Clinical reasoning in unimodal interventions in patients with non-specific neck pain in daily physiotherapy practice, a Delphi study

Maissan, François; Pool, Jan; Stutterheim, Eric; Wittink, Harriët; Ostelo, Raymond

doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2018.06.001

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[12]. Additionally, an international survey reported about approximately 40% of physical therapists (PTs) reported they routinely used the PSFS on patients with neck pain [13], which is in accordance with a recent Delphi study among known experts in the management of cervical spine disorders [14]. However, the psychometric properties of the PSFS on patients with neck pain is conflicting and previous studies have often used small sample sizes [12,15,16].…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

The content and construct validity of the modified patient specific functional scale (PSFS 2.0) in individuals with neck pain

Graaf¹,

Fernández‐de‐las‐Peñas

Cleland

2019

Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study design: Clinical measurement study. Background: The Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is a commonly used outcome measure, however answering options differ and content validity has yet to be assessed. Objective: To assess the content validity of the PSFS in patients with neck pain presenting to a physical therapist. And secondly, to assess the construct validity of the PSFS using the preferred version identified in the content validity study. Methods: The target population consisted of patients with neck pain presenting to physical therapy. First, content validity was assessed through semi structured interviews and content thematic analysis. Second, construct validity was assessed on the PSFS 2.0 by examining its correlation with the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Results: Eleven patients were interviewed. Patients indicated the concept of 'activity limitations' is very important to them. The PSFS is considered to be relevant and easy to understand. Patients had an explicit preference for the PSFS 2.0 version (using a different answering option and example list) and indicated they preferred to answer the PSFS 2.0 together with a clinician. One hundred patients participated in the construct validity study on the PSFS 2.0. The median PSFS 2.0 score was 4.5 and the correlation with the NDI was substantial (0.54). Conclusion:The results of this study indicate that in individuals with neck pain, the PSFS is appropriate however; PSFS 2.0 is the preferred version. The PSFS 2.0 is considered to be valid in terms of content validity and construct validity for patients with neck pain.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

The content and construct validity of the modified patient specific functional scale (PSFS 2.0) in individuals with neck pain

Graaf¹,

Fernández‐de‐las‐Peñas

Cleland

2019

Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was estimated that the pool of experts within the field of CR was limited based on our eligibility criteria, therefore the target sample size aimed to recruit ten or more experts in line with previous publications (Maissan et al, 2018;Orhan et al, 2019). Limited evidence suggests reliability will decline drastically with a panel size of below six while a panel size of above 12 would result in plateauing of reliability (Murphy et al, 1998).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification criteria for cervical radiculopathy: An international e-Delphi study

Lam

Heneghan

Mistry

et al. 2022

Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL and PEDro from inception to September 2018. We used a sensitive search strategy that we used in a previous review (Maissan et al, 2018). To collect all potentially eligible RCTs, the search strategy combined two primary pathways.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Completeness of the description of manipulation and mobilisation techniques in randomized controlled trials in neck pain; A review using the TiDieR checklist

Pool

Maissan

Waele³

et al. 2020

Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

show abstract

Clinical reasoning in unimodal interventions in patients with non-specific neck pain in daily physiotherapy practice, a Delphi study

Abstract: Pain alone is not an indication for physiotherapy. Insight has been obtained into which measurement instruments are used and when they are used. Consensus about sequential linear lines of clinical reasoning was poor.

Cited by 8 publications

References 24 publications

The content and construct validity of the modified patient specific functional scale (PSFS 2.0) in individuals with neck pain

The content and construct validity of the modified patient specific functional scale (PSFS 2.0) in individuals with neck pain

Classification criteria for cervical radiculopathy: An international e-Delphi study

Completeness of the description of manipulation and mobilisation techniques in randomized controlled trials in neck pain; A review using the TiDieR checklist

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About