Clinical practice guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain in primary care: an updated overview

A model for personalized diagnostics for non-specific low back pain: the role of the myofascial unit

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Most LBP is non-specific or idiopathic, which is defined as symptoms of unknown origin without a clear specific cause or pathology. Current guidelines for clinical evaluation are based on ruling out underlying serious medical conditions, but not on addressing underlying potential contributors to pain. Although efforts have been made to identify subgroups within this population based on response to treatment, a comprehensive framework to guide assessment is still lacking. In this paper, we propose a model for a personalized mechanism-based assessment based on the available evidence that seeks to identify the underlying pathologies that may initiate and perpetuate central sensitization associated with chronic non-specific low back pain (nsLBP). We propose that central sensitization can have downstream effects on the "myofascial unit", defined as an integrated anatomical and functional structure that includes muscle fibers, fascia (including endomysium, perimysium and epimysium) and its associated innervations (free nerve endings, muscle spindles), lymphatics, and blood vessels. The tissue-level abnormalities can be perpetuated through a vicious cycle of neurogenic inflammation, impaired fascial gliding, and interstitial inflammatory stasis that manifest as the clinical findings for nsLBP. We postulate that our proposed model offers biological plausibility for the complex spectrum of clinical findings, including tissue-level abnormalities, biomechanical dysfunction and postural asymmetry, ecological and psychosocial factors, associated with nsLBP. The model suggests a multi-domain evaluation that is personalized, feasible and helps rule out specific causes for back pain guiding clinically relevant management. It may also provide a roadmap for future research to elucidate mechanisms underlying this ubiquitous and complex problem.

Systematic review of predictors of hospitalisation for non-specific low back pain with or without referred leg pain

Significant costs and utilisation of healthcare resources are associated with hospitalisations for non-specific low back pain despite clinical guidelines recommending community-based care. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the predictors of hospitalisation for low back pain. A protocol was registered with PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (#CRD42021281827) and conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. Database search of Ovid Medline, Emcare, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, PEDro and OTSeeker was conducted. Studies were included if they examined a predictor of hospitalisation for non-specific low back pain with or without referred leg pain. Data was extracted and descriptively synthesised. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklists. There were 23 studies published over 29 articles which identified 52 predictor variables of hospitalisation for low back pain. The risk of hospitalisation was grouped into themes: personal, health and lifestyle, psychology, socioeconomic, occupational, clinical, and health systems and processes. There was moderate level evidence that arrival to an emergency department via ambulance with low back pain, and older age increase the risk of hospitalisations for low back pain. There was low level evidence that high pain intensity, past history of low back pain, opioid use, and occupation type increase the risk of hospitalisation for low back pain. Further research into psychological and social factors is warranted given the paucity of available studies. Hospital avoidance strategies, improved patient screening and resource utilisation in emergency departments are considerations for practice.

The adult with low back pain: causes, diagnosis, imaging features and management

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. This article highlights the importance of succinct history taking and a thorough clinical examination when managing a patient with lower back pain in hospital. Furthermore, it encourages the clinician to consider the pertinent causes of low back pain such as age-related degeneration, malignancy, trauma, infection and seronegative inflammatory spondyloarthropathies, and looks at the diagnosis, imaging features and key management options which are available in secondary care.

A systematic review of conservative and surgical treatments for deep gluteal syndrome

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Conservative and surgical treatments, are recommended as the primary treatment in the management of patients diagnosed with deep gluteal syndrome; but evidence supporting superiority of one treatment over another is lacking. The aim of this review is to systematically review the effectiveness of treatments.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, AMED, Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials), and PEDro were screened (to 24 July 2019). Risk of bias of trials and surgical case series were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Joanna Briggs Institute Critical appraisal checklists, respectively. Outcomes were reductions in pain or disability. For each outcome, the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated. A narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Out of 909 records, thirteen studies with 508 patients were included, eight RCTs with 336 patients and 5 case series with 172 patients. Conservative modalities were: infiltration into muscle of steroid, botulinum toxin, thiochilcoside and colchicine. There was one RCT and five case series of surgery. Only three trials reached an MCID in pain reduction for the intervention. The five surgical studies reached a before and after MCID. Only one study showed an MCID reduction in disability. The overall quality of evidence was low.

