You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 8, Issue 11
  • Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Epidemiology
Protocol
Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature review
  1. Lucia Domingues1,2,3,
  2. Eduardo B Cruz2,
  3. Fernando M Pimentel-Santos1,4,5,
  4. Sofia Ramiro1,6,
  5. Helena Donato7,
  6. Santiago Rodrigues Manica1,4,5,
  7. Jill Alison Hayden8,
  8. Rachelle Buchbinder9,
  9. Jaime C Branco1,4,5
  1. 1 Rheumatological Diseases, Centro de Estudos de Doenças Crónicas, Nova Medical School, Lisboa, Portugal
  2. 2 Department of Physiotherapy, Escola Superior de Saúde—Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal
  3. 3 Ambulatory Care Unit, Centro de Medicina e Reabilitação de Alcoitão, Estoril, Portugal
  4. 4 Nova Medical School | Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
  5. 5 Rheumatology Department, Hospital Egas Moniz, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Ocidental, Lisboa, Portugal
  6. 6 Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
  7. 7 Documentation Service, Centro Hospitalar e Universitario de Coimbra EPE, Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
  8. 8 Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  9. 9 Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute and Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Lucia Domingues; lucia.domingues{at}nms.unl.pt

Abstract

Introduction Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding baseline patient characteristics associated with recovery and non-recovery, as defined by measures of pain intensity, disability and global perceived improvement.

Methods and analysis Six electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro Database, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, will be searched, with terms related to the review question such as neck pain, prognostic or predictive research, from inception to 28 September of 2018. Studies will be included if they have investigated an association between patient characteristics and outcomes, with at least one follow-up time point. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. Data from included papers will be extracted using standardised forms, including study and participants’ characteristics, outcomes, prognostic factors and effect size of the association. The risk of bias of each study will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted considering the strength, consistency of results and the methodological quality.

Ethics and dissemination This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal, as a chapter of a doctoral thesis and through presentations at national and international conferences.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42018091183.

  • non-specific neck pain
  • prognostic factors
  • recovery
  • non-recovery

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023356

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors The manuscript protocol was drafted by LD and was revised by EBC, FPdS, JCB, SR, HD, JAH, RB and SRM. LD, EBC, FPdS, SR, JAH, RB, SRM and JCB contributed to the development of the selection criteria, the risk of bias assessment strategy and data extraction criteria. HD will develop the search strategy and manage the study records on Mendeley software. EBC and FPdS will screen the studies obtained in the search for their eligibility criteria. LD and SRM will extract data and assess risk of bias of included studies. JAH and RB will resolve any disagreements regarding eligibility for inclusion, data extraction and/or risk of bias. All authors have read, provided feedback and approved the final protocol. LD is the guarantor of this article.

    • Funding This work is supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior (Portugal) and European Social Funder through a PhD student scholarship with the reference number SFRH/BD/110398/2015. The corresponding author is the student that receives the financial support. RB is funded by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Principal Research Fellowship.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.