Efficacy, Tolerability, and Dose-Dependent Effects of Opioid Analgesics for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Persistent pain, long-term opioids, and restoring trust in the patient-clinician relationship

The erosion of trust in the patient-clinician relationship is an underappreciated, and vital, component of the prescription opioid crisis. Drawing from lived experience of patients and clinicians, and a narrative evidence review, this report discusses how opioid use for persistent pain can impact the patient-clinician relationship from the vantage points of the patient and the family physician. For patients, the stress of dealing with persistent pain, misalignment with clinicians regarding goals of care, experiences of disrespect and stigma, fear of abrupt tapers, and frustration with a fragmented health system, all combine to breed a lack of trust. Clinicians, for their part, experience challenges due to inadequate resources for pain management and opioid safety, pressure to deprescribe opioids rapidly, inconsistent prescribing practices of colleagues, 'policing' opioid prescriptions when concern arises for opioid use disorder and adversarial relationships with frustrated patients wary of clinician intentions. As a result, many clinicians struggle to maintain a therapeutic relationship with patients in great need of empathy and healing. To support implementation of evidence-based guidelines and achieve public health goals of safer prescribing and reducing harm from prescription opioids, we recommend steps health systems and clinicians can take to rebuild trust in the patient-clinician relationship, enable patient-centered pain care, and embed patient perspectives into opioid safety processes. PERSPECTIVE: Erosion of patient-clinician trust is a barrier to implementing evidence-based guidelines that aim to improve opioid safety. This paper explores lived patient and clinician experiences and recommends steps for health systems and clinicians to rebuild this trust as a strategy to actualize the benefits of adherence to these guidelines.

The effectiveness of education for people with shoulder pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effectiveness of education for people with shoulder pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched several databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL) and trial registries from inception to May 25, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials investigating any education for people with shoulder pain.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Pain and disability were primary outcomes. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to assess methodological quality. Meta-analysis was not appropriate due to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included 14 trials (8 had high methodological quality). The one trial on rotator-cuff related shoulder pain did not assess pain or disability but found best practice education (vs. structure-focused education) increased reassurance and intentions to stay active. The one trial on adhesive capsulitis found daily reminders, encouragement, and education about exercise via text did not improve pain and disability compared to no education. For post-operative shoulder pain, two (of four) trials found education reduced some measure of pain, but none found an effect on disability or any other outcomes. For 'shoulder complaints' (i.e. mixed or unclear diagnosis), no trials found education was more effective than home exercise or no education for improving pain or disability.

CONLUSION

Some forms of education appear to improve reassurance, treatment intentions, perceived treatment needs, recovery expectations, and knowledge, but their effect on pain and disability is unclear. High-quality trials are needed to resolve uncertainty surrounding the benefit of education for shoulder pain, particularly rotator-cuff related shoulder pain and adhesive capsulitis.

Patterns of antidepressant use in people with low back pain: A retrospective study using workers' compensation data

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are commonly used to treat low back pain (LBP), but little is known about patterns of antidepressant use in this population. This study aimed to identify patterns of antidepressant dispensing and switching in Australian workers with an accepted workers' compensation claim for LBP, and to investigate factors associated with dispensing and switching.

METHODS

This retrospective study included data from accepted workers' compensation time loss claims for LBP between 2010 and 2018 with a 2-year follow-up. We described the type of antidepressant dispensed, the time for the index antidepressant to be dispensed, and whether people in the study switched to a different antidepressant. Logistic regression models investigated factors associated with antidepressants being dispensed for the first time and for switching to a different antidepressant.

RESULTS

Antidepressants were dispensed to 2476 people with LBP (14%) at least once after a median (IQR) of 28 (10.9-54.7) weeks. Amitriptyline was the most dispensed antidepressant at any one point (47.8%), and the most common index antidepressant (42.9%). Also, 32.7% of people switched to a different antidepressant at least once. Sex, age, having been dispensed opioids, gabapentinoids or diazepam prior to antidepressants being dispensed, having used psychological services, and socioeconomic disadvantage were associated with antidepressant dispensing.

CONCLUSION

One in seven people with LBP were dispensed an antidepressant, most commonly amitriptyline. Antidepressants were commonly used in combination with other pain medicines such as opioids, gabapentinoids and diazepam.

SIGNIFICANCE

Antidepressants were dispensed to one in seven people with low back pain, most commonly amitriptyline followed by duloxetine. Antidepressants were typically dispensed after 6 months and after other medicines such as opioids, gabapentinoids and diazepam had been dispensed. Due to the administrative nature of the data, the study cannot infer whether antidepressants were dispensed to treat pain or other health problems, such as a mental health condition.

Benchmarks for low back pain in general practice in Flanders: electronic audit of INTEGO

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for encounter in general practice. Yet results from literature show adherence to clinical practice guidelines is low. Audit & feedback is a well-known strategy to improve adherence to guidelines. Benchmarking is an important step in the audit & feedback process. The objective of this study was to develop data-derived benchmarks for low back pain quality indicators.

METHODS

Four electronic health record extractable quality indicators were selected from an existing indicator set developed by CEBAM, an independent, multidisciplinary and interuniversity medical scientific institute in Belgium. Data from 2021-2022 from INTEGO, a general practice morbidity registry, were used to calculate benchmarks for the four quality indicators. The Achievable Benchmark of Care methodology was used to create benchmarks based on the performance of the 10% best-performing practices.

RESULTS

The following benchmarks were derived: 4.2% prescription for medical imaging, 12.7% prescription for opioids, 27.2% for prescription for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen, 37.7% prescription for physical therapy and 11.9% prescription for work absenteeism.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmarks for four electronic health record-extractable quality indicators have been established. They can be used for an electronic audit & feedback tool in primary practice in Flanders or other quality improvement initiatives.

Effectiveness of strategies for implementing guideline-concordant care in low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background

International low back pain guidelines recommend providing education/advice to patients, discouraging routine imaging use, and encouraging judicious prescribing of analgesics. However, practice variation occurs and the effectiveness of implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care is unclear. This review aims to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies to promote guideline-concordant care for low back pain.

Methods

Five databases (including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL and PEDro were searched from inception until 22nd August 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to promote guideline-concordant care (providing education/advice, discouraging routine imaging use, and/or reducing analgesic use) among healthcare professionals or organisations were included. Two reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments. The primary outcome was guideline-concordant care in the medium-term (>3 months but <12 months). The taxonomy recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group was used to categorise implementation strategies. Meta-analysis with a random-effects model was conducted where possible. This systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42023452969).

Findings

Twenty-seven RCTs with 32 reports were included. All strategies targeted healthcare professionals (7796 health professionals overseeing 34,890 patients with low back pain), and none targeted organisations. The most commonly used implementation strategies were educational materials (15/27) and educational meetings (14/27), although most studies (24/27) used more than one strategy ('multifaceted strategies'). In the medium-term, compared to no implementation, implementation strategies probably reduced the use of routine imaging (number of studies [N] = 7, odds ratio [OR] = 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.58, I 2  = 50%, moderate certainty evidence), but made no difference in reducing analgesic use (N = 4, OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.96-1.14, I 2  = 0%, high certainty evidence). Further, implementation strategies may make no difference to improve the rate of providing education/advice (N = 3, OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 0.87-3.87, I 2  = 95%, low certainty evidence), but this finding should be interpreted with caution because the sensitivity analysis showed a weak positive finding indicating unstable results that are likely to change with future research (N = 2, OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.04-1.35, I 2  = 0%, moderate certainty evidence). No difference was found when comparing one implementation strategy to another in the medium-term.

Interpretation

Implementing guideline recommendations delivered mixed effects in promoting guideline-concordant care for low back pain management.

Funding

There was no funding source for this review.

Research hotspots and frontiers in non-specific low back pain: a bibliometric analysis

Background

Extensive research has been conducted worldwide on non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), some researchers published a bibliometric analysis of NSLBP in 2020, but there have been no supplements or updates since then. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the research hotspots and frontiers in NSLBP over the last decade.

Methods

Primary sources on NSLBP were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database from 2014 to 2023. CiteSpace V6.2. R7 (64-bit) and VOSviewer 1.6.19 software were used to analyze the number and centrality of journals, countries, institutions, authors, references, and keywords, and the functions of co-occurrence and clustering were applied to draw a visual knowledge map.

