3.9 Review

Cold hyperalgesia as a prognostic factor in whiplash associated disorders: A systematic review

Journal

MANUAL THERAPY
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages 402-410

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2012.02.014

Keywords

Whiplash; Prognosis; Cold hyperalgesia; Systematic review

Categories

Funding

  1. Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff (UK)
  2. Musculoskeletal Association of Chartered Physiotherapists (MACP)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To review and critically evaluate the existing literature for the prognostic value of cold hyperalgesia in Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD). Methods: Embase, PsycINFO, and Medline databases were systematically searched (from inception to 20th September 2011) for prospective studies investigating a prognostic ability for cold hyperalgesia in WAD. Reference lists and lead authors were cross-referenced. Two independent reviewers selected studies, and consensus was achieved via a third reviewer. The risk of bias in identified studies was systematically evaluated by two reviewers using previously published guidance. The influences of seven potential covariates of cold hyperalgesia were considered. Quantitative synthesis was planned and homogeneity assessed. A modified Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to qualitatively assess trials. Results: The review screened 445 abstracts, from these 20 full text studies were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Six prospective studies on four cohorts were identified and reviewed. Findings from all four cohorts supported cold hyperalgesia as a prognostic factor in WAD. Conclusions: There is moderate evidence supporting cold hyperalgesia as a prognostic factor for long-term pain and disability outcome in WAD. Further validation of the strength of this relationship and the influence of covariates are required. The mechanism for this relationship is unknown. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available