Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31004195›Full record

ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2019

Development of a standard set of outcome measures for non-specific low back pain in Dutch primary care physiotherapy practices: a Delphi study.

A C Verburg, S A van Dulmen, H Kiers, M W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden, P J van der Wees

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management of Lower Back Pain Associated with Spinal Stenosis: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

A C VerburgRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. koen.verburg@radboudumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-4068-8228
S A van DulmenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
H KiersInstitute for Human Movement Studies, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M W G Nijhuis-van der SandenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
P J van der WeesRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a clinical standard set of outcome measures that are accepted for relevance and feasibility by stakeholders and useful for (a) interaction between patient and the professional, e.g. shared decision-making in goal-setting, monitoring and feedback based on outcomes, (b) internal quality improvement, and (c) external transparency in patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) in primary care physical therapy.

methodsWe used a consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA Delphi method in seven steps with panellists (patients, representatives of patient and physiotherapy associations, researchers, policy makers, health insurers): (1) literature search, (2) first online survey, (3) patient interviews, (4) an experts meeting, (5) a consensus meeting, (6) second online survey, and (7) final approval of an advisory board. Steps 1-4 resulted in potential outcome measures. In the consensus meeting after discussion panellists voted for inclusion per measure. In the second online survey the final standard set was rated on relevance and feasibility on a 9-point Likert scale; when the median score was ≥ 7, the standard set was accepted and finally approved.

resultsThirteen draft outcome measures were rated and discussed, and finally, six outcome measures were accepted. The standard set includes the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Global Perceived Effect (GPE-DV), and the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT).

conclusionThis study presents a standard set of outcome measures for patients with NSLBP in primary care physiotherapy accepted for relevance and feasibility by stakeholders. The standard set is currently used in daily practice and tested on validity and reliability in a pilot study. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Physical Therapy ModalitiesDecision Making, SharedDelphi TechniqueHumansLow Back PainOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient ParticipationPrimary Health CareProfessional-Patient RelationsQuality ImprovementDelphiNon-specific low back painOutcome measuresPREMsPROMs

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.