Classification of Neck Pain
Original Editor - Your name will be added here if you created the original content for this page.
Top Contributors - Rachael Lowe, Kim Jackson, Simisola Ajeyalemi, Jess Bell and Olajumoke Ogunleye
Introduction[edit | edit source]
Classification provides a general framework for identifying subgroups of patients based on the primary goal of treatment, with the ultimate aim of matching indivuals to specific interventions from which they are most likely to benefit[1]. The principle supporting classification systems centres around the following notion: a decrease in uncertainty concerning appropriate, effective treatments could be observed via the linkage of an impairment diagnosis to a treatment choice[2]. Diagnostic algorithms and classification may be beneficial to clinical decision making and allows clinicians to easily identify the correct intervention strategy and predict a patient’s prognosis.
Evidence for the conservative management of neck pain in primary care does not support any particular approach and it remains unclear as to what the most effective method of treatment in terms of costs, time and resolution. As a result there has been a shift from the pathoanatomical model of diagnosis towards the development of prognostic tests that can separate a heterogeneous population into treatment-oriented subgroups that will inform patient management and be cost effective[3][4]. This form of classification provides a general framework for identifying subgroups of patients based on the primary goal of treatment, with the ultimate aim of matching individuals to specific interventions from which they are most likely to benefit[3][5].
Once diagnostic triage has taken place and the individual has been cleared of serious spinal pathology classification can help to guide appropriate treatment intervention.
Classification Types[edit | edit source]
Different classification systems are often used in clinical practice:
Pathoanatomical[edit | edit source]
Structurally based i.e. which structure is dysfunctional. The pathoanatomical model has proven limited for the correlation between diagnosis and clinical decisions regarding treatment management plans because different diagnoses often exhibit similar symptoms[2].
Clinical condition[edit | edit source]
Signs and symptoms based i.e. what condition does the individual have, such as cervical osteoarthritis, cervicogenic headache etc.
Response to movement[edit | edit source]
Symptom response based i.e. how does movement change symptoms, such as with repeated movements and the centralisation phenomenon. Werneke et al[6] suggested categorisation by changes in pain location to mechanical assessment and treatment allowed identification of patients with improved treatment outcomes and facilitated planning of conservative treatment of patients with acute spinal pain syndromes. However, limited inference can be taken from this study as the authors reported pooled data for all participants, of which only 23% had neck pain[7].
Treatment based[edit | edit source]
Proposed Childs et al[3] and supported by Fritz and Brennan[8], the system was based on the goals of treatment and the interventions used to achieve these goals, rather than an attempt to classify patients by pathology or symptom distribution. It was updated in 2008 as part of the APTA Orthopedic section ICF Guidelines with the four current classification categories including: neck pain with mobility deficits, neck pain with radiating pain (radicular), neck pain with movement coordination impairments (WAD), and neck pain with headache (cervicogenic).
Summary[edit | edit source]
Therapists should be aware of the different classification systems that exist. Appropriate use of these systems can guide specific assessment and treatment selection. There has been a shift from the pathoanatomical model of diagnosis towards a more cost effective model that separates a heterogeneous population into treatment-oriented subgroups with matched treatment interventions. The treatment based classification is a widely used system that has been proven to be effective for managing individuals with neck pain[5].
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ Childs MJ, Fritz JM, Piva SR, Whitman JM. Proposal of a classification system for patients with neck pain. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2004 Nov;34(11):686-700.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Wang, W. T. J., Olson, S. L., Campbell, A. H. M., Hanten, W. P., & Gleeson, P. B. (2003). Effectiveness of Physical Therapy for Patients with Neck Pain: An Individualized Approach Using a Clinical Decision-Making Algorithm. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 82(3), 203-218.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Childs MJ, Fritz JM, Piva SR, Whitman JM. Proposal of a classification system for patients with neck pain.Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2004 Nov;34(11):686-700.
- ↑ Childs J, Cleland J, Elliott J, Deydre T, Wainner R, Whitman J, et al. Neck Pain: Clinical Practice Guidelines Linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health From the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(9):A1-A34
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Fritz, J. M., & Brennan, G. P. (2007). Preliminary Examination of a Proposed Treatment-Based Classification System for Patients Receiving Physical Therapy Interventions for Neck Pain. Physical Therapy, 87(5), 513-524.
- ↑ Werneke, M., Hart, D., & Cook, D. (1999). A Descriptive Study of the Centralization Phenomenon: A Prospective Analysis. Spine, 24(7), 676-683.
- ↑ Hing W. Differential Diagnosis and Classification of Neck Pain. WCPT Congress, 2015.
- ↑ Fritz JM, Brennan GP. Preliminary examination of a proposed treatment-based classification system for patients receiving physical therapy interventions for neck pain. Phys Ther. 2007;87(5):513-24
