Rheumatology Advance Access published online on June 24, 2006
Rheumatology, doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel164
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Department of General Practice, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Netherlands Expert Center for Workrelated Musculoskeletal Disorders, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Objectives. To identify predictors of non-recovery in non-traumatic complaints at the arm, neck and shoulder in general practice 6 months after the first consultation. Methods. A prospective cohort study was set in 21 Dutch general practices. Consulters with a first or new episode of non-traumatic arm, neck or shoulder complaints and age 18 through 64 yrs entered the cohort. Complaint, patient, physical, psychosocial and work characteristics were investigated as possible predictors of non-recovery at 6 months using multiple logistic regression analyses (backward Wald). Results. At 6 months, 46% of the total population (n = 612) and 42% of the working subpopulation (n = 473) still reported complaints. Complaint characteristics (long duration of the complaint before consultation, recurrent complaint, musculoskeletal comorbidity and complaint mainly located at wrist or hand) were most predictive of non-recovery followed by psychosocial characteristics (more somatization and experiencing less social support). Having a specific diagnosis was associated with recovery. In the working subpopulation, the same variables were predictors of non-recovery. Additionally, low supervisory support was associated with non-recovery. The models correctly classified 72-75% of the patients (explained variance 0.27-0.28). Conclusions. Besides questions on complaint characteristics, information on somatization and support can help a general practitioner to recognize patients at risk of persistent complaints.
Received January 20, 2006
Accepted April 7, 2006
Original Papers
Prognostic indicators for non-recovery of non-traumatic complaints at arm, neck and shoulder in general practice--6 months follow-up
A. Feleus 1,
S. M. A. Bierma-Zeinstra 2 *,
H. S. Miedema 3,
A. P. Verhagen 2,
A. P. Nauta 4,
A. Burdorf 5,
J. A. N. Verhaar 6,
and
B. W. Koes 2
2 Department of General Practice, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
3 Netherlands Expert Center for Workrelated Musculoskeletal Disorders, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
4 The Netherlands Society of Occupational Medicine, Centre of Excellence, Utrecht, The Netherlands
5 Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
6 Department of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
S. M. A. Bierma-Zeinstra, E-mail: s.bierma-zeinstra{at}erasmusmc.nl
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Feleus, S. M. A. Bierma-Zeinstra, R. M. D. Bernsen, H. S. Miedema, J. A. N. Verhaar, and B. W. Koes Management Decisions in Nontraumatic Complaints of Arm, Neck, and Shoulder in General Practice Ann. Fam. Med, September 1, 2009; 7(5): 446 - 454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. L. Reilingh, T. Kuijpers, A. M. Tanja-Harfterkamp, and D. A. van der Windt Course and prognosis of shoulder symptoms in general practice Rheumatology, May 1, 2008; 47(5): 724 - 730. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

