TY - JOUR
T1 - Tests for central sensitization in general practice
T2 - a Delphi study
AU - den Boer, Carine
AU - Terluin, Berend
AU - van der Wouden, Johannes C
AU - Blankenstein, Annette H
AU - van der Horst, Henriëtte E
N1 - Funding Information: Christijan Georgiev, MD, participated in the development of the Delphi procedure as medical student. Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - INTRODUCTION: Central sensitization (CS) may explain the persistence of symptoms in patients with chronic pain and persistent physical symptoms (PPS). There is a need for assessing CS in the consultation room. In a recently published systematic review, we made an inventory of tests for CS. In this study we aimed to assess which tests might have added value, might be feasible and thus be suitable for use in general practice.METHODS: We conducted a Delphi study consisting of two e-mail rounds to reach consensus among experts in chronic pain and PPS. We invited 40 national and international experts on chronic pain and PPS, 27 agreed to participate. We selected 12 tests from our systematic review and additional searches; panellists added three more tests in the first round. We asked the panellists, both clinicians and researchers, to rate these 15 tests on technical feasibility for use in general practice, added value and to provide an overall judgement for suitability in general practice.RESULTS: In two rounds the panellists reached consensus on 14 of the 15 tests: three were included, eleven excluded. Included were the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments. No consensus was reached on the Sensory Hypersensitivity Scale.CONCLUSION: In a Delphi study among an international panel of experts, three tests for measuring CS were considered to be suitable for use in general practice: the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments.
AB - INTRODUCTION: Central sensitization (CS) may explain the persistence of symptoms in patients with chronic pain and persistent physical symptoms (PPS). There is a need for assessing CS in the consultation room. In a recently published systematic review, we made an inventory of tests for CS. In this study we aimed to assess which tests might have added value, might be feasible and thus be suitable for use in general practice.METHODS: We conducted a Delphi study consisting of two e-mail rounds to reach consensus among experts in chronic pain and PPS. We invited 40 national and international experts on chronic pain and PPS, 27 agreed to participate. We selected 12 tests from our systematic review and additional searches; panellists added three more tests in the first round. We asked the panellists, both clinicians and researchers, to rate these 15 tests on technical feasibility for use in general practice, added value and to provide an overall judgement for suitability in general practice.RESULTS: In two rounds the panellists reached consensus on 14 of the 15 tests: three were included, eleven excluded. Included were the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments. No consensus was reached on the Sensory Hypersensitivity Scale.CONCLUSION: In a Delphi study among an international panel of experts, three tests for measuring CS were considered to be suitable for use in general practice: the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and monofilaments.
KW - Central sensitization
KW - Chronic pain
KW - Medically unexplained symptoms
KW - Persistent physical symptoms
KW - Tests
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117604568&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01539-0
DO - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01539-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 34666688
SN - 1471-2296
VL - 22
SP - 206
JO - BMC Family Practice
JF - BMC Family Practice
IS - 1
M1 - 206
ER -