CONCLUSION

Given the low quality of evidence, no single conservative treatment can be recommended over another. Clinicians should follow general guidelines on the management of back pain and sciatica for first line treatment, namely physiotherapy. Surgery may have a place for chronic cases.

Preoperative Opioid Prescribers and Lumbar Fusion: Their Effect on Clinical Outcomes and Postoperative Opioid Usage

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of multiple preoperative opioid prescribers on postoperative patient opioid usage and patient-reported outcome measures after single-level lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Prior literature has identified opioid prescriptions from multiple postoperative providers increase opioid usage rates. However, there is limited evidence on how multiple preoperative opioid prescribers affect postoperative opioid usage or clinical outcomes after a single-level lumbar fusion.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or posterolateral lumbar fusions between September 2017 and February 2020 at a single academic institution was performed. Patients were excluded if they were not identifiable in our state's prescription drug-monitoring program. Univariate comparisons and regression analyses identified factors associated with postoperative clinical outcomes and opioid usage.

RESULTS

Of 239 patients, 160 (66.9%) had one or fewer preoperative prescribers and 79 (33.1%) had >1 prescribers. On regression analysis, the presence of multiple preoperative prescribers was an independent predictor of increased improvement in Visual Analog Scale (∆VAS) Back (β=-1.61, P =0.012) and the involvement of a nonoperative spine provider was an independent predictor of increased improvement in ∆VAS Leg (β = -1.53, P = 0.034). Multiple preoperative opioid prescribers correlated with an increase in opioid prescriptions postoperatively (β = 0.26, P = 0.014), but it did not significantly affect the amount of morphine milligram equivalents prescribed (β = -48.79, P = 0.146). A greater number of preoperative opioid prescriptions predicted worse improvements in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and Oswestry Disability Index and predicted increased postoperative opioid prescriptions, prescribers, and morphine milligram equivalents.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple preoperative opioid prescribers predicted increased improvement in postoperative back pain, whereas preoperative involvement of a nonoperative spine provider predicted improvements in leg pain after surgery. The number of preoperative opioid prescriptions was a better metric for predicting poor postoperative outcomes and increased opioid consumption compared with the number of preoperative opioid prescribers.

Reductions in kinesiophobia and distress after pain neuroscience education and exercise lead to favourable outcomes: a secondary mediation analysis of a randomized controlled trial in primary care

ABSTRACT

Pain neuroscience education combined with exercise (PNE + exercise) is an effective treatment for patients with chronic spinal pain. Yet, however, little is known about its underlying therapeutic mechanisms. Thus, this study aimed to provide the first insights by performing a novel mediation analysis approach in a published randomized controlled trial in primary care where PNE + exercise was compared with standard physiotherapy. Four mediators (catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, central sensitization-related distress, and pain intensity) measured at postintervention and 3 outcomes (disability, health-related quality of life, and pain medication intake) measured at 6-month follow-up were included into the analysis. The postintervention measure of each outcome was also introduced as a competing candidate mediator in each respective model. In addition, we repeated the analysis by including all pairwise mediator-mediator interactions to allow the effect of each mediator to differ based on the other mediators' values. Postintervention improvements in disability, medication intake, and health-related quality of life strongly mediated PNE + exercise effects on each of these outcomes at 6-month follow-up, respectively. Reductions in disability and medication intake were also mediated by reductions in kinesiophobia and central sensitization-related distress. Reductions in kinesiophobia also mediated gains in the quality of life. Changes in catastrophizing and pain intensity did not mediate improvements in any outcome. The mediation analyses with mediator-mediator interactions suggested a potential effect modification rather than causal independence among the mediators. The current results, therefore, support the PNE framework to some extent as well as highlight the need for implementing the recent approaches for mediation analysis to accommodate dependencies among the mediators.

