ABSTRACT
Background Although benign most of the time, neck pain (NP) has been observed as the early manifestation of various serious cervical pathologies (e.g., malignancies, fractures). Red flags (RF) are signs and symptoms that raise suspicion of serious spinal pathology. Considering that it has been estimated that the incidence of delayed diagnosis of serious cervical pathologies ranges from 5% to 20%, investigating RFs for NP remains a priority for an informed practice and the patient’s safety. Therefore, the following systematic review will aim to identify red flags recommendations to triage serious pathologies in current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for patients with NP, to evaluate the consistency between different CPGs regarding RF recommendations, and to investigate on what study type the recommendation of CPGs are based.
Material and methods We will search for CPGs for patients with specific or non – specific NP by searching MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and PEDro electronic databases. Guidelines will also be searched through forward and backward citation tracking strategies (Web of Science), by consulting experts in the field, and by checking guideline organization databases. Also, we will screen the references of two recently published systematic reviews on CPGs for NP. For all the CPGs included, we will extract bibliographic information, the serious pathologies considered, the RF considered for all serious pathologies, the reference used to support all the RF cited in the guideline, and, if available, the diagnostic accuracy data for all the RF. Two authors will independently perform the study selection and data extraction processes.
Data synthesis Results will be presented descriptively and using graphs and tables. We will evaluate the consistency among the guidelines in their endorsement of red flags using Fleiss’ kappa. Fleiss’ kappa will be presented separately for all serious pathologies the CPGs consider.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
