Critical Appraisal of Clinical Prediction Rules That Aim to Optimize Treatment Selection for Musculoskeletal Conditions

Author:

Stanton Tasha R.1,Hancock Mark J.2,Maher Christopher G.3,Koes Bart W.4

Affiliation:

1. T.R. Stanton, BScPT, MScRS, is a PhD candidate, Musculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for International Health, University of Sydney, PO Box M201, Missenden Road, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 2111.

2. M.J. Hancock, BAppSc, PhD, is Lecturer, University of Sydney.

3. C.G. Maher, BAppSc, PhD, is Director, Musculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for International Health, University of Sydney.

4. B.W. Koes, MSc, PhD, is Professor, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Abstract

BackgroundClinical prediction rules (CPRs) for treatment selection in musculoskeletal conditions have become increasingly popular.PurposeThe purposes of this review are: (1) to critically appraise studies evaluating CPRs and (2) to consider the clinical utility and stage of development of each CPR.Data SourcesPertinent databases were searched up to April 2009. Studies aiming to develop or evaluate a CPR for treatment response in musculoskeletal conditions were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted methodological data, stage of development, and effect size information.Study Selection/Data Extraction and SynthesisEighteen studies, evaluating 15 separate CPRs, were included. Fourteen CPRs were at the derivation stage, and all CPRs had been evaluated using a single-arm trial design, thus it is not possible to determine whether the CPRs identify prognosis (regardless of treatment) or specifically response to treatment. The CPR at the validation stage investigated spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for low back pain and had been evaluated in 2 separate well-conducted randomized controlled trials. The first trial demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect of the SMT CPR; the additional effect from SMT in patients “positive-on-the-rule” was 15 Oswestry disability units at week 1 and 9 units at week 4. The second trial showed that the CPR did not generalize to a different clinical setting, including a modified treatment.LimitationsDue to differences in methods of reporting and journal publication restraints (eg, word count restrictions), some quality assessment items may have been completed in the included studies, but not captured in this review.ConclusionsThere is, at present, little evidence that CPRs can be used to predict effects of treatment for musculoskeletal conditions. The principal problem is that most studies use designs that cannot differentiate between predictors of response to treatment and general predictors of outcome. Only 1 CPR has been evaluated within an RCT designed to predict response to treatment. Validation of these rules is imperative to allow clinical application.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3