Standardized Stretching Postural postures to treat low-back pain in pregnancy: the GEMALODO randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Two-thirds of pregnant women suffer from low-back pain during pregnancy, which leads to negative effects on quality of everyday life. According to the literature, an 8- to 12-week program of adapted physical activity during pregnancy has proven its efficacy in treatment of low-back pain and functional disability. Stretching Postural is a nondynamic technique using muscular contractions and stretches that act mainly on the back and that can be practiced alone.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effect of an 8-week program of standardized Stretching Postural postures in low-risk pregnant women suffering from low-back pain.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an open-label, randomized, controlled trial in 1 French university hospital. Women with a singleton low-risk pregnancy between 15 and 32 weeks of gestation and with back, lumbar, or sacroiliac pain were randomly assigned (1:1) to either undergo an 8-week program of standardized Stretching Postural with basic advice (intervention group) or to receive basic advice only (control group). Both groups received ergonomic advice and encouragement to practice physical activity. The primary endpoint was the pain assessment at 8 weeks (defined by the mean pain level estimated by women in the previous week, scored on a numeric scale from 0 to 10). Secondary endpoints were pain after 4 weeks of follow-up, quality of life (12-item Short Form Survey), satisfaction (Patient Global Impression of Change), and delivery outcomes. The main analysis was intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

From January 2019 to August 2020, 60 women were randomized: 30 were assigned to the intervention group and 30 to the control group. The mean level of pain at 8 weeks was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (1.6±1.4 vs 4.1±2.2; P<.01). The mean 12-item Short Form Survey scores were significantly higher in the posture group than in the control group (Physical Component Score, 45.7±7.8 vs 37.4±8.5; P<.01; Mental Component Score, 54.3±5.8 vs 50.4±7.1; P=.04), and the Patient Global Impression of Change score was also significantly higher (6.1±1.5 vs 3.9±2.3; P<.01). No adverse effects were found.

CONCLUSION

Stretching Postural appears to be a safe and efficient nondrug therapy to treat low-back pain during low-risk pregnancy.

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.

The smallest worthwhile effect on pain intensity of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and exercise therapy for acute and chronic low back pain: a benefit-harm trade-off study

QUESTION

What are the smallest worthwhile effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with acute and chronic low back pain (LBP)? What is the smallest worthwhile effect of individualised exercise for people with chronic LBP compared with no intervention?

DESIGN

Benefit-harm trade-off study.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were recruited by advertisement on social media and included if they were English-speaking adults in Australia who had non-specific LBP.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Pain intensity.

RESULTS

A total of 116 people with acute LBP and 230 people with chronic LBP were recruited. For acute LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs additional to no intervention was a 30% (IQR 10 to 40%) reduction in pain intensity. For chronic LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs additional to no intervention was a 27.5% (IQR 10 to 50%) reduction in pain intensity. For chronic LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of exercise additional to no intervention was a 20% (IQR 10 to 40%) reduction in pain intensity. There were small associations between baseline pain, duration of pain and level of exercise and the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs for acute LBP. There were no other clear associations.

CONCLUSIONS

For people with LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of exercise and NSAIDs additional to no intervention is approximately a 20 to 30% reduction in pain. These results can inform the interpretation of the effects of NSAIDs and exercise in randomised trials and meta-analyses, incorporating consumers' perspectives. Further research on comparisons between different interventions and on other core LBP outcomes may inform decision-making.

REGISTRATION

OSF osf.io/3erjx/.

What's the low back pain problem represented to be? An analysis of discourse of the Australian policy directives

PURPOSE

Low back pain (LBP) directives provide information about how LBP should be managed, communicated and navigated in complex health systems, making them an important form of policy. This study aimed to examine how LBP is problematised (represented) in Australian directives.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We employed an analysis of discourse of LBP directives drawing on Bacchi's "What's the problem represented to be?" policy problematisation approach.

RESULTS

Our analysis suggests that LBP is problematised as a symptom that tends to improve when individuals take responsibility for themselves, but may require care at times. The way in which LBP is represented in the directives excludes important aspects, such as the uncertainties of scientific knowledge, paradigms other than (post)positivist, multimorbidity, social and structural determinants of health.

CONCLUSION

LBP directives may benefit from problematisations of LBP that consider the ongoing nature of LBP and broader contextual factors that impact on both LBP outcomes and care, beyond individual responsibility. Consideration of a wider range of paradigms and expanded evidence base may also be beneficial, as these are likely to enable individuals, clinicians and the Australian healthcare system to address LBP while dealing with its complexities, enabling real-world changes to lessen the LBP burden.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals who work with people who experience low back pain (LBP) may benefit from critically reflecting about discourses embedded in policy directives.Healthcare professionals may consider engaging in policy changes processes to expand the discourses on which LBP policy directives rely.Healthcare professionals' ability to enact policy recommendations may be enhanced by consideration of the fluctuating nature of LBP, uncertainties, multimorbidity and determinants of health.

Factors influencing physiotherapists implementation of high value care in the management of nonspecific low back pain in Indian healthcare settings: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Non-specific low back pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that often requires the involvement of physiotherapists for effective management. However, there is limited understanding of the factors influencing physiotherapists' implementation of high-value care in the management of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), particularly in Indian healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators of implementation of high-value care in managing NSLBP from the perspective of physiotherapists practicing in Indian healthcare settings.

DESIGN

Descriptive qualitative design.

METHODS

We adopted a descriptive phenomenological approach and purposefully selected physiotherapists (N = 15) from diverse healthcare settings, encompassing varying years of clinical experience, to capture a broad range of perspectives. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted via the Zoom video conferencing platform. Each interview lasted on average for 30-45 min, and no follow-up interviews were conducted. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis with an inductive approach.

RESULTS

Our analysis revealed three major themes and seven sub-themes uncovering barriers and facilitators of implementation of high-value care. These themes include misconceptions about low back pain and its management among physiotherapists, their perceived lack of autonomy in clinical decision-making due to external influences, and the significance of aligning treatment plans with patient goals while considering evidence-based care.

CONCLUSION

The study results provide insights into the unique challenges associated with implementation of high-value care for non-specific low back pain in Indian healthcare settings.

Facets of facet joint interventions

Facet joint (FJ) disease is a common cause of axial low back pain with many minimally invasive image-guided treatment options. This article discusses fluoroscopic and CT-guided intraarticular FJ injections, medial branch (MB) radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and lumbar facet synovial cyst (LFSC) aspiration, rupture, or fenestration. Additionally, the article will highlight medial branch blocks (MBBs) utilized to diagnose facet-mediated pain and to predict outcomes to RFA.

Are there any correlations among the number of discopathy levels and pain intensity or disability in patients with symptomatic low back pain?

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is considered a civilization disease that affects people in an increasing number. Discopathy (degeneration of intervertebral discs) is recognised as one of LBP causes. Still, the relationship between the number of discopathy levels and LBP remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the number of discopathy levels with intensity of LBP, functional level and the degree of disability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The prospective, cohort study involved 200 patients aged 27 to 55 years (44.9 ± 9.2 years) with single- or multilevel lumbar discopathy confirmed by imaging examinations. Functional examination included NRSscale, goniometric measurements, Modified Laitinen Pain Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index and Back Pain Function Scale.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant positive correlations between the number of discopathy levels and the age of the subjects (r = 0.266; p = 0.000), BMI (r = 0.158; p = 0.029) and ODI (r = 0.157; p = 0.026). Positive correlation (r = 0.142; p = 0.044) was also observed between the results of Fingertip-to-floortest and the number of levels of discopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of levels of discopathy was depended on the age and BMI of the patients. It had no effect on pain intensity, range of rotational motion of the lumbar spine and functional status of patients. As the number of levels of discopathy increased, a higher degree of everyday disability was observed.

