Quebec task force Classification of Grades of WAD
This article or area is currently under construction and may only be partially complete. Please come back soon to see the finished work! (29/07/2023)
Original Editor - Kapil Narale
Top Contributors - Kapil Narale
What is the Classification of Grades of WAD[edit | edit source]
The Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD) for grading WAD injuries was developed into a classification system in 1995. [1]
This classification system helps categorise the nature and severity of the WAD injury from information collected during the history and physical examination. This incudes the feeling of pain, decreased range of motion (ROM), point tenderness, neurological signs, and fractures or dislocation. [1]
One study shows that the prognosis worsens with an increase in WAD grade. [1] (cite the actual study as well)
Grades of WAD[edit | edit source]
The following chart outlines the Quebec task force Classification of Grades of WAD: [1]
| Grade | Classification |
|---|---|
| 0 | No complaint about the neck.
No physical sign(s). |
| I | Complaint of neck pain, stiffness or tenderness only
No physical sign(s). |
| II | Neck complaint AND musculoskeletal sign(s).
Musculoskeletal signs include decreased range of motion and point tenderness. |
| III | Neck complaint AND neurological sign(s).
Neurologic signs include decreased or absent deep tendon reflexes, weakness, and sensory deficits. |
| IV | Neck complaint AND fracture or dislocation. |
Reliability and Validity[edit | edit source]
The inter-rater reliability of the Quebec task force classification is unknown . [1]
It is apparent that the reliability of a well-known classification system can greatly vary between clinicians of different experience level, whether the clinician has 2-3 years of experience or 10-20 years of experience. It is likely that individuals with more experience have a better ability at using the classification system due to more exposure. The raters' understanding of the classification system can be different from one another due to clinical experience. The inter-rater reliability may be affected by the interpreter's background, experience, and training. Classifying individuals based on profiles and descriptions rather than in-person classifications would also have a big difference on the interpreted classification. though the classification is determinant on clinical signs. Also the clinician's understanding of the descriptors within the classification system may have an effect on their selection of grades. [1]
The classification by Spitzer et al. (1995) does not specify how to interpret the grades of classification. [1]
Inter-rater reliability can be improved if the initial patient-physician interaction was video recorded. This owuld allow for analysis of facial expressions and emotions. [1]
Resources[edit | edit source]
- bulleted list
- x
or
- numbered list
- x
