Search

To update the findings of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) on prognostic factors for whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and best-evidence synthesis. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO from 2000–2017. Random pairs of reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. We retrieved 10,081 articles. Of those, 100 met inclusion criteria. After critical appraisal, 74 were judged to have low risk of bias. This adds to the 47 admissible studies found by the Neck Pain Task Force. Twenty-two related to course of recovery; 59 to prognostic factors in recovery; and 16 reported other WADs outcomes. Some studies related to more than one category. Findings suggest that half of those with WADs will experience substantial improvement within three months and cessation of symptoms within six months. Among factors associated with recovery are post-crash psychological factors, including expectations for recovery and coping. Our review adds to the Neck Pain Task Force by clarifying the role of prognostic factors. Evidence supports the important role of post-crash psychological factors in WADs recovery. CRD42013004610

Background context In 2008, the Bone and Joint Decade 2000 to 2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders recommended patient education for the management of neck pain. However, the effectiveness of education interventions has recently been challenged. Purpose To update the findings of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000 to 2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders and evaluate the effectiveness of structured patient education for the management of patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) or neck pain and associated disorders (NAD). Study design/setting Systematic review of the literature and best-evidence synthesis. Patient sample Randomized controlled trials that compared structured patient education with other conservative interventions. Outcome measures Self-rated recovery, functional recovery (eg, disability, return to activities, work, or school), pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes such as depression or fear, or adverse effects. Methods We systematically searched eight electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DARE, PubMed, and ICL) from 2000 to 2012. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Scientifically admissible studies were summarized in evidence tables and synthesized following best-evidence synthesis principles. Results We retrieved 4,477 articles. Of those, nine were eligible for critical appraisal and six were scientifically admissible. Four admissible articles investigated patients with WAD and two targeted patients with NAD. All structured patient education interventions included advice on activation or exercises delivered orally combined with written information or as written information alone. Overall, as a therapeutic intervention, structured patient education was equal or less effective than other conservative treatments including massage, supervised exercise, and physiotherapy. However, structured patient education may provide small benefits when combined with physiotherapy. Either mode of delivery (ie, oral or written education) provides similar results in patients with recent WAD. Conclusions This review adds to the Bone and Joint Decade 2000 to 2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders by defining more specifically the role of structured patient education in the management of WAD and NAD. Results suggest that structured patient education alone cannot be expected to yield large benefits in clinical effectiveness compared with other conservative interventions for patients with WAD or NAD. Moreover, structured patient education may be of benefit during the recovery of patients with WAD when used as an adjunct therapy to physiotherapy or emergency room care. These benefits are small and short lived.

Background context Little is known about the effectiveness of multimodal care for individuals with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) and neck pain and associated disorders (NAD). Purpose To update findings of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders and evaluate the effectiveness of multimodal care for the management of patients with WAD or NAD. Study design/setting Systematic review and best-evidence synthesis. Patient sample We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies. Outcome measures Self-rated recovery, functional recovery (eg, disability, return to activities, work, or school), pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes (eg, depression, fear), or adverse events. Methods We systematically searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 2000 to 2013. RCTs, cohort, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Scientifically admissible studies were summarized using evidence tables and synthesized following best-evidence synthesis principles. Results We retrieved 2,187 articles, and 23 articles were eligible for critical appraisal. Of those, 18 articles from 14 different RCTs were scientifically admissible. There were a total of 31 treatment arms, including 27 unique multimodal programs of care. Overall, the evidence suggests that multimodal care that includes manual therapy, education, and exercise may benefit patients with grades I and II WAD and NAD. General practitioner care that includes reassurance, advice to stay active, and resumption of regular activities may be an option for the early management of WAD grades I and II. Our synthesis suggests that patients receiving high-intensity health care tend to experience poorer outcomes than those who receive fewer treatments for WAD and NAD. Conclusions Multimodal care can benefit patients with WAD and NAD with early or persistent symptoms. The evidence does not indicate that one multimodal care package is superior to another. Clinicians should avoid high utilization of care for patients with WAD and NAD.

Background Context In 2008, the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) found limited evidence on the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture for the management of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) or neck pain and associated disorders (NAD). Purpose This review aimed to update the findings of the Neck Pain Task Force, which examined the effectiveness of manual therapies, passive physical modalities, and acupuncture for the management of WAD or NAD. Study Design/Setting This is a systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Sample The sample includes randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing manual therapies, passive physical modalities, or acupuncture with other interventions, placebo or sham, or no intervention. Outcome Measures The outcome measures were self-rated or functional recovery, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes, or adverse events. Methods We systematically searched five databases from 2000 to 2014. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Studies with a low risk of bias were stratified by the intervention's stage of development (exploratory vs. evaluation) and synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. Funding was provided by the Ministry of Finance. Results We screened 8,551 citations, and 38 studies were relevant and 22 had a low risk of bias. Evidence from seven exploratory studies suggests that (1) for recent but not persistent NAD grades I–II, thoracic manipulation offers short-term benefits; (2) for persistent NAD grades I–II, technical parameters of cervical mobilization (eg, direction or site of manual contact) do not impact outcomes, whereas one session of cervical manipulation is similar to Kinesio Taping; and (3) for NAD grades I–II, strain-counterstrain treatment is no better than placebo. Evidence from 15 evaluation studies suggests that (1) for recent NAD grades I–II, cervical and thoracic manipulation provides no additional benefit to high-dose supervised exercises, and Swedish or clinical massage adds benefit to self-care advice; (2) for persistent NAD grades I–II, home-based cupping massage has similar outcomes to home-based muscle relaxation, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) does not offer benefits, Western acupuncture provides similar outcomes to non-penetrating placebo electroacupuncture, and needle acupuncture provides similar outcomes to sham-penetrating acupuncture; (3) for WAD grades I–II, needle electroacupuncture offers similar outcomes as simulated electroacupuncture; and (4) for recent NAD grades III, a semi-rigid cervical collar with rest and graded strengthening exercises lead to similar outcomes, and LLLT does not offer benefits. Conclusions Our review adds new evidence to the Neck Pain Task Force and suggests that mobilization, manipulation, and clinical massage are effective interventions for the management of neck pain. It also suggests that electroacupuncture, strain-counterstrain, relaxation massage, and some passive physical modalities (heat, cold, diathermy, hydrotherapy, and ultrasound) are not effective and should not be used to manage neck pain.

Background Context In 2008, the lack of published evidence prevented the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force [NPTF]) from commenting on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain. Purpose This study aimed to update findings of the NPTF and evaluate the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the management of neck pain and associated disorders (NAD) or whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Study Design/setting This study used systematic review and best-evidence synthesis. Sample Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing psychological interventions to other non-invasive interventions or no intervention were the samples used in this study. Outcome measures The outcome measures are (1) self-rated recovery; (2) functional recovery; (3) clinical outcomes; (4) administrative outcomes; and (5) adverse effects. Methods We searched six databases from 1990 to 2015. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies meeting our selection criteria were eligible for critical appraisal. Random pairs of independent reviewers used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to critically appraise eligible studies. Studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Finance. Results We screened 1,919 articles, 19 were eligible for critical appraisal and 10 were judged to have low risk of bias. We found no clear evidence supporting relaxation training or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for persistent grades I–III NAD for reducing pain intensity or disability. Similarly, we did not find evidence to support the effectiveness of biofeedback or relaxation training for persistent grade II WAD, and there is conflicting evidence for the use of CBT in this population. However, adding a progressive goal attainment program to functional restoration physiotherapy may benefit patients with persistent grades I–III WAD. Furthermore, Jyoti meditation may help reduce neck pain intensity and bothersomeness in patients with persistent NAD. Conclusions We did not find evidence for or against the use of psychological interventions in patients with recent onset NAD or WAD. We found evidence that a progressive goal attainment program may be helpful for the management of persistent WAD and that Jyoti meditation may benefit patients with persistent NAD. The limited evidence of effectiveness for psychological interventions may be due to several factors, such as interventions that are ineffective, poorly conceptualized, or poorly implemented. Further methodologically rigorous research is needed.

