Stratified care integrated with eHealth versus usual primary care physiotherapy in patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neck and shoulder complaints are common in primary care physiotherapy. These patients experience pain and disability, resulting in high societal costs due to, for example, healthcare use and work absence. Content and intensity of physiotherapy care can be matched to a patient's risk of persistent disabling pain. Mode of care delivery can be matched to the patient's suitability for blended care (integrating eHealth with physiotherapy sessions). It is hypothesized that combining these two approaches to stratified care (referred to from this point as Stratified Blended Approach) will improve the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints compared to usual physiotherapy. METHODS: This paper presents the protocol of a multicenter, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster randomized controlled trial. A total of 92 physiotherapists will be recruited from Dutch primary care physiotherapy practices. Physiotherapy practices will be randomized to the Stratified Blended Approach arm or usual physiotherapy arm by a computer-generated random sequence table using SPSS (1:1 allocation). Number of physiotherapists (1 or > 1) will be used as a stratification variable. A total of 238 adults consulting with neck and/or shoulder complaints will be recruited to the trial by the physiotherapy practices. In the Stratified Blended Approach arm, physiotherapists will match I) the content and intensity of physiotherapy care to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain, categorized as low, medium or high (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool) and II) the mode of care delivery to the patient's suitability and willingness to receive blended care. The control arm will receive physiotherapy as usual. Neither physiotherapists nor patients in the control arm will be informed about the Stratified Blended Approach arm. The primary outcome is region-specific pain and disability (combined score of Shoulder Pain and Disability Index & Neck Pain and Disability Scale) over 9 months. Effectiveness will be compared using linear mixed models. An economic evaluation will be performed from the societal and healthcare perspective. DISCUSSION: The trial will be the first to provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Stratified Blended Approach compared with usual physiotherapy in patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NL8249 . Officially registered since 27 December 2019. Date of first enrollment: 30 September 2020. Study status: ongoing, data collection.

Reconsideration of the scheme of the international classification of functioning, disability and health: incentives from the Netherlands for a global debate.

PURPOSE: The ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health) framework (used worldwide to describe 'functioning' and 'disability'), including the ICF scheme (visualization of functioning as result of interaction with health condition and contextual factors), needs reconsideration. The purpose of this article is to discuss alternative ICF schemes. METHOD: Reconsideration of ICF via literature review and discussions with 23 Dutch ICF experts. Twenty-six experts were invited to rank the three resulting alternative schemes. RESULTS: The literature review provided five themes: 1) societal developments; 2) health and research influences; 3) conceptualization of health; 4) models/frameworks of health and disability; and 5) ICF-criticism (e.g. position of 'health condition' at the top and role of 'contextual factors'). Experts concluded that the ICF scheme gives the impression that the medical perspective is dominant instead of the biopsychosocial perspective. Three alternative ICF schemes were ranked by 16 (62%) experts, resulting in one preferred scheme. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a new ICF scheme, better reflecting the ICF framework, for further (inter)national consideration. These Dutch schemes should be reviewed on a global scale, to develop a scheme that is more consistent with current and foreseen developments and changing ideas on health. Implications for Rehabilitation We propose policy makers on community, regional and (inter)national level to consider the use of the alternative schemes of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health within their plans to promote functioning and health of their citizens and researchers and teachers to incorporate the alternative schemes into their research and education to emphasize the biopsychosocial paradigm. We propose to set up an international Delphi procedure involving citizens (including patients), experts in healthcare, occupational care, research, education and policy, and planning to get consensus on an alternative scheme of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. We recommend to discuss the alternatives for the present scheme of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in the present update and revision process within the World Health Organization as a part of the discussion on the future of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework (including ontology, title and relation with the International Classification of Diseases). We recommend to revise the definition of personal factors and to draft a list of personal factors that can be used in policy making, clinical practice, research, and education and to put effort in the revision of the present list of environmental factors to make it more useful in, e.g., occupational health care.

Burden of Sickness Absence Due to Chronic Disease in the Dutch Workforce from 2007 to 2011.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic diseases are associated with productivity loss costs due to sickness absence. It is not always clear, however, which chronic diseases in particular are involved with how many sickness days and associated costs. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence, additional days of sickness absence, and associated costs of chronic diseases among the Dutch working population from 2007 to 2011. METHODS: Prevalence of chronic diseases and additional days of sickness absence were derived from the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey (NWCS) from 2007 to 2011. The cost of each sickness absence day was based on linked personal income data. We used multiple regression analysis to derive the unconfounded additional days of sickness absence due to each chronic disease. RESULTS: Annually, approximately 37 % of the Dutch working population reported some type of chronic physical or psychological disease. No clinically relevant changes in prevalence of specific chronic diseases were observed in the studied period, nor in the number of additional sickness absence days or associated costs. The national financial burden due to sickness absence associated with chronic musculoskeletal disorders amounted to €1.3 billion annually. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic diseases result in substantial productivity loss due to sickness absence. Given the ageing population, the proposed increase in the state pension age and an increase in sedentary lifestyle and obesity, the prevalence of chronic diseases may be expected to rise. Coordinated efforts to maintain and improve the health of the working population are necessary to minimize socioeconomic consequences.

