IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0104226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Nijmegen Decision Tool for Chronic Low Back Pain. Development of a Clinical Decision Tool for Secondary or Tertiary Spine Care Specialists

Author

Listed:
  • Miranda L van Hooff
  • Jan van Loon
  • Jacques van Limbeek
  • Marinus de Kleuver

Abstract

Background: In Western Europe, low back pain has the greatest burden of all diseases. When back pain persists, different medical specialists are involved and a lack of consensus exists among these specialists for medical decision-making in Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP). Objective: To develop a decision tool for secondary or tertiary spine care specialists to decide which patients with CLBP should be seen by a spine surgeon or by other non-surgical medical specialists. Methods: A Delphi study was performed to identify indicators predicting the outcome of interventions. In the preparatory stage evidence from international guidelines and literature were summarized. Eligible studies were reviews and longitudinal studies. Inclusion criteria: surgical or non-surgical interventions and persistence of complaints, CLBP-patients aged 18–65 years, reported baseline measures of predictive indicators, and one or more reported outcomes had to assess functional status, quality of life, pain intensity, employment status or a composite score. Subsequently, a three-round Delphi procedure, to reach consensus on candidate indicators, was performed among a multidisciplinary panel of 29 CLBP-professionals (>five years CLBP-experience). The pre-set threshold for general agreement was ≥70%. The final indicator set was used to develop a clinical decision tool. Results: A draft list with 53 candidate indicators (38 with conclusive evidence and 15 with inconclusive evidence) was included for the Delphi study. Consensus was reached to include 47 indicators. A first version of the decision tool was developed, consisting of a web-based screening questionnaire and a provisional decision algorithm. Conclusions: This is the first clinical decision tool based on current scientific evidence and formal multidisciplinary consensus that helps referring the patient for consultation to a spine surgeon or a non-surgical spine care specialist. We expect that this tool considerably helps in clinical decision-making spine care, thereby improving efficient use of scarce sources and the outcomes of spinal interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Miranda L van Hooff & Jan van Loon & Jacques van Limbeek & Marinus de Kleuver, 2014. "The Nijmegen Decision Tool for Chronic Low Back Pain. Development of a Clinical Decision Tool for Secondary or Tertiary Spine Care Specialists," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0104226
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104226
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0104226
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0104226&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0104226?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rym Boulkedid & Hendy Abdoul & Marine Loustau & Olivier Sibony & Corinne Alberti, 2011. "Using and Reporting the Delphi Method for Selecting Healthcare Quality Indicators: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-9, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Melanie Kleynen & Susy M Braun & Michel H Bleijlevens & Monique A Lexis & Sascha M Rasquin & Jos Halfens & Mark R Wilson & Anna J Beurskens & Rich S W Masters, 2014. "Using a Delphi Technique to Seek Consensus Regarding Definitions, Descriptions and Classification of Terms Related to Implicit and Explicit Forms of Motor Learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    2. Tracey Smythe & Andrew Wainwright & Allen Foster & Christopher Lavy, 2017. "What is a good result after clubfoot treatment? A Delphi-based consensus on success by regional clubfoot trainers from across Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-9, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0104226. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.