Background context In 2008, the Neck Pain Task Force (NPTF) recommended exercise for the management of neck pain and whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). However, no evidence was available on the effectiveness of exercise for Grade III neck pain or WAD. Moreover, limited evidence was available to contrast the effectiveness of various types of exercises. Purpose To update the findings of the NPTF on the effectiveness of exercise for the management of neck pain and WAD grades I to III. Study design/setting Systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Sample Studies comparing the effectiveness of exercise to other conservative interventions or no intervention. Outcome measures Outcomes of interest included self-rated recovery, functional recovery, pain intensity, health-related quality of life, psychological outcomes, and/or adverse events. Methods We searched eight electronic databases from 2000 to 2013. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. The results of scientifically admissible studies were synthesized following best-evidence synthesis principles. Results We retrieved 4,761 articles, and 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were critically appraised. Ten RCTs were scientifically admissible: nine investigated neck pain and one addressed WAD. For the management of recent neck pain Grade I/II, unsupervised range-of-motion exercises, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen, or manual therapy lead to similar outcomes. For recent neck pain Grade III, supervised graded strengthening is more effective than advice but leads to similar short-term outcomes as a cervical collar. For persistent neck pain and WAD Grade I/II, supervised qigong and combined strengthening, range-of-motion, and flexibility exercises are more effective than wait list. Additionally, supervised Iyengar yoga is more effective than home exercise. Finally, supervised high-dose strengthening is not superior to home exercises or advice. Conclusions We found evidence that supervised qigong, Iyengar yoga, and combined programs including strengthening, range of motion, and flexibility are effective for the management of persistent neck pain. We did not find evidence that one supervised exercise program is superior to another. Overall, most studies reported small effect sizes suggesting that a small clinical effect can be expected with the use of exercise alone.

PURPOSE: To develop an evidence-based guideline for the management of grades I-III neck pain and associated disorders (NAD).METHODS: This guideline is based on recent systematic reviews of high-quality studies. A multidisciplinary expert panel considered the evidence of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, societal and ethical values, and patient experiences (obtained from qualitative research) when formulating recommendations. Target audience includes clinicians; target population is adults with grades I-III NAD RECOMMENDATION 1: Clinicians should rule out major structural or other pathologies as the cause of NAD. Once major pathology has been ruled out, clinicians should classify NAD as grade I, II, or III.RECOMMENDATION 2: Clinicians should assess prognostic factors for delayed recovery from NAD.RECOMMENDATION 3: Clinicians should educate and reassure patients about the benign and self-limited nature of the typical course of NAD grades I-III and the importance of maintaining activity and movement. Patients with worsening symptoms and those who develop new physical or psychological symptoms should be referred to a physician for further evaluation at any time during their care.RECOMMENDATION 4: For NAD grades I-II ≤3 months duration, clinicians may consider structured patient education in combination with: range of motion exercise, multimodal care (range of motion exercise with manipulation or mobilization), or muscle relaxants. In view of evidence of no effectiveness, clinicians should not offer structured patient education alone, strain-counterstrain therapy, relaxation massage, cervical collar, electroacupuncture, electrotherapy, or clinic-based heat.RECOMMENDATION 5: For NAD grades I-II >3 months duration, clinicians may consider structured patient education in combination with: range of motion and strengthening exercises, qigong, yoga, multimodal care (exercise with manipulation or mobilization), clinical massage, low-level laser therapy, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In view of evidence of no effectiveness, clinicians should not offer strengthening exercises alone, strain-counterstrain therapy, relaxation massage, relaxation therapy for pain or disability, electrotherapy, shortwave diathermy, clinic-based heat, electroacupuncture, or botulinum toxin injections.RECOMMENDATION 6: For NAD grade III ≤3 months duration, clinicians may consider supervised strengthening exercises in addition to structured patient education. In view of evidence of no effectiveness, clinicians should not offer structured patient education alone, cervical collar, low-level laser therapy, or traction. RECOMMENDATION 7: For NAD grade III >3 months duration, clinicians should not offer a cervical collar. Patients who continue to experience neurological signs and disability more than 3 months after injury should be referred to a physician for investigation and management. RECOMMENDATION 8: Clinicians should reassess the patient at every visit to determine if additional care is necessary, the condition is worsening, or the patient has recovered. Patients reporting significant recovery should be discharged.

To update findings of the 2000–2010 Bone and Joint Decade Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders and evaluate the effectiveness of non-invasive and non-pharmacological interventions for the management of patients with headaches associated with neck pain (i.e., tension-type, cervicogenic, or whiplash-related headaches). We searched five databases from 1990 to 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case–control studies comparing non-invasive interventions with other interventions, placebo/sham, or no interventions. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to determine scientific admissibility. Studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. We screened 17,236 citations, 15 studies were relevant, and 10 had a low risk of bias. The evidence suggests that episodic tension-type headaches should be managed with low load endurance craniocervical and cervicoscapular exercises. Patients with chronic tension-type headaches may also benefit from low load endurance craniocervical and cervicoscapular exercises; relaxation training with stress coping therapy; or multimodal care that includes spinal mobilization, craniocervical exercises, and postural correction. For cervicogenic headaches, low load endurance craniocervical and cervicoscapular exercises; or manual therapy (manipulation with or without mobilization) to the cervical and thoracic spine may also be helpful. The management of headaches associated with neck pain should include exercise. Patients who suffer from chronic tension-type headaches may also benefit from relaxation training with stress coping therapy or multimodal care. Patients with cervicogenic headache may also benefit from a course of manual therapy.

Background Soft-tissue therapy is commonly used to manage musculoskeletal injuries. Objective To determine the effectiveness of soft-tissue therapy for the management of musculoskeletal disorders and injuries of the upper and lower extremities. Design Systematic Review. Methods We searched six databases from 1990 to 2015 and critically appraised eligible articles using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Evidence from studies with low risk of bias was synthesized using best-evidence synthesis methodology. Results We screened 9869 articles and critically appraised seven; six had low risk of bias. Localized relaxation massage provides added benefits to multimodal care immediately post-intervention for carpal tunnel syndrome. Movement re-education (contraction/passive stretching) provides better long-term benefit than one corticosteroid injection for lateral epicondylitis. Myofascial release improves outcomes compared to sham ultrasound for lateral epicondylitis. Diacutaneous fibrolysis (DF) or sham DF leads to similar outcomes in pain intensity for subacromial impingement syndrome. Trigger point therapy may provide limited or no additional benefit when combined with self-stretching for plantar fasciitis; however, myofascial release to the gastrocnemius, soleus and plantar fascia is effective. Conclusion Our review clarifies the role of soft-tissue therapy for the management of upper and lower extremity musculoskeletal disorders and injuries. Myofascial release therapy was effective for treating lateral epicondylitis and plantar fasciitis. Movement re-education was also effective for managing lateral epicondylitis. Localized relaxation massage combined with multimodal care may provide short-term benefit for treating carpal tunnel syndrome. More high quality research is needed to study the appropriateness and comparative effectiveness of this widely utilized form of treatment.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a government-regulated rehabilitation guideline compared with education and activation by general practitioners, and to a preferred-provider insurance-based rehabilitation programme on self-reported global recovery from acute whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) grade I–II.DesignPragmatic randomised clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment.SettingMultidisciplinary rehabilitation clinics and general practitioners in Ontario, Canada.Participants340 participants with acute WAD grade I and II. Potential participants were sampled from a large automobile insurer when reporting a traffic injury.InterventionsParticipants were randomised to receive one of three protocols: government-regulated rehabilitation guideline, education and activation by general practitioners or a preferred-provider insurance-based rehabilitation.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOur primary outcome was time to self-reported global recovery. Secondary outcomes included time on insurance benefits, neck pain intensity, whiplash-related disability, health-related quality of life and depressive symptomatology at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postinjury.ResultsThe median time to self-reported global recovery was 59 days (95% CI 55 to 68) for the government-regulated guideline group, 105 days (95% CI 61 to 126) for the preferred-provider group and 108 days (95% CI 93 to 206) for the general practitioner group; the difference was not statistically significant (Χ2=3.96; 2 df: p=0.138). We found no clinically important differences between groups in secondary outcomes. Post hoc analysis suggests that the general practitioner (hazard rate ratio (HRR)=0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77) and preferred-provider groups (HRR=0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.96) had slower recovery than the government-regulated guideline group during the first 80 days postinjury. No major adverse events were reported.ConclusionsTime-to-recovery did not significantly differ across intervention groups. We found no differences between groups with regard to neck-specific outcomes, depression and health-related quality of life.Trial registration numberNCT00546806.

Objectives:In 2007, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee (OHTAC) developed a decision framework to guide decision making around nondrug health technologies. In 2012, OHTAC commissioned a revision of this framework to enhance its usability and deepen its conceptual and theoretical foundations.Methods:The committee overseeing this work used several methods: (a) a priori consensus on guiding principles, (b) a scoping review of decision attributes and processes used globally in health technology assessment (HTA), (c) presentations by methods experts and members of review committees, and (d) committee deliberations over a period of 3 years.Results:The committee adopted a multi-criteria decision-making approach, but rejected the formal use of multi-criteria decision analysis. Three broad categories of attributes were identified: (I) context criteria attributes included factors such as stakeholders, adoption pressures from neighboring jurisdictions, and potential conflicts of interest; (II) primary appraisal criteria attributes included (i) benefits and harms, (ii) economics, and (iii) patient-centered care; (III) feasibility criteria attributes included budget impact and organizational feasibility.Conclusion:The revised Ontario Decision Framework is similar in some respects to frameworks used in HTA worldwide. Its distinctive characteristics are that: it is based on an explicit set of social values; HTA paradigms (evidence based medicine, economics, and bioethics/social science) are used to aggregate decision attributes; and that it is rooted in a theoretical framework of optimal decision making, rather than one related to broad social goals, such as health or welfare maximization.

Background Exercise is a key component of rehabilitation for soft tissue injuries of the shoulder; however its effectiveness remains unclear. Objective Determine the effectiveness of exercise for shoulder pain. Methods We searched seven databases from 1990 to 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and case control studies comparing exercise to other interventions for shoulder pain. We critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. We synthesized findings from scientifically admissible studies using best-evidence synthesis methodology. Results We retrieved 4853 articles. Eleven RCTs were appraised and five had a low risk of bias. Four studies addressed subacromial impingement syndrome. One study addressed nonspecific shoulder pain. For variable duration subacromial impingement syndrome: 1) supervised strengthening leads to greater short-term improvement in pain and disability over wait listing; and 2) supervised and home-based strengthening and stretching leads to greater short-term improvement in pain and disability compared to no treatment. For persistent subacromial impingement syndrome: 1) supervised and home-based strengthening leads to similar outcomes as surgery; and 2) home-based heavy load eccentric training does not add benefits to home-based rotator cuff strengthening and physiotherapy. For variable duration low-grade nonspecific shoulder pain, supervised strengthening and stretching leads to similar short-term outcomes as corticosteroid injections or multimodal care. Conclusion The evidence suggests that supervised and home-based progressive shoulder strengthening and stretching are effective for the management of subacromial impingement syndrome. For low-grade nonspecific shoulder pain, supervised strengthening and stretching are equally effective to corticosteroid injections or multimodal care. Systematic review registration number CRD42013003928.

Introduction Soft tissue injuries of the leg, ankle, or foot are common and often treated by exercise. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of exercise for the management of soft tissue injuries of the leg, ankle, or foot. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted. We searched five databases from 1990 to 2015. Relevant articles were critically appraised using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. The evidence from studies with low risk of bias was synthesized using the best-evidence synthesis methodology. Results We screened 7946 articles. We critically appraised ten randomized trials and six had a low risk of bias. The evidence suggests that for recent lateral ankle sprain: 1) rehabilitation exercises initiated immediately post-injury are as effective as a similar program initiated one week post-injury; and 2) supervised progressive exercise plus education/advice and home exercise lead to similar outcomes as education/advice and home exercise. Eccentric exercises may be more effective than an AirHeel brace but less effective than acupuncture for Achilles tendinopathy of more than two months duration. Finally, for plantar heel pain, static stretching of the calf muscles and sham ultrasound lead to similar outcomes, while static plantar fascia stretching provides short-term benefits compared to shockwave therapy. Conclusions We found little evidence to support the use of early or supervised exercise interventions for lateral ankle sprains. Eccentric exercises may provide short-term benefits over a brace for persistent Achilles tendinopathy and plantar fascia stretching provides short-term benefits for plantar heel pain.

To evaluate the methodological quality and synthesize recommendations of evidence-based guidelines for the management of common traffic injuries.We conducted a systematic review and best evidence synthesis of guidelines on musculoskeletal injuries, psychological disorders and mild traumatic brain injuries (MTBI) from 1995 to 2012. Independent reviewers critically appraised eligible guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) criteria.We retrieved 9863 citations. Of those, 16 guidelines were eligible for critical appraisal and eight were scientifically admissible (four targeting whiplash-associated disorders (WAD), one addressing anxiety and three addressing MTBI). The inadmissible guidelines had inadequate literature searches, inexplicit links between evidence and recommendations, and ambiguous recommendations. The literature used to develop most of the admissible guidelines was outdated. Major recommendations included: (1) Advice, education and reassurance for all conditions; (2) Exercise, return-to-activity, mobilization/manipulation, analgesics and avoiding collars for WAD; (3) Psychological first aid, pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy as first-line interventions for anxiety; and (4) Monitoring for complications, discharge criteria, advice upon discharge from the emergency room and post-discharge care for MTBI.Fifty percent of appraised guidelines were scientifically admissible, but most need updating. Most guidelines focus on WAD and MTBI. Few guidelines make comprehensive recommendations on a wide range of consequences from traffic collisions.The core components of a program of care designed to manage common traffic injuries (whiplash-associated disorders - WAD, anxiety and mild traumatic brain injuries) should include advice, education and reassurance. Depending on the condition, the following specific interventions should be considered: (1) WAD: exercise, early return to activity, mobilization/manipulation, analgesics and avoidance of collars; (2) Anxiety: psychological first aid, pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy; and (3) Mild traumatic brain injuries: use of specific discharge criteria (including no factors warranting hospital admission and support structures for subsequent care), education upon discharge from emergency room and post-discharge care (e.g. monitoring for complications, gradual return to normal activity based on tolerance of individual). The methodological quality of guidelines varies greatly; therefore, guideline developers need to adhere to established methodological standards and conform to the evaluation criteria outlined in the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

