Advanced search
1 file | 725.44 KB Add to list

Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults : a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies

(2019) PAIN REPORTS. 4(5).
Author
Organization
Abstract
Screening tools allowing to predict poor pain outcomes are widely used. Often these screening tools contain psychosocial risk factors. This review (1) identifies multidimensional screening tools that include psychosocial risk factors for the development or maintenance of pain, pain-related distress, and pain-related disability across pain problems in adults, (2) evaluates the quality of the validation studies using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST), and (3) synthesizes methodological concerns. We identified 32 articles, across 42 study samples, validating 7 screening tools. All tools were developed in the context of musculoskeletal pain, most often back pain, and aimed to predict the maintenance of pain or pain-related disability, not pain-related distress. Although more recent studies design, conduct, analyze, and report according to best practices in prognosis research, risk of bias was most often moderate. Common methodological concerns were identified, related to participant selection (eg, mixed populations), predictors (eg, predictors were administered differently to predictors in the development study), outcomes (eg, overlap between predictors and outcomes), sample size and participant flow (eg, unknown or inappropriate handling of missing data), and analysis (eg, wide variety of performance measures). Recommendations for future research are provided.
Keywords
Multidimensional screening, Yellow flags, Pain, Risk of bias

Downloads

  • Veirman et al. 2019 - Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults.pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 725.44 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Veirman, Elke, et al. “Multidimensional Screening for Predicting Pain Problems in Adults : A Systematic Review of Screening Tools and Validation Studies.” PAIN REPORTS, vol. 4, no. 5, 2019, doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000775.
APA
Veirman, E., Van Ryckeghem, D., De Paepe, A., Kirtley, O., & Crombez, G. (2019). Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults : a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies. PAIN REPORTS, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000775
Chicago author-date
Veirman, Elke, Dimitri Van Ryckeghem, Annick De Paepe, Olivia Kirtley, and Geert Crombez. 2019. “Multidimensional Screening for Predicting Pain Problems in Adults : A Systematic Review of Screening Tools and Validation Studies.” PAIN REPORTS 4 (5). https://doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000775.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Veirman, Elke, Dimitri Van Ryckeghem, Annick De Paepe, Olivia Kirtley, and Geert Crombez. 2019. “Multidimensional Screening for Predicting Pain Problems in Adults : A Systematic Review of Screening Tools and Validation Studies.” PAIN REPORTS 4 (5). doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000775.
Vancouver
1.
Veirman E, Van Ryckeghem D, De Paepe A, Kirtley O, Crombez G. Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults : a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies. PAIN REPORTS. 2019;4(5).
IEEE
[1]
E. Veirman, D. Van Ryckeghem, A. De Paepe, O. Kirtley, and G. Crombez, “Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults : a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies,” PAIN REPORTS, vol. 4, no. 5, 2019.
@article{8632898,
  abstract     = {{Screening tools allowing to predict poor pain outcomes are widely used. Often these screening tools contain psychosocial risk factors. This review (1) identifies multidimensional screening tools that include psychosocial risk factors for the development or maintenance of pain, pain-related distress, and pain-related disability across pain problems in adults, (2) evaluates the quality of the validation studies using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST), and (3) synthesizes methodological concerns. We identified 32 articles, across 42 study samples, validating 7 screening tools. All tools were developed in the context of musculoskeletal pain, most often back pain, and aimed to predict the maintenance of pain or pain-related disability, not pain-related distress. Although more recent studies design, conduct, analyze, and report according to best practices in prognosis research, risk of bias was most often moderate. Common methodological concerns were identified, related to participant selection (eg, mixed populations), predictors (eg, predictors were administered differently to predictors in the development study), outcomes (eg, overlap between predictors and outcomes), sample size and participant flow (eg, unknown or inappropriate handling of missing data), and analysis (eg, wide variety of performance measures). Recommendations for future research are provided.}},
  articleno    = {{e775}},
  author       = {{Veirman, Elke and Van Ryckeghem, Dimitri and De Paepe, Annick and Kirtley, Olivia and Crombez, Geert}},
  issn         = {{2471-2531}},
  journal      = {{PAIN REPORTS}},
  keywords     = {{Multidimensional screening,Yellow flags,Pain,Risk of bias}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{5}},
  title        = {{Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults : a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000000775}},
  volume       = {{4}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric