A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies

C. E. Dionne, Kate M. Dunn, Peter R. Croft, Alf L. Nachemson, Rachelle Buchbinder, Bruce F. Walker, Mary Wyatt, J. David Cassidy, Michel Rossignol, Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, Jan Hartvigsen, Päivi Leino-Arjas, Ute Latza, Shmuel Reis, Maria Teresa Gil del Rea, Francisco M. Kovacs, Birgitta Öberg, Christine Cedraschi, Lex M. Bouter, Bart W. KoesH. Susan J. Picavet, Maurits W. Van Tulder, Kim Burton, Nadine E. Foster, Gary J. MacFarlane, Elaine Thomas, Martin Underwood, Gordon Waddell, Paul Shekelle, Ernest Volinn, Michael Von Korff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

313 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN. A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries. OBJECTIVE. To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies. METHODS. Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76%). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article. RESULTS. Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs. CONCLUSION. These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)95-103
Number of pages9
JournalSpine
Volume33
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2008

Fingerprint

Back Pain
Low Back Pain
Cross-Sectional Studies
Delphi Technique
Sciatica
Research
Population
Primary Health Care
Research Personnel

Cite this

Dionne, C. E., Dunn, K. M., Croft, P. R., Nachemson, A. L., Buchbinder, R., Walker, B. F., ... Von Korff, M. (2008). A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies. Spine, 33(1), 95-103. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94
Dionne, C. E. ; Dunn, Kate M. ; Croft, Peter R. ; Nachemson, Alf L. ; Buchbinder, Rachelle ; Walker, Bruce F. ; Wyatt, Mary ; Cassidy, J. David ; Rossignol, Michel ; Leboeuf-Yde, Charlotte ; Hartvigsen, Jan ; Leino-Arjas, Päivi ; Latza, Ute ; Reis, Shmuel ; Gil del Rea, Maria Teresa ; Kovacs, Francisco M. ; Öberg, Birgitta ; Cedraschi, Christine ; Bouter, Lex M. ; Koes, Bart W. ; Picavet, H. Susan J. ; Van Tulder, Maurits W. ; Burton, Kim ; Foster, Nadine E. ; MacFarlane, Gary J. ; Thomas, Elaine ; Underwood, Martin ; Waddell, Gordon ; Shekelle, Paul ; Volinn, Ernest ; Von Korff, Michael. / A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies. In: Spine. 2008 ; Vol. 33, No. 1. pp. 95-103.
@article{8cc784a569034615bec628789f9953c2,
title = "A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies",
abstract = "STUDY DESIGN. A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries. OBJECTIVE. To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies. METHODS. Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76{\%}). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article. RESULTS. Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs. CONCLUSION. These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.",
keywords = "Back pain, Definitions, Consensus, Delphi study",
author = "Dionne, {C. E.} and Dunn, {Kate M.} and Croft, {Peter R.} and Nachemson, {Alf L.} and Rachelle Buchbinder and Walker, {Bruce F.} and Mary Wyatt and Cassidy, {J. David} and Michel Rossignol and Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde and Jan Hartvigsen and P{\"a}ivi Leino-Arjas and Ute Latza and Shmuel Reis and {Gil del Rea}, {Maria Teresa} and Kovacs, {Francisco M.} and Birgitta {\"O}berg and Christine Cedraschi and Bouter, {Lex M.} and Koes, {Bart W.} and Picavet, {H. Susan J.} and {Van Tulder}, {Maurits W.} and Kim Burton and Foster, {Nadine E.} and MacFarlane, {Gary J.} and Elaine Thomas and Martin Underwood and Gordon Waddell and Paul Shekelle and Ernest Volinn and {Von Korff}, Michael",
year = "2008",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "95--103",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

Dionne, CE, Dunn, KM, Croft, PR, Nachemson, AL, Buchbinder, R, Walker, BF, Wyatt, M, Cassidy, JD, Rossignol, M, Leboeuf-Yde, C, Hartvigsen, J, Leino-Arjas, P, Latza, U, Reis, S, Gil del Rea, MT, Kovacs, FM, Öberg, B, Cedraschi, C, Bouter, LM, Koes, BW, Picavet, HSJ, Van Tulder, MW, Burton, K, Foster, NE, MacFarlane, GJ, Thomas, E, Underwood, M, Waddell, G, Shekelle, P, Volinn, E & Von Korff, M 2008, 'A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies', Spine, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 95-103. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94

A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies. / Dionne, C. E.; Dunn, Kate M.; Croft, Peter R.; Nachemson, Alf L.; Buchbinder, Rachelle; Walker, Bruce F.; Wyatt, Mary; Cassidy, J. David; Rossignol, Michel; Leboeuf-Yde, Charlotte; Hartvigsen, Jan; Leino-Arjas, Päivi; Latza, Ute; Reis, Shmuel; Gil del Rea, Maria Teresa; Kovacs, Francisco M.; Öberg, Birgitta; Cedraschi, Christine; Bouter, Lex M.; Koes, Bart W.; Picavet, H. Susan J.; Van Tulder, Maurits W.; Burton, Kim; Foster, Nadine E.; MacFarlane, Gary J.; Thomas, Elaine; Underwood, Martin; Waddell, Gordon; Shekelle, Paul; Volinn, Ernest; Von Korff, Michael.

In: Spine, Vol. 33, No. 1, 01.01.2008, p. 95-103.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies

AU - Dionne, C. E.

AU - Dunn, Kate M.

AU - Croft, Peter R.

AU - Nachemson, Alf L.

AU - Buchbinder, Rachelle

AU - Walker, Bruce F.

AU - Wyatt, Mary

AU - Cassidy, J. David

AU - Rossignol, Michel

AU - Leboeuf-Yde, Charlotte

AU - Hartvigsen, Jan

AU - Leino-Arjas, Päivi

AU - Latza, Ute

AU - Reis, Shmuel

AU - Gil del Rea, Maria Teresa

AU - Kovacs, Francisco M.

AU - Öberg, Birgitta

AU - Cedraschi, Christine

AU - Bouter, Lex M.

AU - Koes, Bart W.

AU - Picavet, H. Susan J.

AU - Van Tulder, Maurits W.

AU - Burton, Kim

AU - Foster, Nadine E.

AU - MacFarlane, Gary J.

AU - Thomas, Elaine

AU - Underwood, Martin

AU - Waddell, Gordon

AU - Shekelle, Paul

AU - Volinn, Ernest

AU - Von Korff, Michael

PY - 2008/1/1

Y1 - 2008/1/1

N2 - STUDY DESIGN. A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries. OBJECTIVE. To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies. METHODS. Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76%). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article. RESULTS. Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs. CONCLUSION. These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.

AB - STUDY DESIGN. A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries. OBJECTIVE. To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies. METHODS. Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76%). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article. RESULTS. Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs. CONCLUSION. These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.

KW - Back pain

KW - Definitions

KW - Consensus

KW - Delphi study

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=37649021179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94

DO - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94

M3 - Article

C2 - 18165754

AN - SCOPUS:37649021179

VL - 33

SP - 95

EP - 103

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - 1

ER -

Dionne CE, Dunn KM, Croft PR, Nachemson AL, Buchbinder R, Walker BF et al. A Consensus Approach Toward the Standardization of Back Pain Definitions for Use in Prevalence Studies. Spine. 2008 Jan 1;33(1):95-103. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e7f94