Bias in the measurement of the outcome is associated with effect sizes in randomized clinical trials on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the relationships between the risk of bias and treatment effect estimates for exercise therapy interventions on pain intensity and physical functioning outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional meta-epidemiological study of the 230 RCTs (31,674 participants) in the 2021 'Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain' Cochrane Review were included. Study design characteristics, sample size, prospective trial registration, flowchart information, interventions, and comparisons were extracted. Independent pairs of reviewers assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.

RESULTS

The metaregression included 220 (pain intensity) and 203 (physical functioning) effect sizes. Unadjusted and adjusted metaregression models showed no significant associations between the bias domains and pain intensity effect sizes. Only domain 'bias in the measurement of the outcome' was significantly associated with physical functioning (standardized mean difference: -0.40, 95% confidence interval: -0.77 to -0.02) when adjusted for flowchart reported (yes/no), prospective trial registration, sample size, and comparator type.

CONCLUSION

The risk of bias in the measurement of the outcome could lead to slight overestimates of the effect size for physical functioning. Clinicians should consider this when they read and assess RCT results in this field. We encourage metaresearchers to replicate our findings using a consistent approach for evaluating the risk of bias (i.e., the RoB 2 tool) in other musculoskeletal conditions and interventions to investigate their generalizability.

The Efficacy and Safety of a Combination of Thiocolchicoside and Etoricoxib in Low Back Pain (ESCoTEL): A Randomized Active-Controlled Trial

Background Low back pain (LBP) is a global health concern. Management of LBP aims at pain relief facilitating improvement of functional ability. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the first line of therapy. However, the selection of NSAIDs is challenging given the range of underlying etiologies and severity. The current study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of two available fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), namely, a dual FDC (DFC) of etoricoxib (60 mg) and thiocolchicoside (4 mg) versus a triple FDC (TFC) of chlorzoxazone (500 mg), diclofenac (50 mg), and paracetamol (325 mg). Methodology A total of 200 eligible adult subjects aged 18-70 years with a history of LBP and muscle spasm for ≤14 days and Wong-Baker Faces Pain score >4 were enrolled after obtaining written informed consent and randomized in a 1:1 allocation ratio to be treated with either DFC or TFC for 28 days. Efficacy was assessed based on the change in score from baseline (before treatment) to day 28 on the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire, as well as the proportion of subjects who improved upon treatment. Safety was assessed based on adverse events and clinical laboratory test results. Results A significant decrease in pain intensity (p < 0.001) and significant improvement in functional ability (p < 0.001) was observed after treatment with either DFC or TFC. The decrease in Wong-Baker Faces Pain score and ODI, from baseline, was comparable between the treatment groups. However, more subjects with very severe pain at baseline showed ≥30% improvement upon treatment with DFC than with TFC (~25% versus ~12%; p = 0.172). Also, significantly more crippled subjects with very severe functional disability showed improvement in the DFC group compared to the TFC group (~26% versus ~4%; p = 0.008). No adverse events or clinically relevant laboratory test results were evident. Conclusions Both DFC and TFC were comparable in efficacy and safety for the management of recent-onset LBP. However, significantly more subjects with very severe pain or functional disability showed improvement after 28 days when treated with DFC compared to TFC.