Background Previous studies have demonstrated that organized, multidisciplinary care is the cornerstone of current strategies to reduce the death and disability caused by stroke. Identification of stroke units and an understanding of their composition and operation would provide insight for the further actions required to improve stroke care. The objective of this study was to identify and survey stroke units in Canada’s largest province, Ontario (population of 13 million) in order to describe availability, structure, staffing, processes of care, and type of population stroke units serve. Methods The Ontario Stroke Network (2011) list of stroke units and snowball sampling was used to identify all stroke units. During 2013 – 2014 an interviewer conducted telephone surveys with the stroke unit managers using closed and semi-open ended questions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. Results The survey identified 32 stroke units, and a respondent from every stroke unit (100% response rate) was interviewed. Twenty one were acute stroke units, 10 were integrated stroke units and one was classified as a rehabilitation stroke unit. Stroke units were available in all 14 Local Health Integration Networks except Central West. The estimated average number of stroke patients served per stroke unit was 604 with six-fold variation (242 to 1480) across the province. The typical population served in stroke units were patients with either ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Data consistently reported on the processes of stroke care, including the availability of multidisciplinary staff, specific diagnostic imaging, use of validated assessment tools, and the delivery of patient education. Details about the core components of stoke care were provided by 16 stroke units (50%). Conclusions This study demonstrates the heterogeneous structure of stroke units in Ontario and signaled potential disparity in access to stroke units. Many core components are in place, but half of the stroke units in Ontario do not meet all criteria. Areas for potential improvement include stroke care training for the multidisciplinary team, provision of individualized rehabilitation plans, and early discharge assessment. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2099-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Although return-to-work (RTW) interventions have been shown to be cost-effective, most previous economic analyses have focused on the insurer's perspective. Employers can also incur costs when supporting the RTW of their employees. Objective To identify a key set of items for estimating the costs of RTW interventions from the employer's perspective, and to identify and value the costs and consequences of a RTW intervention. Participants Employers with knowledge of the economic costs of RTW. Methods A survey of 10 workplaces with RTW programs was conducted. The survey consisted of semi-structured interviews with a human resources or occupational health and safety representative from each enrolled workplace. Results The interviews were reviewed and from them key items were identified for estimating the costs of RTW interventions from the employer's perspective. Employers identified the following costs: medical, equipment, training and education, wage replacement and productivity, and claims administration when assisting an employee's RTW. Conclusions Even in a jurisdiction with workers' compensation insurance, employers incur costs associated with RTW programs. It is important to consider these costs, from the perspective of the employer, when studying the cost-effectiveness of RTW interventions or programs.

Background and Objective:Background and Objective: In developed countries, injection drug users have the highest prevalence and incidence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Clinicians and policy makers have several options for reducing morbidity and mortality related to HCV infection, including preventing new infections, screening high-risk populations, and optimizing uptake and delivery of antiviral therapy. Cost-effectiveness analyses provide an estimate of the value for money associated with adopting healthcare interventions. Our objective was to determine the cost effectiveness of hepatitis C interventions (prevention, screening, treatment) targeting substance users and other groups with a high proportion of substance users. Abstract: Methods:Methods: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HealthSTAR and EconLit, and the grey literature. Studies were critically appraised using the Drummond and Jefferson, Neumann et al. and Philips et al. checklists. We developed and applied a quality appraisal instrument specific to cost-effectiveness analyses of HCV interventions. In addition, we summarized cost-effectiveness estimates using a single currency and year ($US, year 2009 values). Abstract: Results:Results: Twenty-one economic evaluations were included, which addressed prevention (three), screening (ten) and treatment (eight). The quality of the analyses varied greatly. A significant proportion did not incorporate important aspects of HCV natural history, disease costs and antiviral therapy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from dominant (less costly and more effective) to $US603 352 per QALY. However, many ICERs were less than $US100 000 per QALY. Screening and treatment interventions involving pegylated interferon and ribavirin were generally cost effective at the $US100 000 per QALY threshold, with the exception of some subgroups, such as immune compromised patients with genotype 1 infections. Abstract: Conclusions:Conclusions: No clear consensus emerged from the studies demonstrating that prevention, screening or treatment provides better value for money as each approach can be economically attractive in certain subgroups. More high-quality economic evaluations of preventing, identifying and treating HCV infection in substance users are needed.

Objective The pursuit of interpretability of longitudinal measures of patient outcome has led to several methods for defining minimal amounts of change or final states that are important. Little is known about the best method. The purpose of this study was to directly compare methods using diagnostic utility to evaluate their usefulness. Study Design and Setting Secondary analysis of longitudinal cohort data of persons attending physiotherapy for shoulder pain. Disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand outcome fielded at baseline and 3 months. Published methods were used to define positive response in scores: minimal change, final state, and combined change and final state. Proportions described as improved were compared (Kappa) and diagnostic testing techniques used to evaluate the strengths of each. Results Only moderate agreement was found between methods (Kappa = 0.47). Minimal clinically important differences were most sensitive but not specific. Final states were less sensitive, more specific, and most accurate. Combinations were slightly less specific. Conclusion A new approach allowed us to evaluate the relative merits and risks of different approaches to interpreting longitudinal patient outcomes. Our study points to a combination of change greater than error and/or a final score within general population norms as being the most clinically sensible with strong diagnostic accuracy.

Purpose To elicit neck pain (NP) patients’ preference scores for their current health, and investigate the association between their scores and NP disability. Methods Rating scale scores (RSs) and standard gamble scores (SGs) for current health were elicited from chronic NP patients (n = 104) and patients with NP following a motor vehicle accident (n = 116). Patients were stratified into Von Korff Pain Grades: Grade I (low-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade II (high-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade III (pain with high disability levels, moderate activity limitations); and Grade IV (pain with high disability levels, several activity limitations). Multivariable regression quantified the association between preference scores and NP disability. Results Mean SGs and RSs were as follows: Grade I patients: 0.81, 0.76; Grade II: 0.70, 0.60; Grade III: 0.64, 0.44; Grade IV: 0.57, 0.39. The association between preference scores and NP disability depended on type of NP and preference-elicitation method. Chronic NP patients’ scores were more strongly associated with depressive symptoms than with NP disability. In both samples, NP disability explained little more than random variance in SGs, and up to 51% of variance in RSs. Conclusion Health-related quality-of-life is considerably diminished in NP patients. Depressive symptoms and preference-elicitation methods influence preference scores that NP patients assign to their health.