Prediction of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in the general population: identification of high-risk groups.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Because of a low prevalence of severe carotid stenosis in the general population, screening for presence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) is not warranted. Possibly, for certain subgroups, screening is worthwhile. The present study aims to develop prediction rules for the presence of ACAS (>50% and >70%). METHODS: Individual participant data from 4 population-based cohort studies (Malmö Diet and Cancer Study, Tromsø Study, Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study, and Cardiovascular Health Study; totaling 23 706 participants) were pooled. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine which variables predict presence of ACAS (>50% and >70%). Calibration and discrimination of the models were assessed, and bootstrapping was used to correct for overfitting. RESULTS: Age, sex, history of vascular disease, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein ratio, diabetes mellitus, and current smoking were predictors of stenosis (>50% and >70%). The calibration of the model was good confirmed by a nonsignificant Hosmer and Lemeshow test for moderate (P=0.59) and severe stenosis (P=0.07). The models discriminated well between participants with and without stenosis, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve corrected for over optimism of 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.84) for moderate stenosis and of 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.90) for severe stenosis. The regression coefficients of the predictors were converted into a score chart to facilitate practical application. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical prediction rule was developed that allows identification of subgroups with high prevalence of moderate (>50%) and severe (>70%) ACAS. When confirmed in comparable cohorts, application of the prediction rule may lead to a reduction in the number needed to screen for ACAS.

Prevalence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in the general population: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In the discussion on the cost-effectiveness of screening, precise estimates of severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis are vital. Accordingly, we assessed the prevalence of moderate and severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis by age and sex using pooled cohort data. METHODS: We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis (23 706 participants) of 4 population-based studies (Malmö Diet and Cancer Study, Tromsø, Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study, and Cardiovascular Health Study). Outcomes of interest were asymptomatic moderate (> or =50%) and severe carotid stenosis (> or =70%). RESULTS: Prevalence of moderate asymptomatic carotid stenosis ranged from 0.2% (95% CI, 0.0% to 0.4%) in men aged <50 years to 7.5% (5.2% to 10.5%) in men aged > or =80 years. For women, this prevalence increased from 0% (0% to 0.2%) to 5.0% (3.1% to 7.5%). Prevalence of severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis ranged from 0.1% (0.0% to 0.3%) in men aged <50 years to 3.1% (1.7% to 5.3%) in men aged > or =80. For women, this prevalence increased from 0% (0.0% to 0.2%) to 0.9% (0.3% to 2.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis in the general population ranges from 0% to 3.1%, which is useful information in the discussion on the cost-effectiveness of screening.

Prevalence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis according to age and sex: systematic review and metaregression analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In the discussion on the value of population-wide screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS), reliable prevalence estimates are crucial. We set out to provide reliable age- and sex-specific prevalence estimates of ACAS through a systematic literature review and meta-regression analysis. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EmBase until December 2007 for studies that reported the prevalence of ACAS in a population free of symptomatic carotid artery disease. Data were extracted with use of a standardized form on participants' characteristics, assessment method, study quality, and prevalence estimates for moderate (>or=50% stenosis) and severe (>or=70% stenosis) ACAS. Metaregression was used to investigate sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Forty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There was considerable variation among studies with respect to demographics, methods of grading stenosis, and stenosis cutoff point used. The pooled prevalence of moderate stenosis was 4.2% (95% CI, 3.1% to 5.7%). Prevalence of moderate stenosis among people age <70 years was 4.8% (95% CI, 3.1% to 7.3%) in men and 2.2% (95% CI, 0.9% to 4.9%) in women. Among those >or=70 years, prevalence increased to 12.5% (95% CI, 7.4% to 20.3%) in men and to 6.9% (95% CI, 4.0% to 11.5%) in women. Metaregression showed that both age and sex significantly affected the prevalence of moderate stenosis. No contribution of study size, publication year, geographic region, assessment method, and study quality was found. The pooled prevalence of severe stenosis was 1.7% (95% CI, 0.7% to 3.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of moderate stenosis increases with age in both men and women, but men at all ages have the higher prevalence estimates. The number of studies that allowed meaningful data synthesis of severe stenosis was limited.