Results

In the past decade, the annual publication volume of studies on NSLBP has shown an overall upward trend year by year, with obvious temporal stages and great development potential. In total, 2,103 articles contained six types of literature, with the highest proportion being original research articles (1,633 articles, 77.65%), published in 200 journals. BMC Musculoskeletal Discourses (90 articles, 4.28%) had the highest number of publications, and the British Medical Journal had the highest impact factor (105.7). Furthermore, the United States of America (329 articles, 15.64%) had the highest publication volume, the University of Sydney (139 articles, 6.61%) was the research institution with the highest production, Maher, Chris G (36 articles, 1.71%) was the author with the most published articles, and Hoy, D (571 articles, 27.15%) was the most frequently cited author. The most cited of articles is "Non-specific low back pain" published in the LANCET, with 1,256 citations.

Conclusion

This article summarizes the current research status of NSLBP and predicts future research hotspots and frontiers. In recent years, adolescents have become a high-risk group for NSLBP. Pain neuroscience education, motor control, spinal manipulative therapy, and acupuncture are effective means to treat NSLBP. Biomechanics and trunk muscles as entry points are effective ideas for the treatment of NSLBP pain. Furthermore, anxiety, neck pain, non-specific musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, and musculoskeletal disorders are diseases that are closely related to NSLBP. In the future, attention should be paid to the design of research plans, increasing the research intensity of randomized controlled trials, strengthening follow-up, and the timely updating of guidelines, which will result in higher quality and high-level scientific evidence for research on NSLBP.

Opioid-related mortality after occupational injury in Washington State: accounting for preinjury opioid use

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the impact of occupational injury and illness on opioid-related mortality while accounting for confounding by preinjury opioid use.

METHODS

We employed a retrospective cohort study design using Washington State workers' compensation data for 1994-2000 injuries linked to US Social Security Administration earnings and mortality data and National Death Index (NDI) cause of death data from 1994 to 2018. We categorised injuries as lost-time versus medical-only, where the former involved more than 3 days off work or permanent disability. We determined death status and cause of death from NDI records. We modelled separate Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) and 95% CIs for injured men and women for opioid-related and all drug-related mortality through 2018. We used quantitative bias analysis to account for unmeasured confounding by preinjury opioid use.

RESULTS

The hazard of opioid-related mortality was elevated for workers with lost-time relative to medical-only injuries: sHR for men: 1.53, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.66; for women: 1.31, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.48. Accounting for preinjury opioid use, effect sizes were reduced but remained elevated: sHR for men was 1.43, 95% simulation interval (SI) 1.20 to 1.69; for women: 1.27, 95% SI 1.10 to 1.45.

CONCLUSIONS

Occupational injuries and illnesses severe enough to require more than 3 days off work are associated with an increase in the hazard of opioid-related mortality. The estimated increase is reduced when we account for preinjury opioid use, but it remains substantial. Reducing work-related injuries and postinjury opioid prescribing and improving employment and income security may decrease opioid-related mortality.

Duration, Cost, and Escalation of Care Events for Physical Therapy Management of Low Back Pain in Service Members With Limb Loss

INTRODUCTION

Physical therapy (PT) is recommended as a primary treatment for low back pain (LBP), a common and impactful musculoskeletal condition after limb loss. The purpose of this brief report is to report the duration and cost of PT care, and subsequent escalation of care events, for LBP in service members with and without limb loss.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort, descriptive study. Service members with and without limb loss (matched) who received PT for LBP at a military treatment facility from 2015 to 2017 were included. Duration of PT care, number of PT visits, and escalation of care events 1 year after PT were extracted from medical records. Escalation of care events was identified as epidural steroid injections, referrals to specialists (e.g., orthopedists, spine surgeons, and pain management), and LBP-related hospitalizations.LBP-related PT encounters were queried; duration of care, number of visits, and cost of care were quantified. Escalation of care events, including opioid prescription, epidural steroid injections, specialty referrals, and hospitalizations, were identified up to 1 year after PT care.

RESULTS

The average course of PT care for LBP was 12.9 more visits, 48.7 days longer, and $764.50 more expensive in service members with limb loss (n = 16) vs. those without limb loss (n = 48). Higher rates of opioid prescriptions and specialty referrals were observed in service members with limb loss.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that service members with limb loss and LBP received higher quantities and longer durations of PT than those without limb loss, yielding a nearly 4 times higher cost of PT.

The Analgesic and Side Effects of Tramadol Hydrochloride Immediate-Release and Extended-Release Tablets in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

 There are no established treatments for low back pain. Conventional treatments include physiotherapy and pharmacological treatments, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Recently, analgesics with mechanisms of action different from those of NSAIDs have emerged. Tramadol formulations have especially attracted attention for being effective among patients in whom NSAIDs are not entirely effective. However, they are associated with side effects that can disrupt treatment. Tramadol hydrochloride immediate-release and extended-release tablets have been recently launched. Herein, we report our experience with these formulations in chronic low back pain patients.

PURPOSE

 To investigate the incidence of side effects and the analgesic effect of tramadol hydrochloride immediate-release and extended-release tablets in patients with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

 This was a multicenter retrospective observational study. The study included patients prescribed tramadol hydrochloride immediate-release and extended-release tablets for chronic low back pain at 13 facilities in Japan between January 2021 and December 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of side effects observed during the study period. The secondary outcomes were changes in the visual analog scale (VAS) score.

RESULTS

 The incidence of side effects was 37.7% (40/106 cases), which included constipation, nausea, drowsiness, and dizziness in 23 (21.7%), 13 (12.3%), 4 (3.8%), and 2 (1.9%) cases, respectively. The rate of treatment discontinuation owing to side effects was relatively low (16/106 cases, 15.1%). Furthermore, after four weeks of treatment, we found a significant reduction in the VAS scores for low back pain from baseline.

CONCLUSION

 This study shows the incidence of side effects following the administration of tramadol hydrochloride immediate-release and extended-release tablets. Regarding the breakdown of side effects, constipation, nausea, drowsiness, and dizziness were noted. Regarding pain evaluation, we found a significant reduction in the VAS scores for low back pain from baseline after four weeks of treatment, suggesting that tramadol hydrochloride immediate-release and extended-release tablets may provide excellent analgesic effects owing to their pharmacokinetic properties that ensure stable tramadol concentrations in the bloodstream.

A critical review of the role of manual therapy in the treatment of individuals with low back pain

The number of low back pain (LBP) cases is projected to increase to more than 800 million by 2050. To address the substantial burden of disease associated with this rise in prevalence, effective treatments are needed. While clinical practice guidelines (CPG) consistently recommend non-pharmacological therapies as first-line treatments, recommendations regarding manual therapy (MT) in treating low back pain vary. The goal of this narrative review was to critically summarize the available evidence for MT behind these recommendations, to scrutinize its mechanisms of action, and propose some actionable steps for clinicians on how this knowledge can be integrated into a person-centered approach. Despite disparate recommendations from CPG, MT is as effective as other available treatments and may be offered to patients with LBP, especially as part of a treatment package with exercise and education. Most of the effects of MT are not specific to the technique. MT and other interventions share several mechanisms of action that mediate treatment success. These mechanisms can encompass patients' expectations, prior experiences, beliefs and convictions, epistemic trust, and nonspecific contextual effects. Although MT is safer than opioids for patients with LBP, this alone is insufficient. Our goal is to encourage clinicians to shift away from outdated and refuted ideas in MT and embrace a person-centered approach rooted in a comprehensive biopsychosocial framework while incorporating patients' beliefs, addressing illness behaviors, and seeking to understand each patient's journey.