Study Design Systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Objectives To describe the prevalence and incidence of neck pain and disability in workers; to identify risk factors for neck pain in workers; to propose an etiological diagram; and to make recommendations for future research. Summary of Background Data Previous reviews of the etiology of neck pain in workers relied on cross-sectional evidence. Recently published cohorts and randomized trials warrant a re-analysis of this body of research. Methods We systematically searched Medline for literature published from 1980–2006. Retrieved articles were reviewed for relevance. Relevant articles were critically appraised. Articles judged to have adequate internal validity were included in our best evidence synthesis. Results One hundred and nine papers on the burden and determinants of neck pain in workers were scientifically admissible. The annual prevalence of neck pain varied from 27.1% in Norway to 47.8% in Quebec, Canada. Each year, between 11% and 14.1% of workers were limited in their activities because of neck pain. Risk factors associated with neck pain in workers include age, previous musculoskeletal pain, high quantitative job demands, low social support at work, job insecurity, low physical capacity, poor computer workstation design and work posture, sedentary work position, repetitive work and precision work. We found preliminary evidence that gender, occupation, headaches, emotional problems, smoking, poor job satisfaction, awkward work postures, poor physical work environment, and workers' ethnicity may be associated with neck pain. There is evidence that interventions aimed at modifying workstations and worker posture are not effective in reducing the incidence of neck pain in workers. Conclusion Neck disorders are a significant source of pain and activity limitations in workers. Most neck pain results from complex relationships between individual and workplace risk factors. No prevention strategies have been shown to reduce the incidence of neck pain in workers.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To undertake a best evidence synthesis on the burden and determinants of whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) after traffic collisions. Summary of Background Data Previous best evidence synthesis on WAD has noted a lack of evidence regarding incidence of and risk factors for WAD. Therefore there was a warrant of a reanalyze of this body of research. Methods A systematic search of Medline was conducted. The reviewers looked for studies on neck pain and its associated disorders published 1980–2006. Each relevant study was independently and critically reviewed by rotating pairs of reviewers. Data from studies judged to have acceptable internal validity (scientifically admissible) were abstracted into evidence tables, and provide the body of the best evidence synthesis. Results The authors found 32 scientifically admissible studies related to the burden and determinants of WAD. In the Western world, visits to emergency rooms due to WAD have increased over the past 30 years. The annual cumulative incidence of WAD differed substantially between countries. They found that occupant seat position and collision impact direction were associated with WAD in one study. Eliminating insurance payments for pain and suffering were associated with a lower incidence of WAD injury claims in one study. Younger ages and being a female were both associated with filing claims or seeking care for WAD, although the evidence is not consistent. Preliminary evidence suggested that headrests/car seats, aimed to limiting head extension during rear-end collisions had a preventive effect on reporting WAD, especially in females. Conclusion WAD after traffic collisions affects many people. Despite many years of research, the evidence regarding risk factors for WAD is sparse but seems to include personal, societal, and environmental factors. More research including, well-defined studies with accurate denominators for calculating risk, and better consideration of confounding factors, are needed.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize literature from 1980 through 2006 on noninvasive interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders. Summary of Background Data No comprehensive systematic literature reviews have been published on interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders in the past decade. Methods We systematically searched Medline and screened for relevance literature published from 1980 through 2006 on the use, effectiveness, and safety of noninvasive interventions for neck pain and associated disorders. Consensus decisions were made about the scientific merit of each article; those judged to have adequate internal validity were included in our best evidence synthesis. Results Of the 359 invasive and noninvasive intervention articles deemed relevant, 170 (47%) were accepted as scientifically admissible, and 139 of these related to noninvasive interventions (including health care utilization, costs, and safety). For whiplash-associated disorders, there is evidence that educational videos, mobilization, and exercises appear more beneficial than usual care or physical modalities. For other neck pain, the evidence suggests that manual and supervised exercise interventions, low-level laser therapy, and perhaps acupuncture are more effective than no treatment, sham, or alternative interventions; however, none of the active treatments was clearly superior to any other in either the short- or long-term. For both whiplash-associated disorders and other neck pain without radicular symptoms, interventions that focused on regaining function as soon as possible are relatively more effective than interventions that do not have such a focus. Conclusion Our best evidence synthesis suggests that therapies involving manual therapy and exercise are more effective than alternative strategies for patients with neck pain; this was also true of therapies which include educational interventions addressing self-efficacy. Future efforts should focus on the study of noninvasive interventions for patients with radicular symptoms and on the design and evaluation of neck pain prevention strategies.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize literature from 1980 through 2006 on surgical interventions for neck pain alone or with radicular pain in the absence of serious pathologic disease. Summary of Background Data There have been no comprehensive systematic literature or evidence-based reviews published on this topic. Methods We systematically searched Medline for literature published from 1980 to 2006 on percutaneous and open surgical interventions for neck pain. Publications on the topic were also solicited from experts in the field. Consensus decisions were made about the scientific merit of each article; those judged to have adequate internal validity were included in our Best Evidence Synthesis. Results Of the 31,878 articles screened, 1203 studies were relevant to the Neck Pain Task Force mandate and of these, 31 regarding treatment by surgery or injections were accepted as scientifically admissible. Radiofrequency neurotomy, cervical facet injections, cervical fusion and cervical arthroplasty for neck pain without radiculopathy are not supported by current evidence. We found there is support for short-term symptomatic improvement of radicular symptoms with epidural corticosteroids. It is not clear from the evidence that long-term outcomes are improved with the surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy compared to nonoperative measures. However, relatively rapid and substantial symptomatic relief after surgical treatment seems to be reliably achieved. It is not evident that one open surgical technique is clearly superior to others for radiculopathy. Cervical foramenal or epidural injections are associated with relatively frequent minor adverse events (5%–20%); however, serious adverse events are very uncommon ( Conclusion Surgical treatment and limited injection procedures for cervical radicular symptoms may be reasonably considered in patients with severe impairments. Percutaneous and open surgical treatment for neck pain alone, without radicular symptoms or clear serious pathology, seems to lack scientific support.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To critically appraise and synthesize the literature on assessment of neck pain. Summary of Background Data The published literature on assessment of neck pain is large and of variable quality. There have been no prior systematic reviews of this literature. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders conducted a critical review of the literature (published 1980–2006) on assessment tools and screening protocols for traumatic and nontraumatic neck pain. Results We found 359 articles on assessment of neck pain. After critical review, 95 (35%) were judged scientifically admissible. Screening protocols have high predictive values to detect cervical spine fracture in alert, low-risk patients seeking emergency care after blunt neck trauma. Computerized tomography (CT) scans had better validity (in adults and elderly) than radiographs in assessing high-risk and/or multi-injured blunt trauma neck patients. In the absence of serious pathology, clinical physical examinations are more predictive at excluding than confirming structural lesions causing neurologic compression. One exception is the manual provocation test for cervical radiculopathy, which has high positive predictive value. There was no evidence that specific MRI findings are associated with neck pain, cervicogenic headache, or whiplash exposure. No evidence supports using cervical provocative discography, anesthetic facet, or medial branch blocks in evaluating neck pain. Reliable and valid self-report questionnaires are useful in assessing pain, function, disability, and psychosocial status in individuals with neck pain. Conclusion The scientific evidence supports screening protocols in emergency care for low-risk patients; and CT-scans for high-risk patients with blunt trauma to the neck. In nonemergency neck pain without radiculopathy, the validity of most commonly used objective tests is lacking. There is support for subjective self-report assessment in monitoring patients' course, response to treatment, and in clinical research.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To undertake a best evidence synthesis of the published evidence on the burden and determinants of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Summary of Background Data The evidence on burden and determinants of neck has not previously been summarized. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders performed a systematic search and critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We identified 469 studies on burden and determinants of neck pain, and judged 249 to be scientifically admissible; 101 articles related to the burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population. Incidence ranged from 0.055 per 1000 person years (disc herniation with radiculopathy) to 213 per 1000 persons (self-reported neck pain). Incidence of neck injuries during competitive sports ranged from 0.02 to 21 per 1000 exposures. The 12-month prevalence of pain typically ranged between 30% and 50%; the 12-month prevalence of activity-limiting pain was 1.7% to 11.5%. Neck pain was more prevalent among women and prevalence peaked in middle age. Risk factors for neck pain included genetics, poor psychological health, and exposure to tobacco. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. The use of sporting gear (helmets, face shields) to prevent other types of injury was not associated with increased neck injuries in bicycling, hockey, or skiing. Conclusion Neck pain is common. Nonmodifiable risk factors for neck pain included age, gender, and genetics. Modifiable factors included smoking, exposure to tobacco, and psychological health. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. Future research should concentrate on longitudinal designs exploring preventive strategies and modifiable risk factors for neck pain.

