Coordination of primary health care for back pain. A randomized controlled trial

The effectiveness of ergonomic interventions on return-to-work after low back pain; a prospective two year cohort study in six countries on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3-4 months

AIMS

To study occurrence and effectiveness of ergonomic interventions on return-to-work applied for workers with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

A multinational cohort of 1631 workers fully sicklisted 3-4 months due to LBP (ICD-9 codes 721, 722, 724) was recruited from sickness benefit claimants databases in Denmark, Germany, Israel, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United States. Medical, ergonomic, and other interventions, working status, and return-to-work were measured using questionnaires and interviews at three months, one and two years after the start of sickleave. Main outcome measure was time to return-to-work. Cox's proportional hazards model was used to calculate hazard ratios regarding the time to return-to-work, adjusted for prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Ergonomic interventions varied considerably in occurrence between the national cohorts: 23.4% (mean) of the participants reported adaptation of the workplace, ranging from 15.0% to 30.5%. Adaptation of job tasks and adaptation of working hours was applied for 44.8% (range 41.0-59.2%) and 46.0% (range 19.9-62.9%) of the participants, respectively. Adaptation of the workplace was effective on return-to-work rate with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.47 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.72; p < 0.0001). Adaptation of job tasks and adaptation of working hours were effective on return-to-work after a period of more than 200 days of sickleave with an adjusted HR of 1.78 (95% CI 1.42 to 2.23; p < 0.0001) and 1.41 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.76; p = 0.002), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that ergonomic interventions are effective on return-to-work of workers long term sicklisted due to LBP.

Acute back pain management in primary care: a qualitative pilot study of the feasibility of a nurse-led service in general practice

OBJECTIVES

(1) To determine the acceptability of the Royal College of General Practitioner Guidelines to small samples of nurses, General Practitioners and acute back pain patients, (2) to determine what additional roles for nurses in the management of acute back pain in primary care might be acceptable to these samples, (3) to evaluate the responses of General Practitioners, nurses and patients to a suggested service model based on the RCGP Guidelines, (4) to identify opportunities for and barriers to the further development of such models and to obtain the appraisal of the above by an external group of assessors.

METHODOLOGY

Using a qualitative design the pilot study included Primary Care (General Practitioners, Practice Nurses and Patients) with the main outcome measures as: appraisal questionnaires (for RCGP Guideline), qualitative content analysis of focus group narratives, and appraisal of process and outcomes by an external panel.

RESULTS

Attitudes towards the RCGP guidelines were positive, but professionals and patients alike did not think their recommendations could be implemented with the current service provision in primary care. There was criticism by professionals of the capacity for a nurse-led service within practices. Access to chiropractors, osteopaths and/or specialist physiotherapists in National Health Service primary care was raised as a need by both groups. All members of the Advisory Panel approved the processes for the recruitment of participants, focus group questions and analysis.

DISCUSSION

Barriers to implementation of the RCGP Guideline and to a nurse-led acute back pain service in general practice, were illustrated. These mainly relate to grossly inadequate capacity to deal with multidimensional patient needs, allowing progression to chronic pain states and much higher health care costs. There was a strong desire to include a different group of professionals in primary care. We recommend a local needs assessment and consideration of a national strategy for the implementation of the RCGP Guideline in primary care.

What factors influence provider knowledge of a congestive heart failure guideline in a national health care system?

Provider knowledge is a potential barrier to adherence to clinical guidelines. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of organizational, provider, and guideline factors on provider knowledge of a congestive heart failure (CHF) clinical practice guideline (CPG) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health care system. We developed a survey to investigate institution-level factors influencing the effectiveness of guideline implementation, including characteristics of the guideline, providers, hospital culture and structure, and regional network. Survey participants were quality managers, primary care administrators, and other individuals involved in primary care CPG implementation at 143 VHA hospitals with ambulatory care clinics. Potential explanatory variables were grouped into 11 factors. Multivariate regression models assessed the association between these factors and reported levels of provider knowledge regarding the CHF guideline at the hospital level. Two hundred forty surveys from 126 of 143 (88%) VHA hospitals were returned. Provider knowledge of the CHF guideline was estimated as "great" or "very great" by 58% of respondents. Three predictor factors (dissemination approaches, use of technology in guideline implementation, and hospital culture) were independently associated (P < or = .05) with provider knowledge. Specific variables within these categories that were related to greater knowledge included physician belief that guidelines were applicable to their practice, distribution of guideline summaries, use of guideline storyboards in clinic areas, the use of technology (eg, electronic patient records) in CPG implementation, and establishment of implementation checkpoints and deadlines. Provider knowledge of guidelines is affected by factors at various organizational levels: dissemination approaches, use of technology, and hospital culture. Guideline implementation efforts that target multiple organizational levels may increase provider knowledge.