Diagnostic accuracy of lumbar CT and MRI in the evaluation of chronic low back pain without red flag symptoms

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for medical consultation. Most of the patients will have nonspecific LBP, which usually are self-limited episodes. It is unclear which of the diagnostic imaging pathways is most effective and costeffective and how the imaging impacts on patient treatment. Imaging techniques are usually indicated if symptoms remain after 6 weeks. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the diagnostic imaging examination of choice in lumbar spine evaluation of low back pain; however, availability of MRI is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography (CT) with MRI (as standard of reference) in the evaluation of chronic low back pain (LBP) without red flags symptoms. To compare the results obtained by two radiologists with different grades of experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with chronic low back pain without red flags symptoms were retrospectively reviewed by two observers with different level of experience. Patients included had undergone a lumbar or abdominal CT and an MRI within a year. Once the radiological information was collected, it was then statistically reviewed. The aim of the statistical analysis is to identify the equivalence between both diagnostic techniques. To this end, sensitivity, specificity and validity index were calculated. In addition, intra and inter-observer reliability were measured by Cohen's kappa values and also using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

340 lumbar levels were evaluated from 68 adult patients with chronic low back pain or sciatica. 63.2% of them were women, with an average age of 60.3 years (SD 14.7). CT shows high values of sensitivity and specificity (>80%) in most of the items evaluated, but sensitivity was low for the evaluation of density of the disc (40%) and for the detection of disc herniation (55%). Moreover, agreement between MRI and CT in most of these items was substantial or almost perfect (Cohen's kappa-coefficient > 0'8), excluding Modic changes (kappa = 0.497), degenerative changes (kappa0.688), signal of the disc (kappa = 0.327) and disc herniation (kappa = 0.639). Finally, agreement between both observers is mostly high (kappa > 0.8). Foraminal stenosis, canal stenosis and the grade of the canal stenosis were overdiagnosed by the inexperienced observer in the evaluation of CT images.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

CT is as sensitive as lumbar MRI in the evaluation of most of the items analysed, excluding Modic changes, degenerative changes, signal of the disc and disc herniation. In addition, these results are obtained regardless the experience of the radiologist. The rising use of diagnostic medical imaging and the improvement of image quality brings the opportunity of making a second look of abdominal CT in search of causes of LBP. Thereby, inappropriate medical imaging could be avoided (2). In addition, it would allow to reduce MRI waiting list and prioritize other patients with more severe pathology than LBP.

Conservative management for lumbar radiculopathy based on the stage of the disorder: a Delphi study

PURPOSE

Conservative management of lumbar radiculopathy (LR) is the first treatment option. To date, systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines have not considered the most appropriate timing of management. This study aimed to establish consensus on effective conservative treatment modalities across different stages (i.e., acute, sub-acute, or chronic) of LR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Through an iterative multistage Delphi process, experts rated agreement with proposed treatment modalities across stages of LR and could suggest additional treatment modalities. The agreement was measured using a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to measure agreement (median, interquartile ranges, and percentage of agreement). Consensus criteria were defined a priori for each round.

RESULTS

Fourteen panelists produced a consensus list of effective treatment modalities across stages of LR. Acute stage management should focus on providing patients with information about the condition including pain education, individualized physical activity, and directional preference exercises, supported with NSAIDs. In the sub-acute stage, strength training and neurodynamic mobilization could be added and transforaminal/epidural injections considered. In the chronic stage, spinal manipulative therapy, specific exercise, and function-specific physical training should be combined with individualized vocational, ergonomic and postural advice.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts agree effectiveness of interventions differs through the evolution of LR.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONTo date clinical guideline for conservative management of lumbar radiculopathy do not consider the evolution of the condition.Acute stage management of lumbar radiculopathy should focus on providing information about the condition and support individualized physical activity with pain medication.Sub-acute management should add neurodynamic mobilization to strength training, while transforaminal and/or epidural injections could be considered.Chronic stage management should consider spinal manipulative therapy and focus on restoring personalized functional capacity.

Adaption and validation of simplified Chinese version of the Low Back Pain Knowledge questionnaire (sC-LKQ)

Introduction

Low back pain (LBP) knowledge questionnaire (LKQ) was developed by a Brazilian research group in 2009. It has been cross-culturally adapted to many languages with good reliability and validity. This work aimed to translate and validate the LKQ into a simplified Chinese version and to evaluate the self-efficacy in LBP among Chinese participants from China and Hungary.