Study Design Best-evidence synthesis. Objective To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in workers. Summary of Background Data Knowledge of the course of neck pain in workers guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning effective workplace policies, formulating interventions and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the frequency and burden of neck pain in the workplace. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 14 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in working populations. Between 60% and 80% of workers with neck pain reported neck pain 1 year later. Few workplace or physical job demands were identified as being linked to recovery from neck pain. However, workers with little influence on their own work situation had a slightly poorer prognosis, and white-collar workers had a better prognosis than blue-collar workers. General exercise was associated with better prognosis; prior neck pain and prior sick leave were associated with poorer prognosis. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force presents a report of current best evidence on course and prognosis for neck pain. Few modifiable prognostic factors were identified; however, having some influence over one's own job and being physically active seem to hold promise as prognostic factors.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To report on gaps in the literature and make methodologic recommendations based on our review of the literature on frequency and risk factors, assessment, intervention, and course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders. Summary of Background Data The scientific literature on neck pain is large and of variable quality. We reviewed 1203 studies and judged 46% to be of sufficient scientific validity to be included in the best evidence synthesis. Scientific quality varied across study topics, and fundamental questions remain about important issues. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We outline a large number of gaps in the current literature. For example, we found important gaps in our knowledge about neck pain in children (risk factors, screening criteria to rule out serious injury, management, course and prognosis); and in the prevention of neck pain-related activity limitations. Few studies addressed the impact of culture or social policies (such as governmental health policies or insurance compensation policies) on neck pain. A number of important questions remain about the effectiveness of commonly used interventions for neck pain. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for whiplash-associated disorders. We identify a number of gaps in the current knowledge, and provide recommendations for the conduct of future studies.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To provide a detailed description of the methods undertaken in a systematic search and perform a best evidence synthesis on the frequency, determinants, assessment, interventions, course and prognosis of neck pain, and its associated disorders. Summary of Background Data Neck pain is an important cause of health burden; however, the published information is vast, and stakeholders would benefit from a summary of the best evidence. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders conducted a systematic search and critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Citations were screened for relevance to the Neck Pain Task Force mandate, using a priori criteria, and relevant studies were critically reviewed for their internal scientific validity. Findings from studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were synthesized into a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 31,878 citations, of which 1203 were relevant to the mandate of the Neck Pain Task Force. After critical review, 552 studies (46%) were judged scientifically admissible and were compiled into the best evidence synthesis. Conclusion The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the epidemiology, assessment and classification of neck pain, as well as interventions and prognosis for this symptom. This article reports the methods used and the outcomes from the review. We found that 46% of the research literature was of acceptable scientific quality to inform clinical practice, policy-making, and future research.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in Grades I–III whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Summary of Background Data Knowledge of the course of recovery of WAD guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning management and intervention strategies and effective compensation policies to decrease the burden of WAD. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 47 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in WAD. The evidence suggests that approximately 50% of those with WAD will report neck pain symptoms 1 year after their injuries. Greater initial pain, more symptoms, and greater initial disability predicted slower recovery. Few factors related to the collision itself (for example, direction of the collision, headrest type) were prognostic; however, postinjury psychological factors such as passive coping style, depressed mood, and fear of movement were prognostic for slower or less complete recovery. There is also preliminary evidence that the prevailing compensation system is prognostic for recovery in WAD. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for WAD. Recovery of WAD seems to be multifactorial.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To provide evidence-based guidance to primary care clinicians about how to best assess and treat patients with neck pain. Summary of Background Data There is a need to translate the results of clinical and epidemiologic studies into meaningful and practical information for clinicians. Methods Based on best evidence syntheses of published studies on the risk, prognosis, assessment, and management of people with neck pain and its associated disorders, plus additional research projects and focused literature reviews reported in this supplement, the 12-member multidisciplinary Scientific Secretariat of the Neck Pain Task Force followed a 4-step approach to develop practical guidance for clinicians. Results The Neck Pain Task Force recommends that people seeking care for neck pain should be triaged into 4 groups: Grade I neck pain with no signs of major pathology and no or little interference with daily activities; Grade II neck pain with no signs of major pathology, but interference with daily activities; Grade III neck pain with neurologic signs of nerve compression; Grade IV neck pain with signs of major pathology. In the emergency room after blunt trauma to the neck, triage should be based on the NEXUS criteria or the Canadian C-spine rule. Those with a high risk of fracture should be further investigated with plain radiographs and/or CT-scan. In ambulatory primary care, triage should be based on history and physical examination alone, including screening for red flags and neurologic examination for signs of radiculopathy. Exercises and mobilization have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain after a motor vehicle collision. Exercises, mobilization, manipulation, analgesics, acupuncture, and low-level laser have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain without trauma. Those with confirmed Grade III and severe persistent radicular symptoms might benefit from corticosteroid injections or surgery. Those with confirmed Grade IV neck pain require management specific to the diagnosed pathology. Conclusion The best available evidence suggests initial assessment for neck pain should focus on triage into 4 grades, and those with common neck pain (Grade I and Grade II) might be offered the listed noninvasive treatments if short-term relief is desired.

Study Design Iterative discussion and consensus by a multidisciplinary task force scientific secretariat reviewing scientific evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Objective To provide an integrated model for linking the epidemiology of neck pain with its management and consequences, and to help organize and interpret existing knowledge, and to highlight gaps in the current literature. Summary of Background Data The wide variability of scientific and clinical approaches to neck pain described in the literature requires a unified conceptual model for appropriate interpretation of the research evidence. Methods The 12-member Scientific Secretariat of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders critically reviewed and eventually accepted as scientifically admissible a total of 552 scientific papers. The group met face-to-face on 18 occasions and had frequent additional telephone conference meetings over a 6-year period to discuss and interpret this literature and to agree on a conceptual model, which would accommodate findings. Models and definitions published in the scientific literature were discussed and repeatedly modified until the model and case definitions presented here were finally approved by the group. Results Our new conceptual model is centered on the person with neck pain or who is at risk for neck pain. Neck pain is viewed as an episodic occurrence over a lifetime with variable recovery between episodes. The model outlines the options available to individuals who are dealing with neck pain, along with factors that determine options, choices, and consequences. The short- and long-term impacts of neck pain are also considered. Finally, the model includes a 5-axis classification of neck pain studies based on how subjects were recruited into each study. Conclusion The Scientific Secretariat found the conceptual model helpful in interpreting the available scientific evidence. We believe it can assist people with neck pain, researchers, clinicians, and policy makers in framing their questions and decisions.

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To undertake a best evidence synthesis on course and prognosis of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Summary of Background Data Knowing the course of neck pain guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning public policies, formulating interventions, and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the burden of neck pain. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Findings from studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were abstracted into evidence tables and included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles on the course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After critical review, 70 (31%) of these were accepted on scientific merit. Six studies related to course and 7 to prognostic factors in the general population. Between half and three quarters of persons in these populations with current neck pain will report neck pain again 1 to 5 years later. Younger age predicted better outcome. General exercise was unassociated with outcome, although regular bicycling predicted poor outcome in 1 study. Psychosocial factors, including psychologic health, coping patterns, and need to socialize, were the strongest prognostic factors. Several potential prognostic factors have not been well studied, including degenerative changes, genetic factors, and compensation policies. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for this symptom. General exercise was not prognostic of better outcome; however, several psychosocial factors were prognostic of outcome.

Study Design Decision analysis. Objective To identify the best treatment for nonspecific neck pain. Summary of Background Data In Canada and the United States, the most commonly prescribed neck pain treatments are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, and manual therapy. Deciding which treatment is best is difficult because of the trade-offs between beneficial and harmful effects, and because of the uncertainty of these effects. Methods (Quality-adjusted) life expectancy associated with standard NSAIDs, Cox-2 NSAIDs, exercise, mobilization, and manipulation were compared in a decisionanalytic model. Estimates of the course of neck pain, background risk of adverse events in the general population, treatment effectiveness and risk, and patient-preferences were input into the model. Assuming equal effectiveness, we conducted a baseline analysis using risk of harm only. We assessed the stability of the baseline results by conducting a second analysis that incorporated effectiveness data from a high-quality randomized trial. Results There were no important differences across treatments. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the baseline model was 4.5 days of life expectancy and 3.4 quality-adjusted life-days. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the second model was 7.3 quality-adjusted life-days. Conclusion When the objective is to maximize life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy, none of the treatments in our analysis were clearly superior.

Best evidence synthesis. To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize literature from 1980 through 2006 on noninvasive interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders. No comprehensive systematic literature reviews have been published on interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders in the past decade. We systematically searched Medline and screened for relevance literature published from 1980 through 2006 on the use, effectiveness, and safety of noninvasive interventions for neck pain and associated disorders. Consensus decisions were made about the scientific merit of each article; those judged to have adequate internal validity were included in our best evidence synthesis. Of the 359 invasive and noninvasive intervention articles deemed relevant, 170 (47%) were accepted as scientifically admissible, and 139 of these related to noninvasive interventions (including health care utilization, costs, and safety). For whiplash-associated disorders, there is evidence that educational videos, mobilization, and exercises appear more beneficial than usual care or physical modalities. For other neck pain, the evidence suggests that manual and supervised exercise interventions, low-level laser therapy, and perhaps acupuncture are more effective than no treatment, sham, or alternative interventions; however, none of the active treatments was clearly superior to any other in either the short-or long-term. For both whiplash-associated disorders and other neck pain without radicular symptoms, interventions that focused on regaining function as soon as possible are relatively more effective than interventions that do not have such a focus. Our best evidence synthesis suggests that therapies involving manual therapy and exercise are more effective than alternative strategies for patients with neck pain; this was also true of therapies which include educational interventions addressing self-efficacy. Future efforts should focus on the study of noninvasive interventions for patients with radicular symptoms and on the design and evaluation of neck pain prevention strategies.

