“Whiplash associated disorders: redefining whiplash and its management” by the Quebec Task Force. A critical evaluation
One article on PainSci cites Freeman 1998: The Art of Rest
PainSci notes on Freeman 1998:
This is a strongly negative review of the well-known 1995 papers published by the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders. “Five distinct and significant categories of methodologic error were found.… Although the Task Force set out to redefine whiplash and its management … its publications instead have confused the subject further.”
original abstract †Abstracts here may not perfectly match originals, for a variety of technical and practical reasons. Some abstacts are truncated for my purposes here, if they are particularly long-winded and unhelpful. I occasionally add clarifying notes. And I make some minor corrections.
STUDY DESIGN: The two publications of the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders were evaluated by the authors of this report for methodologic error and bias.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the conclusions and recommendations of the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders regarding the natural history and epidemiology of whiplash injuries are valid.
SUMMARY OF THE BACKGROUND DATA: In 1995, the Quebec Task Force authored a text (published by the Societe de l'Assurance Automobile du Quebec) and a pullout supplement in Spine entitled "Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Redefining Whiplash and its Management." The Quebec Task Force concluded that whiplash injuries result in "temporary discomfort," are "usually self-limited," and have a "favorable prognosis," and that the "pain [resulting from whiplash injuries] is not harmful."
METHODS: The authors of the current report reviewed the text and the supplement for methodologic flaws that may have threatened the validity of the conclusions and recommendations of the Quebec Task Force.
RESULTS: Five distinct and significant categories of methodologic error were found. They were: selection bias, information bias, confusing and unconventional use of terminology, unsupported conclusions and recommendations, and inappropriate generalizations from the Quebec Cohort Study.
CONCLUSION: The validity of the conclusions and recommendations of the Quebec Task Force regarding the natural course and epidemiology of whiplash injuries is questionable. This lack of validity stems from the presence of bias, the use of unconventional terminology, and conclusions that are not concurrent with the literature the Task Force accepted for review. Although the Task Force set out to redefine whiplash and its management, striving for the desirable goal of clarification of the numerous contentious issues surrounding the injury, its publications instead have confused the subject further.
This page is part of the PainScience BIBLIOGRAPHY, which contains plain language summaries of thousands of scientific papers & others sources. It’s like a highly specialized blog. A few highlights:
- Exercise and education versus saline injections for knee osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Bandak 2022 Ann Rheum Dis.
- Association of Lumbar MRI Findings with Current and Future Back Pain in a Population-based Cohort Study. Kasch 2022 Spine (Phila Pa 1976).
- A double-blinded randomised controlled study of the value of sequential intravenous and oral magnesium therapy in patients with chronic low back pain with a neuropathic component. Yousef 2013 Anaesthesia.
- Is Neck Posture Subgroup in Late Adolescence a Risk Factor for Persistent Neck Pain in Young Adults? A Prospective Study. Richards 2021 Phys Ther.
- Sudden amnesia resulting in pain relief: the relationship between memory and pain. Choi 2007 Pain.