rss
Occup Environ Med 2007;64:313-319 doi:10.1136/oem.2005.023861
  • Original article

Multidisciplinary consensus on the terminology and classification of complaints of the arm, neck and/or shoulder

  1. B M A Huisstede1,
  2. H S Miedema1,
  3. A P Verhagen2,
  4. B W Koes2,
  5. J A N Verhaar3
  1. 1Netherlands Expert Center for Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2Erasmus MC, Department of General Practice, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3Erasmus MC, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to:
 B M A Huisstede
 Department of General Practice, Room Ff325, Erasmus Medical Center,P O Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; b.huisstede{at}erasmusmc.nl
  • Accepted 18 August 2006
  • Published Online First 16 October 2006

Abstract

Background: There is no universally accepted way of labelling or defining upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders. A variety of names are used and many different classification systems have been introduced.

Objective: To agree on an “unambiguous language” concerning the terminology and classification that can be used by all relevant medical and paramedical disciplines in the Netherlands.

Methods: A Delphi consensus strategy was initiated. The outcomes of a multidisciplinary conference were used as a starting point. In total, 47 experts in the field of upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders were delegated by 11 medical and paramedical professional associations to form the expert panel for the Delphi consensus strategy. Each Delphi round consisted of a questionnaire, an analysis and a feedback report.

Results: After three Delphi rounds, consensus was achieved. The experts reported the consensus in a model. This so-called CANS model describes the term, definition and classification of complaints of arm, neck and/or shoulder (CANS) and helps professionals to classify patients unambiguously. CANS is defined as “musculoskeletal complaints of arm, neck and/or shoulder not caused by acute trauma or by any systemic disease”. The experts classified 23 disorders as specific CANS, because they were judged as diagnosable disorders. All other complaints were called non-specific CANS. In addition, the experts defined “alert symptoms” on the top of the model.

Conclusions: The use of the CANS model can increase accurate and meaningful communication among healthcare workers, and may also have a positive influence on the quality of scientific research, by enabling comparison of data of different studies.

Footnotes

  • Published Online First 16 October 2006

  • Competing interests: None.

This Article

  1. All Versions of this Article:
    1. oem.2005.023861v1
    2. 64/5/313 most recent

Services

  1. Request permissions

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Social bookmarking

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of OEM.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for OEM. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.