STUDY DESIGN: Best evidence synthesis. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based guidance to primary care clinicians about how to best assess and treat patients with neck pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a need to translate the results of clinical and epidemiologic studies into meaningful and practical information for clinicians. METHODS: Based on best evidence syntheses of published studies on the risk, prognosis, assessment, and management of people with neck pain and its associated disorders, plus additional research projects and focused literature reviews reported in this supplement, the 12-member multidisciplinary Scientific Secretariat of the Neck Pain Task Force followed a 4-step approach to develop practical guidance for clinicians. RESULTS: The Neck Pain Task Force recommends that people seeking care for neck pain should be triaged into 4 groups: Grade I neck pain with no signs of major pathology and no or little interference with daily activities; Grade II neck pain with no signs of major pathology, but interference with daily activities; Grade III neck pain with neurologic signs of nerve compression; Grade IV neck pain with signs of major pathology. In the emergency room after blunt trauma to the neck, triage should be based on the NEXUS criteria or the Canadian C-spine rule. Those with a high risk of fracture should be further investigated with plain radiographs and/or CT-scan. In ambulatory primary care, triage should be based on history and physical examination alone, including screening for red flags and neurologic examination for signs of radiculopathy. Exercises and mobilization have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain after a motor vehicle collision. Exercises, mobilization, manipulation, analgesics, acupuncture, and low-level laser have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain without trauma. Those with confirmed Grade III and severe persistent radicular symptoms might benefit from corticosteroid injections or surgery. Those with confirmed Grade IV neck pain require management specific to the diagnosed pathology. CONCLUSION: The best available evidence suggests initial assessment for neck pain should focus on triage into 4 grades, and those with common neck pain (Grade I and Grade II) might be offered the listed noninvasive treatments if short-term relief is desired. Language: en

Best evidence synthesis. To undertake a best evidence synthesis on course and prognosis of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Knowing the course of neck pain guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning public policies, formulating interventions, and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the burden of neck pain. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000 –2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Findings fromstudiesmeeting criteria for scientific validity were abstracted into evidence tables and included in a best evidence synthesis. We found 226 articles on the course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After critical review, 70 (31) of these were accepted on scientific merit. Six studies related to course and 7 to prognostic factors in the general population. Between half and three quarters of persons in these populations with current neck pain will report neck pain again 1 to 5 years later. Younger age predicted better outcome. General exercise was unassociated with outcome, although regular bicycling predicted poor outcome in 1 study. Psychosocial factors, including psychologic health, coping patterns, and need to socialize, were the strongest prognostic factors. Several potential prognostic factors have not been well studied, including degenerative changes, genetic factors, and compensation policies. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for this symptom. General exercise was not prognostic of better outcome; however, several psychosocial factors were prognostic of outcome.

Study DesignBest evidence synthesis.ObjectiveTo critically appraise and synthesize the literature on assessment of neck pain.Summary of Background DataThe published literature on assessment of neck pain is large and of variable quality. There have been no prior systematic reviews of this literature.MethodsThe Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders conducted a critical review of the literature (published 1980- 2006) on assessment tools and screening protocols for traumatic and nontraumatic neck pain.ResultsWe found 359 articles on assessment of neck pain. After critical review, 95 (35%) were judged scientifically admissible. Screening protocols have high predictive values to detect cervical spine fracture in alert, low-risk patients seeking emergency care after blunt neck trauma. Computerized tomography (CT) scans had better validity (in adults and elderly) than radiographs in assessing high-risk and/or multi-injured blunt trauma neck patients. In the absence of serious pathology, clinical physical examinations are more predictive at excluding than confirming structural lesions causing neurologic compression. One exception is the manual provocation test for cervical radiculopathy, which has high positive predictive value. There was no evidence that specific MRI findings are associated with neck pain, cervicogenic headache, or whiplash exposure. No evidence supports using cervical provocative discography, anesthetic facet, or medial branch blocks in evaluating neck pain. Reliable and valid self-report questionnaires are useful in assessing pain, function, disability, and psychosocial status in individuals with neck pain.ConclusionThe scientific evidence supports screening protocols in emergency care for low-risk patients; and CT-scans for high-risk patients with blunt trauma to the neck. In nonemergency neck pain without radiculopathy, the validity of most commonly used objective tests is lacking. There is support for subjective self-report assessment in monitoring patients’ course, response to treatment, and in clinical research.

Study design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To report on gaps in the literature and make methodologic recommendations based on our review of the literature on frequency and risk factors, assessment, intervention, and course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders. Summary of background data The scientific literature on neck pain is large and of variable quality. We reviewed 1203 studies and judged 46% to be of sufficient scientific validity to be included in the best evidence synthesis. Scientific quality varied across study topics, and fundamental questions remain about important issues. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We outline a large number of gaps in the current literature. For example, we found important gaps in our knowledge about neck pain in children (risk factors, screening criteria to rule out serious injury, management, course and prognosis); and in the prevention of neck pain-related activity limitations. Few studies addressed the impact of culture or social policies (such as governmental health policies or insurance compensation policies) on neck pain. A number of important questions remain about the effectiveness of commonly used interventions for neck pain. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for whiplash-associated disorders. We identify a number of gaps in the current knowledge, and provide recommendations for the conduct of future studies.

STUDY DESIGN: Best evidence synthesis. OBJECTIVE: To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in Grades I-III whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Knowledge of the course of recovery of WAD guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning management and intervention strategies and effective compensation policies to decrease the burden of WAD. METHODS: The Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. RESULTS: We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 47 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in WAD. The evidence suggests that approximately 50% of those with WAD will report neck pain symptoms 1 year after their injuries. Greater initial pain, more symptoms, and greater initial disability predicted slower recovery. Few factors related to the collision itself (for example, direction of the collision, headrest type) were prognostic; however, postinjury psychological factors such as passive coping style, depressed mood, and fear of movement were prognostic for slower or less complete recovery. There is also preliminary evidence that the prevailing compensation system is prognostic for recovery in WAD. CONCLUSION: The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for WAD. Recovery of WAD seems to be multifactorial. Language: en

STUDY DESIGN. Systematic review. OBJECTIVE. To determine whether results and conclusions on the effectiveness of exercise for workers with neck pain vary with the Cochrane Back Review Group Guidelines and best-evidence synthesis review methods. To identify methodologic weaknesses associated with these review methods that may impact on the validity of their results. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. The Cochrane Back Review Group Guidelines and best-evidence synthesis have different approaches to appraising trial quality and incorporating quality into data synthesis. The impact of different review methods on the reproducibility and validity of review results is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS. Systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, without language restrictions. Twelve trials were selected. Two review methods were used to appraise trial quality and to incorporate quality into data synthesis. As recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group Guidelines, trials were assigned quality scores using a scale. Results of all 12 trials were stratified into levels of evidence according to their scores. Based on these results, no treatment recommendation could be formulated. Best-evidence synthesis critically appraised methodology; trials were accepted on the strength of their scientific merit or rejected due to risk of bias. According to the 4 trials accepted for best-evidence synthesis, workers should be activated with exercise given its beneficial effect on patient-perceived recovery. Both the Cochrane Back Review Group Guidelines and best-evidence synthesis reviews were found to have weaknesses associated with their methods. CONCLUSIONS. Review results and conclusions are sensitive to methods for appraising trial quality and incorporating quality into data synthesis when the evidence consists largely of low-quality trials. Both the Cochrane Back Review Group Guidelines and best-evidence synthesis methods were found to have strengths and methodologic weaknesses that healthcare decision-makers should be aware of when interpreting systematic reviews. © 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Background Context Whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) and neck pain and associated disorders (NAD) are prevalent conditions that impact society and impose a significant economic burden on health-care systems. Health economic evidence on WAD and NAD interventions has been sparse: only three economic evaluations of interventions for NAD were identified by the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders (NPTF). An updated overview is needed to inform health-care policy and guidelines. Purpose This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of interventions for grades I–III WAD and NAD in children and adults. Study Design Systematic review of health economic literature, best-evidence synthesis. Methods We systematically searched CINAHL, the Cochrane economic databases (Health Technology Assessment, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), EconLit, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Tufts CEA Registry from 2000 to 2015 for economic evaluations of WAD and NAD interventions. We appraised relevant evaluations using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network Methodology Criteria for Economic Evaluations. We extracted data, including mean costs (standardized to 2013 Canadian dollars [CAD]) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), from studies with adequate methodological quality. We recalculated cost-effectiveness statistics based on the standardized currency using a willingness-to-pay of CAD $50,000 per additional QALY. Funding was provided by the Ministry of Finance. Results Our search identified 1,616 citations. Six studies fulfilled our selection criteria, including three studies previously reviewed by the NPTF. Structured education appears cost-effective for adults with WAD. For adults with NAD, acupuncture added to routine medical care; manual therapy; multimodal care that includes manual therapy; advice and exercise; and psychological care using cognitive-behavioral therapy appear cost-effective. In contrast, adding manual therapy or diathermy to advice and exercise; multimodal care by a physiotherapist or physician; and behavioral-graded activity do not appear cost-effective for adults with NAD. Conclusions Our review adds to the findings of the NPTF. Recent evidence suggests that structured education is cost-effective for WAD, whereas advice and exercise and multimodal care that include manual therapy are cost-effective for NAD. Obtaining more robust health economic evidence for non-invasive interventions for WAD and NAD in children and adults remains an essential research priority.

