@article{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2017,
  author    = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schmidt, Hendrik and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network)},
  series = {Pain reports},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Pain reports},
  publisher = {Wolters Kluwer Health},
  address   = {Riverwoods, IL},
  doi       = {10.1097/PR9.0000000000000623},
  pages     = {1 -- 11},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. Objectives: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). Methods: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. Results: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95\% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. Conclusion: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2020,
  author    = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Personalized treatment suggestions},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {690},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-47199},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-471993},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Background: The back pain screening tool Risk-Prevention-Index Social (RPI-S) identifies the individual psychosocial risk for low back pain chronification and supports the allocation of patients at risk in additional multidisciplinary treatments. The study objectives were to evaluate (1) the prognostic validity of the RPI-S for a 6-month time frame and (2) the clinical benefit of the RPI-S. Methods: In a multicenter single-blind 3-armed randomized controlled trial, n = 660 persons (age 18-65 years) were randomly assigned to a twelve-week uni- or multidisciplinary exercise intervention or control group. Psychosocial risk was assessed by the RPI-S domain social environment (RPI-SSE) and the outcome pain by the Chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire (baseline M1, 12-weeks M4, 24-weeks M5). Prognostic validity was quantified by the root mean squared error (RMSE) within the control group. The clinical benefit of RPI-SSE was calculated by repeated measures ANOVA in intervention groups. Results: A subsample of n = 274 participants (mean = 38.0 years, SD 13.1) was analyzed, of which 30\% were classified at risk in their psychosocial profile. The half-year prognostic validity was good (RMSE for disability of 9.04 at M4 and of 9.73 at M5; RMSE for pain intensity of 12.45 at M4 and of 14.49 at M5). People at risk showed significantly stronger reduction in pain disability and intensity at M4/M5, if participating in a multidisciplinary exercise treatment. Subjects at no risk showed a smaller reduction in pain disability in both interventions and no group differences for pain intensity. Regarding disability due to pain, around 41\% of the sample would gain an unfitted treatment without the back pain screening. Conclusion: The RPI-SSE prognostic validity demonstrated good applicability and a clinical benefit confirmed by a clear advantage of an individualized treatment possibility.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{AlbrechtEfferUheFontanaetal.2020,
  author    = {Albrecht, Anna Helena and Effer-Uhe, Daniel and Fontana, Sina and Heinze, Alexander and Krell, Paul and Lange, Pia and Muthorst, Olaf and Peters, Birgit and Pr{\"u}tting, Jens and Sch{\"a}fers, Dominik and Schneider, Anne and Th{\"o}ne, Meik and Zimmermann, Ralph},
  title     = {Editorial},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r das gesamte Verfahrensrecht},
  volume    = {3},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r das gesamte Verfahrensrecht},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Otto Schmidt},
  address   = {K{\"o}ln},
  issn      = {2625-1868},
  doi       = {10.9785/gvrz-2020-030201},
  pages     = {11 -- 11},
  year      = {2020},
  language  = {de}
}