Use of CYP2D6 Inhibitors with CYP2D6 Opioids: Association with Emergency Department Visits for Pain

Hydrocodone, tramadol, codeine, and oxycodone are commonly prescribed opioids that rely on activation by cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). CYP2D6 inhibitors can significantly decrease CYP2D6 activity, leading to reduced generation of active metabolites, and impairing pain control. To understand this impact, we assessed emergency department (ED) visits in patients initiating these CYP2D6-dependent opioids while on CYP2D6-inhibitor antidepressants vs. antidepressants that do not inhibit CYP2D6. This retrospective cohort study included adult patients prescribed CYP2D6-dependent opioids utilizing electronic health records data from the University of Florida Health (2015-2021). The association between ED visits and inhibitor exposure was tested using multivariable logistic regression. The primary analysis had 12,118 patients (72% female; mean (SD) age, 55 (13.4)) in the hydrocodone/tramadol/codeine cohort and 5,547 patients (64% female; mean (SD) age, 53.6 (14.2)) in the oxycodone cohort. Hydrocodone/tramadol/codeine-treated patients exposed to CYP2D6-inhibitor antidepressants (n = 7,043) had a higher crude rate of pain-related ED visits than those taking other antidepressants (n = 5,075) (3.28% vs. 1.87%), with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.75 (95% CI: 1.36 to 2.24). Similarly, in the oxycodone cohort, CYP2D6-inhibitor antidepressant-exposed individuals (n = 3,206) had a higher crude rate of ED visits than individuals exposed to other antidepressants (n = 2,341) (5.02% vs. 3.37%), with aOR of 1.70 (95% CI: 1.27-2.27). Similar findings were observed in secondary and sensitivity analyses. Our findings suggest patients with concomitant use of hydrocodone/tramadol/codeine or oxycodone and CYP2D6 inhibitors have more frequent ED visits for pain, which may be due to inadequate pain control.

Exceeding the guideline-recommended maximum daily dose of opioids for long-term treatment of non-cancer pain in Germany - a large retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

High-dose long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) has been associated with increased mortality and hospitalizations. Therefore, the evidence-based German guideline on LTOT for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) recommends to only exceed the maximum daily dose (MDD) of opioids in exceptional cases. This study aimed to determine the portion of LTOT patients who exceeded the guideline-recommended MDD and identify predictors of exceeding in administrative claims data.

METHODS

The retrospective observational analysis of opioid prescriptions in patients receiving LTOT for CNCP was based on administrative claims by a large German statutory health insurance company. Patients with at least two quarters of opioid prescriptions between January 2018 and June 2019 were included and followed up for two years. Predictors were identified by logistic regression. In addition, the number of patients still in opioid therapy and the extent of exceeded MDDs were analyzed over time.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 113,475 patients. Overall, 10.5% of the patients exceeded the guideline-recommended MDD averaged over the observation period. Strong predictors for exceeding the MDD were receiving opioid prescriptions from > 7 physicians (OR = 7.66, p < .001), receiving predominantly strong opioids (OR = 6.79, p < .001) and receiving opioids for at least one year prior to inclusion (OR = 5.35, p < .001). Within the non-exceeding group, 28.1% discontinued opioid therapy. In contrast, 9.9% of patients in the exceeding group discontinued opioid therapy, whereas the vast majority remained on treatment until the end of the observation period. Furthermore, a slight increase in prescribed doses was observed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that a moderate proportion of patients exceeded the guideline-recommended MDD. However, certain patient groups were more likely to receive high doses. This applied in particular to those who were already on treatment at the time of inclusion and continued to receive opioids until the end of the observation period. Further research should examine whether the continuous opioid therapy among the patients with exceeding the guideline-recommended MDD might be related to specific indications, a lack of therapeutic options or avoidance of withdrawal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (drks.de/search/en). Identifier: DRKS00024854. Registered 28 April 2021.

Discontinuation of psychotropic medication: a synthesis of evidence across medication classes

Pharmacotherapy is an effective treatment modality across psychiatric disorders. Nevertheless, many patients discontinue their medication at some point. Evidence-based guidance for patients, clinicians, and policymakers on rational discontinuation strategies is vital to enable the best, personalized treatment for any given patient. Nonetheless, there is a scarcity of guidelines on discontinuation strategies. In this perspective, we therefore summarize and critically appraise the evidence on discontinuation of six major psychotropic medication classes: antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, mood stabilizers, opioids, and stimulants. For each medication class, a wide range of topics pertaining to each of the following questions are discussed: (1) Who can discontinue (e.g., what are risk factors for relapse?); (2) When to discontinue (e.g., after 1 year or several years of antidepressant use?); and (3) How to discontinue (e.g., what's the efficacy of dose reduction compared to full cessation and interventions to mitigate relapse risk?). We thus highlight how comparing the evidence across medication classes can identify knowledge gaps, which may pave the way for more integrated research on discontinuation.

The Association of Physiotherapy and Opioid Use With Duration of Compensated Time Loss for Workers With Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

To determine patterns of physiotherapy and opioid use among compensated workers with low back pain (LBP), factors associated with these, and their association with time loss.

METHODS

Accepted Victorian and South Australian workers' compensation claims, services, and medicines data for LBP claims lodged June 30, 2010-July 1, 2015. Descriptive statistics, multinomial logistic, and Cox regression were used to determine usage groups, their predictors, and effect of these on time loss.

RESULTS

Of 15,728 claims, 24.4% received no services, 3.6% received opioids only, 43.3% received physiotherapy only, and 28.8% received both opioids and physiotherapy. Sex, age, occupation, remoteness, jurisdiction, and socioeconomic status were significantly associated with usage groups. Using opioids and physiotherapy had the longest time loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Any services/medicine usage was associated with increased time loss and was longest for combined physiotherapy and opioids.

M2 Macrophage-Derived Small Extracellular Vesicles Ameliorate Pyroptosis and Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

Intervertebral discs (IVDs) have a limited self-regenerative capacity and current strategies for IVD regeneration are unsatisfactory. Recent studies showed that small extracellular vesicles derived from M2 macrophage cells (M2-sEVs) inhibited inflammation by delivery of various bioactive molecules to recipient cells, which indicated that M2-sEVs may offer a therapeutic strategy for the repair of IVDs. Herein, we investigated the roles and mechanisms of M2-sEVs on IVD regeneration. The in vitro results demonstrated that M2-sEVs inhibited pyroptosis, preserved cellular viability, and promoted migration of nucleus pulposus cells (NPCs). Bioinformatics analysis and verification experiments of microRNA (miR) expression showed that miR-221-3p was highly expressed in M2-sEVs. The mechanism of action was explored and indicated that M2-sEVs inhibited pyroptosis of NPCs through transfer of miR-221-3p, which suppressed the expression levels of phosphatase and tensin homolog and NOD-, LRR-, and pyrin domain-containing protein 3. Moreover, we fabricated decellularized ECM-hydrogel (dECM) for sustained release of M2-sEVs, which exhibited biocompatibility and controlled release properties. The in vivo results revealed that dECM-hydrogel containing M2-sEVs (dECM/M2-sEVs) delayed the degeneration of intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) models. In addition to demonstrating a promising therapeutic for IDD, this study provided valuable data for furthering the understanding of the roles and mechanisms of M2-sEVs in IVD regeneration.

Concurrent and lagged associations among pain medication use, pain, and negative affect: a daily diary study of people with chronic low back pain

ABSTRACT

People with chronic pain often attempt to manage pain and concurrent emotional distress with analgesic substances. Habitual use of such substances-even when not opioid-based-can pose side effect risks. A negative reinforcement model has been proposed whereby relief of pain and emotional distress following medication consumption increases the likelihood that the experience of elevated pain and distress will spur further medication use. People with chronic low back pain (N = 105) completed electronic diary assessments 5 times/day for 14 consecutive days. Lagged and cross-lagged analyses focused on links between time 1 pain and negative affect (NA) and time 2 analgesic medication use and vice versa. Sex differences were also explored. Primary results were as follows: (1) participants on average reported taking analgesic medication during 41.3% of the 3-hour reporting epochs (29 times over 14 days); (2) time 1 within-person increases in pain and NA predicted time 2 increases in the likelihood of ingesting analgesic medications; (3) time 1 within-person increases in medication use predicted time 2 decreases in pain and NA; and (4) lagged associations between time 1 pain/NA and time 2 medication use were strongest among women. Findings suggest that the use of analgesic medications for many people with chronic pain occurs frequently throughout the day. Results support the validity of a negative reinforcement model where pain and distress lead to pain medication use, which in turn leads to relief from pain and distress.

Clinical care standards for the management of low back pain: a scoping review

The objective of this study is to compare and contrast the quality statements and quality indicators across clinical care standards for low back pain. Searches were performed in Medline, guideline databases, and Google searches to identify clinical care standards for the management of low back pain targeting a multidisciplinary audience. Two independent reviewers reviewed the search results and extracted relevant information from the clinical care standards. We compared the quality statements and indicators of the clinical care standards to identify the consistent messages and the discrepancies between them. Three national clinical care standards from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom were included. They provided from 6 to 8 quality statements and from 12 to 18 quality indicators. The three standards provide consistent recommendations in the quality statements related to imaging, and patient education/advice and self-management. In addition, the Canadian and Australian standards also provide consistent recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. However, the three clinical care standards differ in the statements related to psychological assessment, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies. The three national clinical care standards provide consistent recommendations on imaging and patient education/advice, self-management of the condition, and two standards (Canadian and Australian) agree on recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. The standards differ in the quality statements related to psychological assessment, opioid prescription, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies.

Senescence of endplate osteoclasts induces sensory innervation and spinal pain

Spinal pain affects individuals of all ages and is the most common musculoskeletal problem globally. Its clinical management remains a challenge as the underlying mechanisms leading to it are still unclear. Here, we report that significantly increased numbers of senescent osteoclasts (SnOCs) are observed in mouse models of spinal hypersensitivity, like lumbar spine instability (LSI) or aging, compared to controls. The larger population of SnOCs is associated with induced sensory nerve innervation, as well as the growth of H-type vessels, in the porous endplate. We show that deletion of senescent cells by administration of the senolytic drug Navitoclax (ABT263) results in significantly less spinal hypersensitivity, spinal degeneration, porosity of the endplate, sensory nerve innervation and H-type vessel growth in the endplate. We also show that there is significantly increased SnOC-mediated secretion of Netrin-1 and NGF, two well-established sensory nerve growth factors, compared to non-senescent OCs. These findings suggest that pharmacological elimination of SnOCs may be a potent therapy to treat spinal pain.

Senescence of endplate osteoclasts induces sensory innervation and spinal pain

Spinal pain affects individuals of all ages and is the most common musculoskeletal problem globally. Its clinical management remains a challenge as the underlying mechanisms leading to it are still unclear. Here, we report that significantly increased numbers of senescent osteoclasts (SnOCs) are observed in mouse models of spinal hypersensitivity, like lumbar spine instability (LSI) or aging, compared to controls. The larger population of SnOCs is associated with induced sensory nerve innervation, as well as the growth of H-type vessels, in the porous endplate. We show that deletion of senescent cells by administration of the senolytic drug Navitoclax (ABT263) results in significantly less spinal hypersensitivity, spinal degeneration, porosity of the endplate, sensory nerve innervation, and H-type vessel growth in the endplate. We also show that there is significantly increased SnOC-mediated secretion of Netrin-1 and NGF, two well-established sensory nerve growth factors, compared to non-senescent OCs. These findings suggest that pharmacological elimination of SnOCs may be a potent therapy to treat spinal pain.

Economic burden and dosing trends of buprenorphine buccal film and transdermal patch in chronic low back pain

Aim: Exploring prescribing trends and economic burden of chronic low back pain (cLBP) patients prescribed buprenorphine buccal film (Belbuca®) or transdermal patches. Methods: In the MarketScan® commercial insurance claims (employees and their spouses/dependents, 2018-2021), the first film or patch prescription date was an index event. The observation covered 6-month pre-index and 12-month post-index periods. Results: Patients were propensity-score matched (708 per cohort). Buprenorphine initiation had stable cost trends in buccal film and increasing trends in transdermal patch cohort. Between-cohort comparisons of healthcare expenditures, cost trends and resource utilization showed significant differences, mostly in favor of buccal film. Buccal film also had higher daily doses and wider dosing range. Conclusion: Buprenorphine film is more cost-effective cLBP treatment with more flexible dosing.

Behavioural 'nudging' interventions to reduce low-value care for low back pain in the emergency department (NUDG-ED): protocol for a 2×2 factorial, before-after, cluster randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

Opioids and imaging are considered low-value care for most people with low back pain. Yet around one in three people presenting to the emergency department (ED) will receive imaging, and two in three will receive an opioid. NUDG-ED aims to determine the effectiveness of two different behavioural 'nudge' interventions on low-value care for ED patients with low back pain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

NUDG-ED is a 2×2 factorial, open-label, before-after, cluster randomised controlled trial. The trial includes 8 ED sites in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be ED clinicians who manage back pain, and patients who are 18 years or over presenting to ED with musculoskeletal back pain. EDs will be randomly assigned to receive (i) patient nudges, (ii) clinician nudges, (iii) both interventions or (iv) no nudge control. The primary outcome will be the proportion of encounters in ED for musculoskeletal back pain where a person received a non-indicated lumbar imaging test, an opioid at discharge or both. We will require 2416 encounters over a 9-month study period (3-month before period and 6-month after period) to detect an absolute difference of 10% in use of low-value care due to either nudge, with 80% power, alpha set at 0.05 and assuming an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.10, and an intraperiod correlation of 0.09. Patient-reported outcome measures will be collected in a subsample of patients (n≥456) 1 week after their initial ED visit. To estimate effects, we will use a multilevel regression model, with a random effect for cluster and patient, a fixed effect indicating the group assignment of each cluster and a fixed effect of time.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has ethical approval from Southwestern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00472). We will disseminate the results of this trial via media, presenting at conferences and scientific publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12623001000695.

Opioids for Acute Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of opioids for people with acute musculoskeletal pain against placebo.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised, placebo-controlled trials of opioid analgesics for acute musculoskeletal pain in any setting. The primary outcomes were pain and disability at the immediate timepoint (< 24 h).

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases were searched from their inception to February 22nd, 2023.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Continuous outcomes were converted to a 0-100 scale. Dichotomous outcomes were presented as risk differences. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed.

RESULTS

We located 17 trials (1 intravenous and 16 oral route of administration). For adults, high certainty evidence from 11 comparisons shows that oral opioids provide small benefits relative to placebo in the immediate term for pain (mean difference [MD] - 8.8 95% confidence interval [CI] - 12.0 to - 5.6). For disability, the difference is uncertain (MD - 6.2, 95% CI - 17.8 to 5.4). Opioid groups were at higher risk of adverse events (MD 14.3%, 95% CI 8.3-20.4%, very low certainty). There was moderate certainty evidence of a large effect of IV morphine on sciatica pain (MD -42.5, 95% CI - 49.9 to - 35.1, n = 197, 1 study). In paediatric populations, moderate certainty evidence from 3 trials shows that oral opioids probably do not provide benefit beyond that of placebo for pain (MD 6.1, 95% CI - 1.7 to 12.8) and there was no evidence for disability. There was low certainty evidence that there may be no difference in adverse events (MD 10.4%, 95% CI - 0.6 to 21.4%).

DISCUSSION

Intravenous morphine likely offers benefits, but oral opioids may not provide clinically meaningful benefits.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021249346.

The Influence of Active, Passive, and Manual Therapy Interventions for Low Back Pain on Opioid Prescription and Health Care Utilization

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore associations between the utilization of active, passive, and manual therapy interventions for low back pain (LBP) with 1-year escalation-of-care events, including opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, specialty care visits, and hospitalizations.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 4827 patients identified via the Military Health System Data Repository who received physical therapist care for LBP in 4 outpatient clinics between January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2018. One-year escalation-of-care events were evaluated based on type of physical therapist interventions (ie, active, passive, or manual therapy) received using adjusted odds ratios.

RESULTS

Most patients (89.9%) received active interventions. Patients with 10% higher proportion of visits that included at least 1 passive intervention had a 3% to 6% higher likelihood of 1-year escalation-of-care events. Similarly, with 10% higher proportion of passive to active interventions used during the course of care, there was a 5% to 11% higher likelihood of 1-year escalation-of-care events. When compared to patients who received active interventions only, the likelihood of incurring 1-year escalation-of-care events was 50% to 220% higher for those who received mechanical traction and 2 or more different passive interventions, but lower by 50% for patients who received manual therapy.

CONCLUSION

Greater use of passive interventions for LBP was associated with elevated odds of 1-year escalation-of-care events. In addition, the use of specific passive interventions such as mechanical traction in conjunction with active interventions resulted in suboptimal escalation-of-care events, while the use of manual therapy was associated with more favorable downstream health care outcomes.

IMPACT

Physical therapists should be judicious in the use of passive interventions for the management of LBP as they are associated with greater likelihood of receiving opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, and specialty care visits.

Understanding general practitioners' prescribing choices to patients with chronic low back pain: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Although NSAIDs are recommended as a first line analgesic treatment, opioids are very commonly prescribed to patients with low back pain (LBP) despite risks of harms.

AIM

This study aimed to determine factors contributing to general practitioners' (GPs') prescribing choices to patients with chronic LBP in a primary care setting.

METHOD

This discrete choice experiment (DCE) presented 210 GPs with hypothetical scenarios of a patient with chronic LBP. Participants chose their preferred treatment for each choice set, either the opioid, NSAID or neither. The scenarios varied by two patient attributes; non-specific LBP or LBP with referred leg pain (sciatica) and number of comorbidities. The three treatment attributes also varied, being: the type of opioid or NSAID, degree of pain reduction and number of adverse events. The significance of each attribute in influencing clinical decisions was the primary outcome and the degree to which GPs preferred the alternative based on the number of adverse events or the amount of pain reduction was the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Overall, GPs preferred NSAIDs (45.2%, 95% CI 38.7-51.7%) over opioids (28.8%, 95% CI 23.0-34.7%), however there was no difference between the type of NSAID or opioid preferred. Additionally, the attributes of pain reduction and adverse events did not influence a GP's choice between NSAIDs or opioids for patients with chronic LBP.

CONCLUSION

GPs prefer prescribing NSAIDs over opioids for a patient with chronic low back pain regardless of patient factors of comorbidities or the presence of leg pain (i.e. sciatica).

Comparison analysis of safety outcomes and the rate of subsequent spinal procedures between interspinous spacer without decompression versus minimally invasive lumbar decompression

INTRODUCTION

Treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) typically begins with conservative care and progresses to minimally invasive procedures, including interspinous spacer without decompression or fusion (ISD) or minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD). This study examined safety outcomes and the rate of subsequent spinal procedures among LSS patients receiving an ISD versus MILD as the first surgical intervention.

METHODS

100% Medicare Standard Analytical Files were used to identify patients with an ISD or MILD (first procedure=index date) from 2017 to 2021. ISD and MILD patients were matched 1:1 using propensity score matching based on demographics and clinical characteristics. Safety outcomes and subsequent spinal procedures were captured from index date until end of follow-up. Cox models were used to analyze rates of subsequent surgical interventions, LSS-related interventions, open decompression, fusion, ISD, and MILD. Cox models were used to assess postoperative complications during follow-up and logistic regression to analyze life-threatening complications within 30 days of index procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 3682 ISD and 5499 MILD patients were identified. After matching, 3614 from each group were included in the analysis (mean age=74 years, mean follow-up=20.0 months). The risk of undergoing any intervention, LSS-related intervention, open decompression, and MILD were 21%, 28%, 21%, and 81% lower among ISD compared with MILD patients. Multivariate analyses showed no significant differences in the risk of undergoing fusion or ISD, experiencing postoperative complications, or life-threatening complications (all p≥0.241) between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

These results showed ISD and MILD procedures have an equivalent safety profile. However, ISDs demonstrated lower rates of open decompression and MILD.

How to treat chronic pain in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) - A pharmacological review

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pain is a common symptom of rheumatic diseases that impacts patients' quality of life. While non-pharmacological approaches are often recommended as first-line treatments, pharmacological interventions are important for pain management. However, the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacological treatments for chronic pain in rheumatic diseases are unclear.

METHODS

This review critically synthesizes the current evidence base to guide clinicians in selecting appropriate pharmacological treatments for their patients, considering the expected benefits and potential risks and side effects.

RESULTS

For osteoarthritis, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, opioids, and antidepressants are commonly used, with NSAIDs being the most recommended. In addition, topical agents, such as topical NSAIDs, are recommended for localized pain relief. For fibromyalgia, amitriptyline, serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and gabapentinoids are commonly used, with SNRIs being the most recommended. For back pain, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, opioids are used only for acute of flare-up pain, whereas neuropathic pain drugs are only used for chronic radicular pain. For inflammatory rheumatic diseases, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biological agents are recommended to slow disease progression and manage symptoms.

CONCLUSION

While DMARDs and biological agents are recommended for inflammatory rheumatic diseases, pharmacological treatments for other rheumatic diseases only alleviate symptoms and do not provide a cure for the underlying condition. The use of pharmacological treatments should be based on the expected benefits and evaluation of side effects, with non-pharmacological modalities also being considered, especially for fibromyalgia.

Comparative effectiveness of pain control between opioids and gabapentinoids in older patients with chronic pain

ABSTRACT

Gabapentinoid (GABA) prescribing has substantially increased while opioid prescribing has decreased since the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guidelines restricted opioid prescribing for chronic pain. The shift to GABA assumes equal analgesic effectiveness to opioids, but no comparative analgesic effectiveness data exist to support this assumption. We compared GABA to opioids by assessing changes in pain interfering with activities (activity-limiting pain) over time in patients with chronic pain. We used 2017 to 2019 data from a 20% national sample of Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with chronic pain who initiated a GABA or opioid prescription for ≥30 continuous days and received home health care in the study year. The main outcome was the difference in reduction in pain score from pre- to post-prescription assessments between the 2 groups. Within a 60-day window before-and-after drug initiation, our sample comprised 3208 GABA users and 2846 opioid users. Reduction in post-prescription scores of pain-related interference with activities to less-than-daily pain was 48.1% in the GABA group and 41.7% in the opioid group; this remained significant (odds ratio = 1.29, 95% confidence interval: 1.17-1.43, P < 0.0001) after adjustment for patient demographics and comorbidities. The adjusted difference in reduced pain-related interference score between the 2 groups was -0.10 points on a 0 to 4 scale ( P = 0.01). Gabapentinoid use had greater odds of less-than-daily pain post-prescription, in a dose-dependent manner. Thus, GABA use was associated with a larger reduction in chronic pain than opioids, with a larger effect at higher GABA dosage. Future research is needed on functional outcomes in patients with chronic pain prescribed GABA or opioids.

Treatment characteristics of chronic low back pain patients treated with buprenorphine buccal film or transdermal patch

Aims: Retrospective insurance claims analysis exploring treatment characteristics in chronic low back pain patients prescribed buprenorphine buccal film (Belbuca®) or transdermal patches. Patients and methods: The first buprenorphine prescription (buccal film or transdermal patch) was an index event. Patients were observed over 6 month pre- and post-index periods. Propensity score matching minimized the selection bias. Results: Buccal film patients had a higher buprenorphine daily dose (501.7 vs 270.9 µg; p < 0.001). The patch-to-film switching rate was higher than vice versa (11.5 vs 3.8%; p < 0.001). The buccal film showed a greater reduction in opioid prescriptions (-1.1 vs -0.7; p = 0.012), daily morphine milligram equivalents (-12.6 vs -7.3; p < 0.001) and opioid treatment duration (-13.4 vs -7.6 days; p = 0.022). Conclusion: Buccal film was associated with higher buprenorphine doses and a greater reduction of opioid burden.

Efficacy and safety of thermobalancing therapy with Dr Allen's Device for chronic low back pain: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc herniation and non-specific low back pain are common conditions that seriously affect patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although empirical evidence has demonstrated that novel Thermobalancing therapy and Dr Allen's Device can relieve chronic low back pain, there have been no randomised controlled trials for these indications.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of Dr Allen's Device in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).

METHODS

A randomised clinical trial was conducted investigating 55 patients with chronic low back pain due to LDH (n = 28) or NSLBP (n = 27), out of which 15 were randomly assigned to the control group and 40 were assigned to the treatment group. The intervention was treatment with Dr Allen's Device for 3 mo. Changes in HRQoL were assessed using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Thermobalancing therapy with Dr Allen's Device showed a significant reduction in pain in the treatment group (P < 0.001), with no recorded adverse effects. Both pain assessment scales showed a significant improvement in patients' perception of pain indicating improvement in HRQoL.

CONCLUSION

The out-of-hospital use of Thermobalancing therapy with Dr Allen's Device for Low Back Treatment relieves chronic low back pain significantly and without adverse effects, improves the level of activity and HRQoL among patients with LDH and NSLBP. This study demonstrates the importance of this safe first-line therapy that can be used for effective at-home management of chronic low back pain.

Medical Cannabis and Its Efficacy/Effectiveness for the Treatment of Low-Back Pain: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This systematic review aims to inform the current state of evidence about the efficacy and effectiveness of medical cannabis use for the treatment of LBP, specifically on pain levels and overall opioid use for LBP. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and CINAHL. The search was limited to the past 10 years (2011-2021). Study inclusion was determined by the critical appraisal process using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework. Only English language articles were included. Participant demographics included all adult individuals with LBP who were prescribed medical cannabis for LBP and may be concurrently using opioids for their LBP. Study quality and the risk of bias were both evaluated. A narrative synthesis approach was used.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of twelve studies were included in the synthesis: one randomized controlled trial (RCT), six observational studies (one prospective, four retrospective, and one cross-over), and five case studies. All study results, except for the RCT, indicated a decrease in LBP levels or opioid use over time after medical cannabis use. The RCT reported no statistically significant difference in LBP between cannabis and placebo groups. Low back pain (LBP) affects 568 million people worldwide. In the United States, LBP treatment represents more than half of regular opioid users. With the opioid epidemic, alternative methods, particularly medical cannabis, is now increasingly sought by practicing physicians and patients. Due to its infancy, there is minimal high-quality evidence to support medical cannabis use as a first line treatment for LBP.

Treating persistent pain after breast cancer: practice gaps and future directions

This paper discusses the growing problem of persisting pain after successful treatment of breast cancer and presents recommendations for improving pain-related outcomes for this group. We discuss the dominant treatment approach for persisting pain post-breast cancer treatment and draw contrasts with contemporary treatment approaches to persistent pain in non-cancer-related populations. We discuss modern application of the biopsychosocial model of pain and the notion of variable sensitivity within the pain system, moment by moment and over time. We present the implications of increasing sensitivity over time for treatment selection and implementation. By drawing on transformative changes in treatment approaches to persistent non-cancer-related pain, we describe the potentially powerful role that an intervention called pain science education, which is now recommended in clinical guidelines for musculoskeletal pain, may play in improving pain and disability outcomes after successful breast cancer treatment. Finally, we present several research recommendations that centre around adaptation of the content and delivery models of contemporary pain science education, to the post-breast cancer context.

Prescription Opioid Initiation for Neuropathy, Headache, and Low Back Pain: A US Population-based Medicare Study

Neuropathy, headache, and low back pain (LBP) are common conditions requiring pain management. Yet little is known regarding whether access to specialists impacts opioid prescribing. We aimed to identify factors associated with opioid initiation among opioid-naïve older adults and evaluate how access to particular specialists impacts prescribing. This retrospective cohort study used a 20% Medicare sample from 2010 to 2017. Opioid initiation was defined as a first opioid prescription filled within 12 months after a diagnosis encounter. Disease-related opioid initiation was defined as a first opioid prescription filled within 7 days following a disease-specific claim. Logistic regression using generalized estimating equations was used to determine the association of patient demographics, provider types, and regional physician specialty density with disease-related opioid initiation, accounting for within-region correlation. We found opioid initiation steadily declined from 2010 to 2017 (neuropathy: 26-19%, headache: 31-20%, LBP: 45-32%), as did disease-related opioid initiation (4-3%, 12-7%, 29-19%) and 5 to 10% of initial disease-related prescriptions resulted in chronic opioid use within 12 months of initiation. Certain specialist visits were associated with a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation compared with primary care. Residence in high neurologist density regions had a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation (headache odds ratio [OR] .76 [95% CI: .63-.92]) and LBP (OR .7 [95% CI: .61-.81]) and high podiatrist density regions for neuropathy (OR .56 [95% CI: .41-.78]). We found that specialist visits and greater access to specialists were associated with a lower likelihood of disease-related opioid initiation. These data could inform strategies to perpetuate reductions in opioid use for these common pain conditions. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents how opioid initiation for opioid-naïve patients with newly diagnosed neuropathy, headache, and LBP varies across providers. Greater access to certain specialists decreased the likelihood of opioid initiation. Future work may consider interventions to support alternative treatments and better access to specialists in low-density regions.

Clinical Observation, Management and Function Of low back pain Relief Therapies (COMFORT): A cluster randomised controlled trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is commonly treated with opioid analgesics despite evidence that these medicines provide minimal or no benefit for LBP and have an established profile of harms. International guidelines discourage or urge caution with the use of opioids for back pain; however, doctors and patients lack practical strategies to help them implement the guidelines. This trial will evaluate a multifaceted intervention to support general practitioners (GPs) and their patients with LBP implement the recommendations in the latest opioid prescribing guidelines.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a cluster randomised controlled trial that will evaluate the effect of educational outreach visits to GPs promoting opioid stewardship alongside non-pharmacological interventions including heat wrap and patient education about the possible harms and benefits of opioids, on GP prescribing of opioids medicines dispensed. At least 40 general practices will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention or control (no outreach visits; GP provides usual care). A total of 410 patient-participants (205 in each arm) who have been prescribed an opioid for LBP will be enrolled via participating general practices. Follow-up of patient-participants will occur over a 1-year period. The primary outcome will be the cumulative dose of opioid dispensed that was prescribed by study GPs over 1 year from the enrolment visit (in morphine milligram equivalent dose). Secondary outcomes include prescription of opioid medicines, benzodiazepines, gabapentinoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs by study GPs or any GP, health services utilisation and patient-reported outcomes such as pain, quality of life and adverse events. Analysis will be by intention to treat, with a health economics analysis also planned.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial received ethics approval from The University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (2022/511). The results will be disseminated via publications in journals, media and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12622001505796.

The effectiveness of clinic versus home-based, artificial intelligence-guided therapy in patients with low back pain: Non-randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common cause of disability in the US with increasing financial burden on healthcare. A variety of treatment options exist to combat LBP. Home-based therapy is a low-cost option, but there is a lack of data on how it compares to therapy in clinical settings. It was hypothesized that when using artificial intelligence-guided therapy, supervised in-clinic interventions would have a greater influence on patient-reported outcomes and strength than unsupervised, home interventions.

METHODS

This is a non-randomized controlled trial of 51 patients (28 female, 23 male). The investigation compared an 8-week, core-focused exercise intervention in a Clinic (supervised) versus Home (unsupervised) setting. Outcome variables included measures of strength, performance, and patient-reported outcomes related to function. Generalized linear regression (p < 0.05) was used to evaluate outcomes were evaluated with respect to sex, intervention setting, and time.

FINDINGS

Male subjects exhibited greater strength (p ≤ 0.02) but not greater patient-reported outcomes (p ≥ 0.30) than females. The Clinic group exhibited slightly greater lateral pull-down strength (p = 0.002), greater eccentric phase range of motion during overhead press (p < 0.01), and shorter concentric phase duration during bench press (p < 0.01) than the Home group. Significance between groups was not observed in any other strength, performance, or patient-reported outcome (p ≥ 0.11).

INTERPRETATION

A lack of consistent significance indicated that the hypothesis was not supported. AI-guided, telehealth exercise produced comparable outcomes in both home and clinical settings. Telehealth options may offer a lower-cost alternative to clinic-based exercise therapy for patients with nonspecific lower back pain.

Opioid coping motives and pain intensity among adults with chronic low back pain: associations with mood, pain reactivity, and opioid misuse

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a significant public health problem that is associated with opioid misuse and use disorder. Despite limited evidence for the efficacy of opioids in the management of chronic pain, they continue to be prescribed and people with CLBP are at increased risk for misuse. Identifying individual difference factors involved in opioid misuse, such as pain intensity as well as reasons for using opioids (also known as motives), may provide pertinent clinical information to reduce opioid misuse among this vulnerable population. Therefore, the aims of the current study were to examine the relationships between opioid motives-to cope with pain-related distress and pain intensity, in terms of anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, pain-related anxiety, and opioid misuse among 300 (Mage= 45.69, SD = 11.17, 69% female) adults with CLBP currently using opioids. Results from the current study suggest that both pain intensity and motives to cope with pain-related distress with opioids were associated with all criterion variables, but the magnitude of variance explained by coping motives was larger than pain intensity in terms of opioid misuse. The present findings provide initial empirical evidence for the importance of motives to cope with pain-related distress with opioids and pain intensity in efforts to better understand opioid misuse and related clinical correlates among adults with CLBP.

Process evaluation of the implementation of an evidence-based model of care for low back pain in Australian emergency departments

BACKGROUND

The Sydney Health Partners Emergency Department (SHaPED) trial targeted ED clinicians and evaluated a multifaceted strategy to implement a new model of care. The objective of this study was to investigate attitudes and experiences of ED clinicians as well as barriers and facilitators for implementation of the model of care.

DESIGN

A qualitative study.

METHODS

The EDs of three urban and one rural hospital in New South Wales, Australia participated in the trial between August and November 2018. A sample of clinicians was invited to participate in qualitative interviews via telephone and face-to-face. The data collected from the interviews were coded and grouped in themes using thematic analysis methods.