Purpose We conducted a systematic review to critically appraise and synthesize literature on the effectiveness of work disability prevention (WDP) interventions in workers with neck pain, whiplash-associated disorders (WAD), or upper extremity disorders. Methods We searched electronic databases from 1990 to 2012. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Scientifically admissible studies were summarized and synthesized following best-evidence synthesis methodology. Results Of the 6,359 articles retrieved, 16 randomized controlled trials were eligible for critical appraisal and five were admissible. We found that a return-to-work coordination program (including workplace-based work hardening) was superior to clinic-based work hardening for persistent rotator cuff tendinitis. Workplace high-intensity strength training and workplace advice had similar outcomes for neck and shoulder pain. Mensendieck/Cesar postural exercises and strength and fitness exercises had similar outcomes for non-specific work-related upper limb complaints. Adding a brief job stress education program to a workplace ergonomic intervention was not beneficial for persistent upper extremity symptoms. Adding computer-prompted work breaks to ergonomic adjustments and workplace education benefited workers’ recovery from recent work-related neck and upper extremity complaints. Conclusions At present, no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness of WDP interventions for managing neck pain, WAD, and upper extremity disorders. Our review suggests a return-to-work coordination program is more effective than clinic-based work hardening. Also, adding computer-prompted breaks to ergonomic and workplace interventions benefits workers’ recovery. The current quality of evidence does not allow for a definitive evaluation of the effectiveness of ergonomic interventions.

Background Multi-disciplinary heart failure (HF) clinics have been shown to improve outcomes for HF patients in randomized clinical trials. However, it is unclear how widely available specialized HF clinics are in Ontario. Also, the service models of current clinics have not been described. It is therefore uncertain whether the efficacy of HF clinics in trials is generalizable to the HF clinics currently operating in the province. Methods As part of a comprehensive evaluation of HF clinics in Ontario, we performed an environmental scan to identify all HF clinics operating in 2010. A semi-structured interview was conducted to understand the scope of practice. The intensity and complexity of care offered were quantified through the use of a validated instrument, and clinics were categorized as high, medium or low intensity clinics. Results We identified 34 clinics with 143 HF physicians. We found substantial regional disparity in access to care across the province. The majority of HF physicians were cardiologists (81%), with 81% of the clinics physically based in hospitals, of which 26% were academic centers. There was a substantial range in the complexity of services offered, most notably in the intensity of education and medication management services offered. All the clinics focused on ambulatory care, with only one having an in-patient focus. None of the HF clinics had a home-based component to care. Conclusions Multiple HF clinics are currently operating in Ontario with a wide spectrum of care models. Further work is necessary to understand which components lead to improved patient outcomes.

Background Quality indicators in coronary heart disease (CHD) measure the practice gap between optimal care and current clinical practice. However, the potential impact of achieving quality indicator benchmarks remains unknown. Methods Using a validated, epidemiologic model of CHD in Ontario, Canada, we estimated the potential impact on mortality of improved utilization on CHD quality indicators from 2005 levels to recommend benchmark utilization of 90%. Eight CHD disease subgroups were evaluated, including inpatients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute coronary syndromes, and heart failure, in addition to ambulatory patients who were post-acute myocardial infarction survivors, or had heart failure, chronic stable angina, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. The primary outcome was the predicted mortality reduction associated with meeting quality indicator targets for each CHD subgroup-treatment combination. Results In 2005, there were 10,060 CHD deaths in Ontario, representing an age-adjusted CHD mortality of 191 per 100,000 people. By meeting quality indicator utilization benchmarks, mortality could be potentially reduced by approximately 20% (95% confidence interval 17.8-21.1), representing approximately 1960 avoidable deaths. The bulk of this potential benefit was in ambulatory patients with chronic stable angina (36% of reduction) and heart failure (31% of reduction). The biggest drivers were optimizing angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use in chronic stable angina patients (approximately 440 avoidable deaths) and β-blocker use in heart failure (approximately 400 avoidable deaths). Conclusions These findings reinforce the importance of quality indicators and could aid policy makers in prioritizing strategies to meet the goals outlined in the Canadian Heart Health Strategy and Action Plan for reducing cardiovascular mortality.

Background Whiplash injury affects 83% of persons in a traffic collision and leads to whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). A major challenge facing health care decision makers is identifying cost-effective interventions due to lack of economic evidence. Our objective is to compare the cost-effectiveness of: 1) physician-based education and activation, 2) a rehabilitation program developed by Aviva Canada (a group of property and casualty insurance providers), and 3) the legislated standard of care in the Canadian province of Ontario: the Pre-approved Framework Guideline for Whiplash developed by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario. Methods/Design The economic evaluation will use participant-level data from the University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial and will be conducted from the societal perspective over the trial's one-year follow-up. Resource use (costs) will include all health care goods and services, and benefits provided during the trial's 1-year follow-up. The primary health effect will be the quality-adjusted life year. We will identify the most cost-effective intervention using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental net-benefit. Confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will represent uncertainty around these statistics, respectively. A budget impact analysis will assess the total annual impact of replacing the current legislated standard of care with each of the other interventions. An expected value of perfect information will determine the maximum research expenditure Canadian society should be willing to pay for, and inform priority setting in, research of WAD management. Discussion Results will provide health care decision makers with much needed economic evidence on common interventions for acute whiplash management. Trial Registration http://ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00546806 [Trial registry date: October 18, 2007; Date first patient was randomized: February 27, 2008]

Background Specialized multidisciplinary clinics have been shown to reduce mortality in heart failure (HF). Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this model of care delivery. Methods We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis, with a 12-year time horizon, from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-term Care, comparing a standard care cohort, consisting of all patients admitted to hospital with HF in 2005, to a hypothetical cohort treated in HF clinics. Survival curves describing the natural history of HF were constructed using mortality estimates from the Enhanced Feedback for Effective Cardiac Treatment (EFFECT) study. Survival benefits and resource uptake associated with HF clinics were estimated from a meta-analysis of published trials. HF clinics costs were obtained by costing a representative clinic in Ontario. Health-related costs were determined through linkage to administrative databases. Outcome measures included life expectancy (years), costs (in 2008 Canadian dollars) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results HF clinics were associated with a 29% reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.91) but a 12% increase in hospitalizations (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.92–1.135). The cost of care in HF clinics was $52 per 30 patient-days. Projected life-expectancy of HF clinic patients was 3.91 years, compared to 3.21 years for standard care. The 12-year cumulative cost per patient in the HF clinic group was $66,532 versus $53,638 in the standard care group. The ICER was $18,259/life-year gained. Conclusions HF clinics appear to be a cost effective way of delivering ambulatory care to HF patients.