Abstract:Background and aims In 2008, the International Association for the Study of Pain Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain (NeuPSIG) proposed a clinical grading system to help identify patients with neuropathic pain (NeP). We previously applied this classification system, along with two NeP screening tools, the painDETECT (PD-Q) and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale (LANSS), to identify NeP in patients with neck/upper limb pain. Both screening tools failed to identify a large proportion of patients with clinically classified NeP, however a limitation of our study was the use of a single clinician performing the NeP classification. In 2016, the NeuPSIG grading system was updated with the aim of improving its clinical utility. We were interested in field testing of the revised grading system, in particular in the application of the grading system and the agreement of interpretation of clinical findings. The primary aim of the current study was to explore the application of the NeuPSIG revised grading system based on patient records and to establish the inter-rater agreement of detecting NeP. A secondary aim was to investigate the level of agreement in detecting NeP between the revised NeuPSIG grading system and the LANSS and PD-Q. Methods In this retrospective study, two expert clinicians (Specialist Pain Medicine Physician and Advanced Scope Physiotherapist) independently reviewed 152 patient case notes and classified them according to the revised grading system. The consensus of the expert clinicians' clinical classification was used as "gold standard" to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the two NeP screening tools. Results The two clinicians agreed in classifying 117 out of 152 patients (ICC 0.794, 95% CI 0.716-850; κ 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.73), yielding a 77% agreement. Compared to the clinicians' consensus, both LANSS and PD-Q demonstrated limited diagnostic accuracy in detecting NeP (LANSS sensitivity 24%, specificity 97%; PD-Q sensitivity 53%, specificity 67%). Conclusions The application of the revised NeP grading system was feasible in our retrospective analysis of patients with neck/upper limb pain. High inter-rater percentage agreement was demonstrated. The hierarchical order of classification may lead to false negative classification. We propose that in the absence of sensory changes or diagnostic tests in patients with neck/upper limb pain, classification of NeP may be further improved using a cluster of clinical findings that confirm a relevant nerve lesion/disease, such as reflex and motor changes. The diagnostic accuracy of LANSS and PD-Q in identifying NeP in patients with neck/upper limb pain remains limited. Clinical judgment remains crucial to diagnosing NeP in the clinical practice. Implications Our observations suggest that in view of the heterogeneity in patients with neck/upper limb pain, a considerable amount of expertise is required to interpret the revised grading system. While the application was feasible in our clinical setting, it is unclear if this will be feasible to apply in primary health care settings where early recognition and timely intervention is often most needed. The use of LANSS and PD-Q in the identification of NeP in patients with neck/upper limb pain remains questionable.

Clinical indicators to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain: protocol for a modified Delphi study

Clinical indicators to identify neuropathic pain in low back related leg pain: a modified Delphi study

Diagnostic utility of diagnostic investigations to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain: protocol for a systematic review

Common Clinical Practice for Low Back Pain Treatment: A Modified Delphi Study

A Bayesian Network Decision Support Tool for Low Back Pain Using a RAND Appropriateness Procedure: Proposal and Internal Pilot Study

Field testing of the revised neuropathic pain grading system in a cohort of patients with neck and upper limb pain

Processes and approaches to perioperative pain management in patients undergoing major lower extremity amputations secondary to vascular disease: a multi-specialty modified Delphi consensus study protocol

Localised neuropathic pain in the primary care setting: a cross-sectional study of prevalence, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, quality of life and sleep performance

Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment

Features and methods to discriminate between mechanism-based categories of pain experienced in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi expert consensus study

Evidence- and data-driven classification of low back pain via artificial intelligence: Protocol of the PREDICT-LBP study

Usefulness of four commonly used neuropathic pain screening questionnaires in patients with chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Evaluating low back pain through electrodermal activity: a systematic review protocol

Factors predicting the transition from acute to persistent pain in people with 'sciatica': the FORECAST longitudinal prognostic factor cohort study protocol

Development of a low back pain care pathway in an academic hospital system: results of a consensus process

A consensus approach toward the standardization of back pain definitions for use in prevalence studies

Proportion of neuropathic pain in the back region in chronic low back pain patients -a multicenter investigation

The S-LANSS score for identifying pain of predominantly neuropathic origin: validation for use in clinical and postal research

Identification of core indicators for the integration of a palliative care approach in hospitals: An international Delphi study

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency denervation versus placebo for chronic and moderate to severe low back pain: study protocol for the RADICAL randomised controlled trial

Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain? The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations