Premium
Whiplash: Pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis
Author(s) -
Rodriquez Arthur A.,
Barr Karen P.,
Burns Stephen P.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
muscle and nerve
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.025
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1097-4598
pISSN - 0148-639X
DOI - 10.1002/mus.20060
Subject(s) - whiplash , medicine , physical therapy , rehabilitation , physical medicine and rehabilitation , disfigurement , neck pain , observational study , intensive care medicine , surgery , poison control , emergency medicine , alternative medicine , pathology
We have reviewed the literature relevant to pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of whiplash‐associated disorder (WAD) since 1995 and provided a brief summary of literature pertaining to forces action on the head and neck during a motor vehicle accident. The scope of the current review is confined to the Quebec guidelines for WAD grades 1–3 but excludes grade 4 (neck complaints and fracture or dislocation). After excluding papers without scientific data and single case reports or case series with fewer than 20 patients, articles were reviewed for methodological quality. The diagnosis remains clinical. No imaging, physiological, or psychological study provides specific diagnostic criteria. In the acute period up to 2 weeks, soft collars or rest and work‐leave do not shorten the duration of neck pain. Sick leave is reduced by high‐dose methylprednisolone given within 8 h of injury, but confirmatory studies examining the cost–benefit relationship are needed. In the first 6 months, active as opposed to passive treatment results in improved outcomes. Specific exercise strategies have not been studied. For those with symptoms lasting more than 6 months, percutaneous radio‐frequency neurotomy can provide pain relief for many months in those responding to blind local anesthetic facet blocks. Intra‐articular corticosteroids are ineffective. Uncontrolled trials suggest that multimodal rehabilitation programs result in improved overall function. The overall prognosis for recovery has varied considerably across studies. Such variability is likely due to differences in case identification methods and whether outcome is assessed in terms of symptoms or the receipt of financial compensation for injury. The impact on prognosis of both collision‐ and patient‐related factors is also reviewed. Muscle Nerve 29: 768–781, 2004