and diagnostic studies, it is equally appropriate that studies reporting posterior probabilities calculate and report the level of precision associated with these point estimates.

A clinical prediction rule to identify patients with low back pain who are likely to experience short-term success following lumbar stabilization exercises: a randomized controlled validation study

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the validity of a previously suggested clinical prediction rule (CPR) for identifying patients most likely to experience short-term success following lumbar stabilization exercise (LSE). Background Although LSE is commonly used by physical therapists in the management of low back pain, it does not seem to be more effective than other interventions. A 4-item CPR for identifying patients most likely to benefit from LSE has been previously suggested but has yet to be validated.

METHODS

One hundred five patients with low back pain underwent a baseline examination to determine their status on the CPR (positive or negative). Patients were stratified by CPR status and then randomized to receive an LSE program or an intervention consisting of manual therapy (MT) and range-of-motion/flexibility exercises. Both interventions included 11 treatment sessions delivered over 8 weeks. Low back pain-related disability was measured by the modified version of the Oswestry Disability Index at baseline and upon completion of treatment.

RESULTS

The statistical significance for the 2-way interaction between treatment group and CPR status for the level of disability at the end of the intervention was P = .17. However, among patients receiving LSE, those with a positive CPR status experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared with those with a negative CPR status (P = .02). Also, among patients with a positive CPR status, those receiving LSE experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared with those receiving MT (P = .03). In addition, there were main effects for treatment and CPR status. Patients receiving LSE experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared to patients receiving MT (P = .05), and patients with a positive CPR status experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared to patients with a negative CPR status, regardless of the treatment received (P = .04). When a modified version of the CPR (mCPR) containing only the presence of aberrant movement and a positive prone instability test was used, a significant interaction with treatment was found for final disability (P = .02). Of the patients who received LSE, those with a positive mCPR status experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared to those with a negative mCPR status (P = .02), and among patients with a positive mCPR status, those who received LSE experienced less disability by the end of treatment compared to those who received MT (P = .005).

CONCLUSION

The previously suggested CPR for identifying patients likely to benefit from LSE could not be validated in this study. However, due to its relatively low level of power, this study could not invalidate the CPR, either. A modified version of the CPR that contains only 2 items may possess a better predictive validity to identify those most likely to succeed with an LSE program. Because this modified version was established through post hoc testing, an additional study is recommended to prospectively test its predictive validity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognosis, level 1b-.