Methods

A total of 431 people participated in this research, which lasted from September 2021 to June 2022 and was conducted on the Credamo online platform. The simplified Chinese LKQ (sC-LKQ) was generated through translation and cross-cultural adaptation guidelines. The participants were selected to fill out demographic questions, the sC-LKQ, and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The reliability and validity of the data were evaluated using SPSS 28.0.

Results

The sC-LKQ showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha was 0.79), and the intraclass correlation value was 0.85. There were five components in the questionnaire with good construct validity. The scores of RMDQ had negatively correlated with sC-LKQ.

Conclusion

In the Chinese population, the sC-LKQ demonstrated excellent psychometric qualities and could be used to evaluate self-efficacy in clinical practice and research.

The Effect of Therapeutic Adherence on the Effectiveness of a Digital Therapeutic Exercise Program: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Nonspecific back pain (NSBP) contributes greatly to the overall burden of disease from musculoskeletal conditions. Digital therapeutics (DTx) aims to address the excess demand for movement and exercise therapy resulting from this spectrum of conditions. This study aims to investigate the differential therapeutic response of NSBP to different use profiles of a digital home exercise program.

METHODS

This study used a PSM model to comparatively assess the achievement of a clinically relevant pain improvement among patients who exhibit a high use (HU), intermediate use (IU), low use (LU), or sub-LU use profile. Sensitivity analyses with commonly accepted thresholds for clinically relevant improvements were conducted.

RESULTS

Higher use profiles show a higher probability of achieving a clinically relevant improvement of self-reported pain intensities. Additionally, the achievement of any higher use level is associated with a significant increase in the probability of achieving a clinically relevant improvement.

CONCLUSION

To enable the optimal effectiveness of DTx home exercise programs, an HU use profile should be pursued. This finding is in line with earlier guidance for the achievement of optimal therapeutic benefit from conventional movement and exercise therapy and underscores the importance of a cross-disciplinary effort from patients, healthcare professionals and system stakeholders alike to maximize the therapeutic effect from DTx.

Patient and provider characteristics associated with therapeutic intervention selection in a chiropractic clinical encounter: a cross-sectional analysis of the COAST and O-COAST study data

BACKGROUND

Chiropractors use a variety of therapeutic interventions in clinical practice. How the selection of interventions differs across musculoskeletal regions or with different patient and provider characteristics is currently unclear. This study aimed to describe how frequently different interventions are used for patients presenting for chiropractic care, and patient and provider characteristics associated with intervention selection.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Chiropractic Observation and Analysis STudy (COAST) and Ontario (O-COAST) studies: practice-based, cross-sectional studies in Victoria, Australia (2010-2012) and Ontario, Canada (2014-2015). Chiropractors recorded data on patient diagnosis and intervention selection from up to 100 consecutive patient visits. The frequency of interventions selected overall and for each diagnostic category (e.g., different musculoskeletal regions) were descriptively analysed. Univariable multi-level logistic regression (provider and patient as grouping factors), stratified by diagnostic category, was used to assess the association between patient/provider variables and intervention selection.