Usefulness of functional outcome questionnaires in primary screening of spinal disease

Back pain screening clinics are established to clinically screen patients with back pain for organic lumbar pathology. The aim of this study is to assess the relationship between clinical signs of organic pathology and the level of disability as measured by functional outcome scores. Sixty-nine patients who were found to have clinical signs of organic pathology and 69 age- and sex-matched patients from 512 patients who were found to have no signs of organic pathology in the same time period in the back pain screening clinic were selected. The Oswestry Disability, Short Form-36, and visual analogue (pain) scores between the two groups were statistically analyzed. We found a significant increase in the level of disability in the group with organic pathology; however, the variation in the scores makes them unspecific for use in screening of acute spinal pathology. We also found a strong relationship between psychologic disability and length of symptoms.

Employer attitudes, training, and return-to-work outcomes: a pilot study

This work was concerned with investigating and changing employer attitudes and practices that impede return to work and rehabilitation for injured workers. Prior studies have shown that employer responses to workers reporting work-related musculoskeletal discomfort have significant and independent effects on disability outcomes. Based on these findings, a pilot training program was developed by occupational rehabilitation specialists to improve the response of supervisors to employees reporting work-related injuries. The training was delivered to 108 supervisors at seven southeastern New Hampshire companies that volunteered to participate. A survey was developed and pilot-tested, then administered before the training. Survey participants were employees who had work-related injuries in the past year. The survey asked about types and onset of injury, specific supervisor responses, and overall impression of supervisor interaction at the time of injury. Employee responses before the intervention were compared with those collected from workers who reported injuries after the training. The postintervention results demonstrated significant decreases in supervisors (1) blaming employees for the injury, (2) not taking the condition seriously, and (3) discouraging the worker from filing a claim. Positive trends in confidentiality of discussions, access to medical care, and accommodation and work modifications were also noted. Although anecdotal reports from the companies indicated a consistent decrease in work-related lost time after the intervention, actual verification was not possible, and other components of the intervention may have accounted for this outcome. Small numbers of cases and possible lack of comparability of cases before and after the intervention are significant limitations. However, rehabilitation professionals may be able to improve disability management practices and accommodations through employer education, especially when training is directed toward front-line supervisors.

Practice guidelines and measurement: state-of-the-science

BACKGROUND

Restructuring of the health care system has exposed widespread evidence of practice variability and has highlighted the benefits associated with nurses embracing interdisciplinary, best practice solutions to health care delivery. Clinical practice guidelines have emerged as a valuable interdisciplinary evidenced-based tool.

PURPOSE

This article explores the state of the science of guideline measurement and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of measurement approaches.

METHOD

A computerized search of Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Medline, and PubMed for the search term "practice guidelines" was combined with the following key words: attitudes, adherence, effect, impact, instrument, and measurement.

DISCUSSION

Measurement issues identified in this analysis are related to the manner in which guidelines are written and the lack of a standard methodology for measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenge remains to establish sound measures of adherence and impact while controlling for confounding variables. Questions remain as to the format of practice guidelines to best grant autonomy while offering recommendations that are clear and measurable.

Return-to-work interventions for low back pain: a descriptive review of contents and concepts of working mechanisms

Low back pain is a major medical and social problem associated with disability, work absenteeism and high costs. Given the impact of the problem, there is a need for effective treatment interventions in occupational healthcare that aim at the prevention of chronic disability and the realisation of return to work. These so-called return-to-work (RTW) interventions are becoming increasingly popular. As well as questions concerning the effectiveness of RTW interventions, there are also important questions on the actual content and underlying concepts of these multifactorial intervention strategies. The purpose of this review is to examine the literature on the content and underlying concepts of RTW interventions for low back pain. A systematic literature search identified 14 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of 19 RTW interventions. The content and concepts of these RTW interventions are described, compared and discussed in this review. Further, the contents of the RTW interventions are classified by the use of predefined components (physical exercises, education, behavioural treatments and ergonomic measures). The identified RTW interventions varied with respect to the disciplines involved, the target population and the number and duration of sessions. The classification showed that physical exercises were a component of most of the selected interventions, followed by education, behavioural treatments and ergonomic measures. The most prevalent combination of components was the combination of physical exercises, behavioural treatment and education. However, the types of physical exercises, behavioural treatment and education varied widely among the RTW interventions. The described concepts for the physical exercises were an increase of muscle strength, coordination, range of motion of the spine and cardiovascular fitness, and a decrease of muscle tension. Education as a part of RTW interventions is believed to increase the understanding of patients regarding their disorder and treatment. Behavioural treatments were mainly based on the gate control theory of pain (psychophysiological processes are involved in pain perception) and/or the operant conditioning hypothesis (pain behaviour is determined by its consequences). No concepts were described for ergonomic measures. Finally, the plausibility of the described concepts is discussed. Future RCTs on this topic should evaluate the underlying concepts of the RTW intervention in addition to its effectiveness.

