Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 7, pp 930–935 | Cite as

Neither the WAD-classification nor the Quebec Task Force follow-up regimen seems to be important for the outcome after a whiplash injury. A prospective study on 186 consecutive patients

  • Jouko Kivioja
  • Irene Jensen
  • Urban Lindgren
Original Article

Abstract

A classification of injury and a follow-up schedule were proposed by the Quebec Task Force (QTF) in 1995. No general agreement about the clinical usefulness of the WAD-classification or of the suggested follow-up regimen exists. A series of 186 consecutive cases seen in the emergency room during the acute phase after a whiplash injury was prospectively studied for 1 year. All findings including history and physical findings were recorded using standardized QTF protocols. In one group follow-up visits were done according to the QTF regimen: at 1, 3, 6, 12 weeks and 1 year after the accident; in a control group no visit was scheduled. The outcome variable was neck pain at 1 year after the accident. After 1 year, 18% of the total number of patients had significant neck pain. Risk factors for chronic neck pain at 1 year after whiplash injury were: neck pain before the accident and a high degree of emotional distress at the time of the accident; both factors independently associated with a tenfold increased risk of developing chronic neck pain. Neither the WAD classification nor the QTF follow-up regimen could be linked to a better outcome. In this study the outcome was associated with patient-specific characteristics and not with physical signs of injury, the depth of the initial evaluation or the follow-up regimen.

Keywords

QTF classification Follow-up plan Multivariate analysis Neck sprain Outcome Predictors WAD Whiplash injury 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are obliged to Per Näsman, the Royal Institute of Technology, for statistical advice

Conflict of interest statement

There is no conflict of interest for any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Barnsley L, Lord S, Bogduk N (1994) Whiplash injury (review). Pain 58:283–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berglund A, Alfredsson L, Jensen I, Cassidy JD, Nygren A (2001) The association between exposure to a rear-end collision and future health complaints. J Clin Epidemiol 54(8):851–856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berglund A, Bodin L, Jensen J, Wiklund A, Alfredsson L (2006) The influence of prognostic factors on neck pain intensity, disability, anxiety and depression over a 2 year period in subjects with acute whiplash injury. Pain 125:244–256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biering-Sorensen F (1983) A prospective study of low back pain in a general population. I. Occurrence, recurrence and aetiology. Scand J Rehabil Med 15(2):71–79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bjornstig U, Hildingsson C, Toolanen G (1990) Soft-tissue injury of the neck in a hospital based material. Scand J Soc Med 18(4):263–267PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Côté P, Cassidy JD, Carroll L, Frank JW, Bombardier C (2001) A systematic review of the prognosis of acute whiplash and a new conceptual framework to synthesize the literature. Spine 26(19):E445–E458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Côté P, Hagg-Johnson S, Cassidy JD, Caroll L, Frank JW, Bombardier C (2005) Initiated patterns of clinical care and recovery from whiplash injuries. Arch Intern Med 165:2257–2263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Côté P, Hagg-Johnson S, Cassidy JD, Caroll L, Frank JW, Bombardier C (2007) Early aggressive care and delayed recovery from whiplash: isolated finding or reproducible result. Arthritis Rheum 57:861–868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dolinis (1997) Risk factors for ‘whiplash’ in drivers: a cohort study of rear-end traffic crashes. Injury 28(3):173–179Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fredriksson K, Alfredsson L, Thorbjornsson CB, Punnett L, Toomingas A, Torgen M, Kilbom A (2000) Risk factors for neck and shoulder disorders: a nested case-control study covering a 24-year period. Am J Ind Med 38(5):516–528PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freeman MD, Croft AC, Rossignol AM (1998) Whiplash associated disorders: redefining whiplash and its management by the Quebec Task Force. A critical evaluation. Spine 23(9):1043–1049PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartling L, Brison RJ, Ardern C, Pickett W (2001) Prognostic value of the Quebec classification of whiplash-associated disorders. Spine 26(1):36–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hildingsson C, Toolanen G (1990) Outcome after soft-tissue injury of the cervical spine. A prospective study of 93 car-accident victims. Acta Orthop Scand 61:357–359PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jensen MP (1992) Self-report scales and procedures for assessing pain in adults. In: Turk DC, Melzack R (eds) Handbook of pain assessment. Guildford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM (1992) Chronic pain in coping measures: individual vs. composite scores. Pain 51:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leino PI, Hanninen V (1995) Psychosocial factors at work in relation to back and limb disorders. Scand J Work Environ Health 21(2):134–142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miettinen T, Lindgren KA, Airaksinen O, Leino E (2002) Whiplash injuries in Finland: a prospective 1-year follow-up study. Clin Exp Rheumatol 20:399–402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norris SH, Watt I (1983) The prognosis of neck injuries resulting from rear end vehicle collisions. J Bone Joint Surg Br 65:608–611PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Radanov BP, Sturzenegger M, Di Stefano G (1995) Long-term outcome after whiplash injury. A 2-year follow-up considering features of injury mechanism and somatic, radiological, and psychosocial findings (review) Medicine 74:281–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spitzer W, Skovron M, Salmi L et al (1995) Scientific monograph of the QTF on whiplash-associated disorders. Spine 20:1S–73SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sterner Y, Toolanen G, Gerdle B, Hildingsson C (2003) The incidence of whiplash trauma and the effects of different factors on recovery. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(2):195–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thorbjornsson CB, Alfredsson L, Fredriksson K, Michelsen H, Punnett L, Vingard E, Torgen M, Kilbom A (2000) Physical and psychosocial factors related to low back pain during a 24-year period. A nested case-control analysis. Spine 25(3):369–374 (discussion 375)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zigmond AS, Smith RP (1983) The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 67:361–370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Orthopaedics, Department of Clinical Intervention and Technology (Huddinge)Karolinska InstituteStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Section of Personal Injury Prevention, Department of Clinical NeuroscienceKarolinska InstituteStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations