Table 1.
Characteristics and Results of Appropriateness Panels
| Chronic Low Back Pain | Chronic Neck Pain | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Panelistsb | Clinical Scenariosa,b | Panelists | Clinical Scenariosa | |
| Total numbers of panelists and clinical scenarios rated across panelists | 9 (100%) | 8100 (100%) | 11 (100%) | 8184 (100%) |
| Changed ratings at home | 2 (22%) | 335 (4%) | 4 (36%) | 281 (3%) |
| Changed ratings during in-person meeting | 5 (63%) | 219 (3%) | 10 (91%) | 758 (9%) |
| Changed ratings because of preferences | 1 (13%) | 8 (0%) | 5 (45%) | 162 (2%) |
| Changed ratings because of costs | 1 (13%) | 3 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Panelists who said ratings could be changed because of preferences | 7 (88%) | 8 (73%) | ||
| Panelists who said ratings could be changed because of costs | 4 (50%) | 6 (55%) | ||
aThe denominator for the number of clinical scenarios where ratings were changed is the number of panelists times the number of clinical scenarios, so 9*900 or 8100 for chronic low back pain and 11*744 or 8184 for chronic neck pain
bOne chronic low back pain panelist could not attend the in-person meeting; therefore, the chronic low back pain percentages for the in-person meeting and below are calculated over 8 panelists and 7200 (8*900) ratings