Disseminating and implementing the results of back pain research in primary care

STUDY DESIGN

Description of a workshop entitled "Implementation and Dissemination: Getting Research into Practice," that was held at the Fourth International Forum on Low Back Pain Research in Primary Care, in Israel in March 2000.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A gap exists between research endeavors and the dissemination and implementation of new research findings.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the outcomes of a workshop on implementation and dissemination of research findings.

METHODS

The Fourth International Forum on Low Back Pain Research in Primary Care aimed to encourage open discussion and consensus building among leading experts in the field, and to develop a research agenda. The workshop on implementation and dissemination focused on issues surrounding the gap between research results and actual practice. These issues were introduced by several presentations. The broad conclusions of the subsequent debate are summarized in this paper as a series of responses to key questions: 1) who should do the implementation?, 2) what should researchers do to help implementation?, 3) what are the key outcomes?, and 4) what are important ingredients for successful implementation?

RESULTS

There was consensus about the importance of implementation of research findings, about the ineffectiveness of merely publishing or disseminating research findings, and about the need for prospective randomized trials evaluating the cost-effectiveness of different implementation strategies. The majority view is that the health provider professions and the professional bodies are the central organizations to implement guidelines, rather than the researchers themselves. Success in getting guidelines or research results into practice is dependent on involving local health service groups, experts, and opinion leaders (both local and national). Patient-centered outcomes and cost-effectiveness of guideline implementation were considered important. It was acknowledged that there are many potentially effective ingredients for successful implementation, but a clear indication of the contents of an effective implementation strategy is still lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

The plenary and workshops focused on closing the gap between research results and actual practice. As long as we do not fully understand how best to influence and change physician behavior, the choice of implementation strategies should be based on the present knowledge of potentially effective interventions and should include considerations of available resources for, and potential barriers to, implementation.

What is the rational diagnostic approach to spinal disorders?

A problem that is encountered in patients with low back pain is that a definite diagnosis is rare. The heart of our clinical dilemma is how best to diagnose those rare patients with severe disease as early as possible. The main reasons for diagnostic errors have been summarized in this chapter. Numerous guidelines have been developed to help in the approach to this difficult problem. However, the limitations of such an approach are highlighted. History and clinical examination are the best single test for diagnostic purposes and neither questionnaires nor computers can replace the clinician. However, the values of clinical abilities should not be overestimated. Finally, the clinical application of guidelines needs to be re-evaluated for each individual patient.

Working with low back pain: workplace and individual psychosocial determinants of limited duty and lost time

BACKGROUND

Few studies have identified the risk factors associated with lost time in employees working with occupational low back pain (OLBP) despite the presence of pain. Such data could assist in the development of evidenced-based secondary prevention programs.

METHODS

The present investigation was a case-control study (n = 421) of demographic, health behavior, ergonomic, workplace and individual psychosocial factors hypothesized to be associated with lost time in young, full-time employees (i.e., soldiers) with OLBP. Analyses of the burden of OLBP in terms of the number of days on limited duty and lost time status were also computed.

RESULTS

Logistic regression analysis indicated that female gender, education beyond HS/GED, longer time working in military, higher levels of daily life worries, no support from others, higher levels of ergonomic exposure, stressful work, increased peer cohesion, and greater perceived effort at work placed a worker at a greater likelihood for OLBP-related lost work time. Lower levels of innovation, involvement, and supervisor support were also associated with lost time. Linear regression indicated that the number of days of lost time and limited duty was associated with lower levels of physical health and higher levels of symptom severity.

CONCLUSIONS

The results support the potential utility of interventions targeting ergonomic, workplace and individual psychosocial risk factors in secondary prevention.