RESULTS

Non-opioid pain management strategies (i.e., patient education, simple analgesics, and heat wraps) were perceived to be the most helpful strategy for reducing opioid use by ED clinicians. However, time constraints and rotation of junior medical staff were seen as the main barriers for uptake of the model of care. Fear of missing a serious pathology and the clinicians' conviction of a need to provide something for the patient were seen as barriers to reducing lumbar imaging referrals. Other barriers to guideline endorsed care included patient's expectations and characteristics (e.g., older age and symptoms severity).

CONCLUSIONS

Improving knowledge of non-opioid pain management strategies was seen as a helpful strategy for reducing opioid use. However, clinicians also raised barriers related to the ED environment, clinicians' behaviour, and cultural aspects, which should be addressed in future implementation efforts.

Different Gabapentin and Pregabalin Dosages for Perioperative Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

IMPORTANCE

Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain. The optimal dosage of pregabalin and gabapentin for pain control and safety in these patients has not been well established.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations of pain, opioid consumption, and adverse events with different dosages of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients undergoing spine surgery.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases were searched for articles until August 7, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials conducted among patients who received pregabalin or gabapentin while undergoing spine surgery were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two investigators independently performed data extraction following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reporting guideline. The network meta-analysis was conducted from August 2022 to February 2023 using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was pain intensity measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and secondary outcomes included opioid consumption and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials with 1861 patients (median age, 45.99 years [range, 20.00-70.00 years]; 759 women [40.8%]) were included in the systematic review and network meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, the VAS pain score was lowest with gabapentin 900 mg per day, followed by gabapentin 1200 mg per day, gabapentin 600 mg per day, gabapentin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 150 mg per day, and pregabalin 75 mg per day. Additionally, gabapentin 900 mg per day was found to be associated with the lowest opioid consumption among all dosages of gabapentin and pregabalin, with a mean difference of -22.07% (95% CI, -33.22% to -10.92%) for the surface under the cumulative ranking curve compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events (nausea, vomiting, and dizziness) among all treatments. No substantial inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence was detected for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that gabapentin 900 mg per day before spine surgery is associated with the lowest VAS pain score among all dosages. In addition, no differences in adverse events were noted among all treatments.

Opioid analgesia for acute low back pain and neck pain (the OPAL trial): a randomised placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Opioid analgesics are commonly used for acute low back pain and neck pain, but supporting efficacy data are scarce. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a judicious short course of an opioid analgesic for acute low back pain and neck pain.

METHODS

OPAL was a triple-blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trial that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) presenting to one of 157 primary care or emergency department sites in Sydney, NSW, Australia, with 12 weeks or less of low back or neck pain (or both) of at least moderate pain severity. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using statistician-generated randomly permuted blocks to guideline-recommended care plus an opioid (oxycodone-naloxone, up to 20 mg oxycodone per day orally) or guideline-recommended care and an identical placebo, for up to 6 weeks. The primary outcome was pain severity at 6 weeks measured with the pain severity subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory (10-point scale), analysed in all eligible participants who provided at least one post-randomisation pain score, by use of a repeated measures linear mixed model. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000775516).

FINDINGS

Between Feb 29, 2016, and March 10, 2022, 347 participants were recruited (174 to the opioid group and 173 to the placebo group). 170 (49%) of 346 participants were female and 176 (51%) were male. 33 (19%) of 174 participants in the opioid group and 25 (15%) of 172 in the placebo group had discontinued from the trial by week 6, due to loss to follow-up and participant withdrawals. 151 participants in the opioid group and 159 in the placebo group were included in the primary analysis. Mean pain score at 6 weeks was 2·78 (SE 0·20) in the opioid group versus 2·25 (0·19) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference 0·53, 95% CI -0·00 to 1·07, p=0·051). 61 (35%) of 174 participants in the opioid group reported at least one adverse event versus 51 (30%) of 172 in the placebo group (p=0·30), but more people in the opioid group reported opioid-related adverse events (eg, 13 [7·5%] of 174 participants in the opioid group reported constipation vs six [3·5%] of 173 in the placebo group).

INTERPRETATION

Opioids should not be recommended for acute non-specific low back pain or neck pain given that we found no significant difference in pain severity compared with placebo. This finding calls for a change in the frequent use of opioids for these conditions.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council, University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, and SafeWork SA.

Umbrella Review of Primary Care Treatments for Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify, critically assess, and summarize evidence of the effectiveness of primary care treatments for adults with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP).

METHODS

We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews focusing on primary care treatments for NSCLBP. We searched the PubMed and Cochrane library databases for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating primary care treatments for adults with NSCLBP published between January 2007 and March 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of these systematic reviews using the AMSTAR checklist. We selected systematic reviews with a low or moderate risk of bias and graded the evidence based on Grading of GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

Among the initial 66 systematic reviews meeting our inclusion criteria, 19 systematic reviews with low or moderate bias risk were selected for analysis. These reviews included a total of 365 studies involving 62 832 participants. The evidence suggested moderate to high support for the effectiveness of certain primary care treatments in improving pain and function in NSCLBP patients. These treatments included NSAIDs and opioids compared to placebos, spinal manipulation versus exercise/physical therapy, and MBR versus exercise/education/advice/no treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations for specific primary care treatments for NSCLBP in adults remain inconclusive. Further high-quality systematic reviews and RCTs are needed to better understand the effectiveness of these treatments. Future RCTs should prioritize the assessment of NSAIDs, opioids, spinal manipulation, and MBR, as they appear promising for improving NSCLBP outcomes in certain comparisons.

Between guidelines and clinical trials: evidence-based advice on the pharmacological management of non-specific chronic low back pain

The pharmacological management of nonspecific chronic low back pain (NCLBP) aims to restore patients' daily activities and improve their quality of life. The management of NCLBP is not well codified and extremely heterogeneous, and residual symptoms are common. Pharmacological management should be considered as co-adjuvant to non-pharmacological therapy, and should be guided by the symptoms reported by the patients. Depending on the individual severity of NCLPB, pharmacological management may range from nonopioid to opioid analgesics. It is important to identify patients with generalized sensory hypersensitivity, who may benefit from dedicated therapy. This article provides an evidence-based overview of the principles of pharmacological management of NCLPB.

Performance in emotion recognition and theory of mind tasks in social anxiety and generalized anxiety disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Social cognition impairments may be associated with poor functional outcomes, symptoms, and disability in social anxiety disorder (SAD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This meta-analysis aims to determine if emotion recognition and theory of mind (ToM) are impaired in SAD or GAD compared to healthy controls. A systematic review was conducted in electronic databases (PubMed, PsycNet, and Web of Science) to retrieve studies assessing emotion recognition and/or ToM in patients with SAD or GAD, compared to healthy controls, up to March 2022. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were conducted. We identified 21 eligible studies: 13 reported emotion recognition and 10 ToM outcomes, with 585 SAD patients, 178 GAD patients, and 753 controls. Compared to controls, patients with SAD exhibited impairments in emotion recognition (SMD = -0.32, CI = -0.47 - -0.16, z = -3.97, p < 0.0001) and ToM (SMD = -0.44, CI = -0.83 -0.04, z = -2.18, p < 0.01). Results for GAD were inconclusive due to the limited number of studies meeting the inclusion criteria (two for each domain). Relevant demographic and clinical variables (age, sex, education level, and anxiety scores) were not significantly correlated with emotion recognition or ToM impairments in SAD and GAD. Further studies employing ecological measures with larger and homogenous samples are needed to better delineate the factors influencing social cognition outcomes in both SAD and GAD.

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for sciatica: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of surgery compared with non-surgical treatment for sciatica.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to June 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials comparing any surgical treatment with non-surgical treatment, epidural steroid injections, or placebo or sham surgery, in people with sciatica of any duration due to lumbar disc herniation (diagnosed by radiological imaging).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data. Leg pain and disability were the primary outcomes. Adverse events, back pain, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment were the secondary outcomes. Pain and disability scores were converted to a scale of 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst pain or disability). Data were pooled using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and certainty of evidence with the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) framework. Follow-up times were into immediate term (≤six weeks), short term (>six weeks and ≤three months), medium term (>three and <12 months), and long term (at 12 months).

RESULTS

24 trials were included, half of these investigated the effectiveness of discectomy compared with non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections (1711 participants). Very low to low certainty evidence showed that discectomy, compared with non-surgical treatment, reduced leg pain: the effect size was moderate at immediate term (mean difference -12.1 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -0.5)) and short term (-11.7 (-18.6 to -4.7)), and small at medium term (-6.5 (-11.0 to -2.1)). Negligible effects were noted at long term (-2.3 (-4.5 to -0.2)). For disability, small, negligible, or no effects were found. A similar effect on leg pain was found when comparing discectomy with epidural steroid injections. For disability, a moderate effect was found at short term, but no effect was observed at medium and long term. The risk of any adverse events was similar between discectomy and non-surgical treatment (risk ratio 1.34 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.98)).

CONCLUSION

Very low to low certainty evidence suggests that discectomy was superior to non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections in reducing leg pain and disability in people with sciatica with a surgical indication, but the benefits declined over time. Discectomy might be an option for people with sciatica who feel that the rapid relief offered by discectomy outweighs the risks and costs associated with surgery.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021269997.

Tolerability and efficacy of duloxetine for the prevention of persistent musculoskeletal pain after trauma and injury: a pilot three-group randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the tolerability and preliminary efficacy of duloxetine as an alternative nonopioid therapeutic option for the prevention of persistent musculoskeletal pain (MSP) among adults presenting to the emergency department with acute MSP after trauma or injury. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, eligible participants (n = 78) were randomized to 2 weeks of a daily dose of one of the following: placebo (n = 27), 30 mg duloxetine (n = 24), or 60 mg duloxetine (n = 27). Tolerability, the primary outcome, was measured by dropout rate and adverse effects. Secondary outcomes assessed drug efficacy as measured by (1) the proportion of participants with moderate to severe pain (numerical rating scale ≥ 4) at 6 weeks (pain persistence); and (2) average pain by group over the six-week study period. We also explored treatment effects by type of trauma (motor vehicle collision [MVC] vs non-MVC). In both intervention groups, duloxetine was well tolerated and there were no serious adverse events. There was a statistically significant difference in pain over time for the 60 mg vs placebo group ( P = 0.03) but not for the 30 mg vs placebo group ( P = 0.51). In both types of analyses, the size of the effect of duloxetine was larger in MVC vs non-MVC injury. Consistent with the role of stress systems in the development of chronic pain after traumatic stress, our data indicate duloxetine may be a treatment option for reducing the transition from acute to persistent MSP. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these promising results.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to 20 February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials of analgesic medicines (eg, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, opioids, anti-convulsant drugs, skeletal muscle relaxants, or corticosteroids) compared with another analgesic medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Adults (≥18 years) who reported acute non-specific low back pain (for less than six weeks).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity (0-100 scale) at end of treatment and safety (number of participants who reported any adverse event during treatment). Secondary outcomes were low back specific function, serious adverse events, and discontinuation from treatment. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was done and confidence was evaluated by the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis method.

RESULTS

98 randomised controlled trials (15 134 participants, 49% women) included 69 different medicines or combinations. Low or very low confidence was noted in evidence for reduced pain intensity after treatment with tolperisone (mean difference -26.1 (95% confidence intervals -34.0 to -18.2)), aceclofenac plus tizanidine (-26.1 (-38.5 to -13.6)), pregabalin (-24.7 (-34.6 to -14.7)), and 14 other medicines compared with placebo. Low or very low confidence was noted for no difference between the effects of several of these medicines. Increased adverse events had moderate to very low confidence with tramadol (risk ratio 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.5)), paracetamol plus sustained release tramadol (2.4 (1.5 to 3.8)), baclofen (2.3 (1.5 to 3.4)), and paracetamol plus tramadol (2.1 (1.3 to 3.4)) compared with placebo. These medicines could increase the risk of adverse events compared with other medicines with moderate to low confidence. Moderate to low confidence was also noted for secondary outcomes and secondary analysis of medicine classes.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain are uncertain. Until higher quality randomised controlled trials of head-to-head comparisons are published, clinicians and patients are recommended to take a cautious approach to manage acute non-specific low back pain with analgesic medicines.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019145257.

Doctor trustworthiness influences pain and its neural correlates in virtual medical interactions

Trust is an important component of the doctor-patient relationship and is associated with improved patient satisfaction and health outcomes. Previously, we reported that patient feelings of trust and similarity toward their clinician predicted reductions in evoked pain in response to painful heat stimulations. In the present study, we investigated the brain mechanisms underlying this effect. We used face stimuli previously developed using a data-driven computational modeling approach that differ in perceived trustworthiness and superimposed them on bodies dressed in doctors' attire. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, participants (n = 42) underwent a series of virtual medical interactions with these doctors during which they received painful heat stimulation as an analogue of a painful diagnostic procedure. Participants reported increased pain when receiving painful heat stimulations from low-trust doctors, which was accompanied by increased activity in pain-related brain regions and a multivariate pain-predictive neuromarker. Findings suggest that patient trust in their doctor may have tangible impacts on pain and point to a potential brain basis for trust-related reductions in pain through the modulation of brain circuitry associated with the sensory-discriminative and affective-motivational dimensions of pain.

Improving Power and Accuracy in Randomized Controlled Trials of Pain Treatments by Accounting for Concurrent Analgesic Use

The 0 to 10 numeric rating scale of pain intensity is a standard outcome in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pain treatments. For individuals taking analgesics, there may be a disparity between "observed" pain intensity (pain intensity with concurrent analgesic use) and pain intensity without concurrent analgesic use (what the numeric rating scale would be had analgesics not been taken). Using a contemporary causal inference framework, we compare analytic methods that can potentially account for concurrent analgesic use, first in statistical simulations, and second in analyses of real (non-simulated) data from an RCT of lumbar epidural steroid injections. The default analytic method was ignoring analgesic use, which is the most common approach in pain RCTs. Compared to ignoring analgesic use and other analytic methods, simulations showed that a quantitative pain and analgesia composite outcome based on adding 1.5 points to pain intensity for those who were taking an analgesic (the QPAC1.5) optimized power and minimized bias. Analyses of real RCT data supported the results of the simulations, showing greater power with analysis of the QPAC1.5 as compared to ignoring analgesic use and most other methods examined. We propose alternative methods that should be considered in the analysis of pain RCTs. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the conceptual framework behind a new quantitative pain and analgesia composite outcome, the QPAC1.5, and the results of statistical simulations and analyses of trial data supporting improvements in power and bias using the QPAC1.5. Methods of this type should be considered in the analysis of pain RCTs.

Person-centred education and advice for people with low back pain: Making the best of what we know

BACKGROUND

The first-line treatment consistently recommended for people with low back pain is patient education and advice. Regardless of the duration of low back pain, clinicians should provide education on the benign nature of low back pain, reassurance about the absence of a serious medical condition, and advice to remain active. There is little guidance on how best to provide this care.

OBJECTIVE

This Masterclass will draw on recent evidence to explore how physical therapy clinicians could deliver person-centred education and advice to people with low back pain to refine their clinical consultation.

DISCUSSION

First, we highlight the potential value of providing validation to acknowledge the distressing experience and consequences of low back pain. Second, we describe a tool to open channels of communication to provide education and advice in a patient-centred and efficient way. Clinicians could consider using the Attitude toward Education and advice for Low back pain Questionnaire to gain an insight into patient attitudes toward education and advice at the outset of a clinical encounter. Finally, we provide options for tailoring patient education and advice to promote self-management of low back pain based on patient attitudes. We present evidence that a positive attitude toward messages about causes rather than messages about physical activity predicts intention to self-manage low back pain. We combine this evidence to suggest a pathway for clinicians to provide education and advice to people with low back pain within the time constraints of a clinical consultation.

Assessment and nonsurgical management of low back pain: a narrative review

Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition that affects people of all ages and income levels worldwide. The etiology of LBP may be mechanical, neuropathic, systemic, referred visceral, or secondary to other causes. Despite numerous studies, the diagnosis and management of LBP remain challenging due to the complex biomechanics of the spine and confounding factors, such as trivial degenerative imaging findings irrelevant to symptoms and psychological and emotional factors. However, it is imperative to identify the crucial signs ("red flags") indicating a serious underlying condition. While many recent guidelines emphasize non-pharmacologic management approaches, such as education, reassurance, and physical and psychological care, as the first option, LBP patients in many countries, including South Korea, are prescribed medications. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation combined with prudent use of medications is required in patients unresponsive to first-line therapy. The development of practical guidelines apposite for South Korea is needed with multidisciplinary discussion.