RESULTS

Ninety-four chiropractors, representative of chiropractors in Victoria and Ontario for age, sex, and years in practice, participated. Data were collected on 7,966 patient visits (6419 unique patients), including 10,731 individual diagnoses (mean age: 43.7 (SD: 20.7), 57.8% female). Differences in patient characteristics and intervention selection were observed between chiropractors practicing in Australia and Canada. Overall, manipulation was the most common intervention, selected in 63% (95%CI:62-63) of encounters. However, for musculoskeletal conditions presenting in the extremities only, soft tissue therapies were more commonly used (65%, 95%CI:62-68). Manipulation was less likely to be performed if the patient was female (OR:0.74, 95%CI:0.65-0.84), older (OR:0.79, 95%CI:0.77-0.82), presenting for an initial visit (OR:0.73, 95%CI:0.56-0.95) or new complaint (OR:0.82, 95%CI:0.71-0.95), had one or more comorbidities (OR:0.63, 95%CI:0.54-0.72), or was underweight (OR:0.47, 95%CI:0.35-0.63), or obese (OR:0.69, 95%CI:0.58-0.81). Chiropractors with more than five years clinical experience were less likely to provide advice/education (OR:0.37, 95%CI:0.16-0.87) and exercises (OR:0.17, 95%CI:0.06-0.44).

CONCLUSION

In more than 10,000 diagnostic encounters, manipulation was the most common therapeutic intervention for spine-related problems, whereas soft tissue therapies were more common for extremity problems. Different patient and provider characteristics were associated with intervention selection. These data may be used to support further research on appropriate selection of interventions for common musculoskeletal complaints.

Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends on Manual Therapy for Low Back Pain Over Past 2 Decades

Purpose

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent musculoskeletal disorder, and manual therapy (MT) is frequently employed as a non-pharmacological treatment for LBP. This study aims to explore the research hotspots and trends in MT for LBP. MT has gained widespread acceptance in clinical practice due to its proven safety and effectiveness. The study aims to analyze the developments in the field of MT for LBP over the past 23 years, including leading countries, institutions, authoritative authors, journals, keywords, and references. It endeavors to provide a comprehensive summary of the existing research foundation and to analyze the current cutting-edge research trends.

Methods

Relevant articles between 2000 and 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) database. We used the software VOSviewer and CiteSpace to perform the analysis and summarize current research hotspots and emerging trends.

Results

Through screening, we included 1643 papers from 2000 to 2023. In general, the number of articles published each year showed an upward trend. The United States had the highest number of publications and citations. Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College was the most published research institution. The University of Pittsburgh in the United States had the most collaboration with other research institutions. Long, Cynthia R. was the active author. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics was the most prolific journal with 234 publications.

Conclusion

This study provides an overview of the current status and trends of clinical studies on MT for LBP in the past 23 years using the visualization software, which may help researchers identify potential collaborators and collaborating institutions, hot topics, and new perspectives in research frontiers, while providing new clinical practice ideas for the treatment of LBP.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Receipt of Nonpharmacologic Care for Chronic Low Back Pain Among Medicare Beneficiaries With OUD

Importance

Nonpharmacologic treatments are important for managing chronic pain among persons with opioid use disorder (OUD), for whom opioid and other pharmacologic therapies may be particularly harmful. Racial and ethnic minority individuals with chronic pain and OUD are vulnerable to suboptimal pain management due to systemic inequities and structural racism, highlighting the need to understand their receipt of guideline-recommended nonpharmacologic pain therapies, including physical therapy (PT) and chiropractic care.

Objective

To assess differences across racial and ethnic groups in receipt of PT or chiropractic care for chronic low back pain (CLBP) among persons with comorbid OUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used a 20% random sample of national Medicare administrative data from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018, to identify fee-for-service community-dwelling beneficiaries with a new episode of CLBP and comorbid OUD. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2022, to July 30, 2023.

Exposures

Race and ethnicity as a social construct, categorized as American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black or African American, Hispanic, non-Hispanic White, and unknown or other.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were receipt of PT or chiropractic care within 3 months of CLBP diagnosis. The time (in days) to receiving these treatments was also assessed.

Results

Among 69 362 Medicare beneficiaries analyzed, the median age was 60.0 years (IQR, 51.5-68.7 years) and 42 042 (60.6%) were female. A total of 745 beneficiaries (1.1%) were American Indian or Alaska Native; 444 (0.6%), Asian or Pacific Islander; 9822 (14.2%), Black or African American; 4124 (5.9%), Hispanic; 53 377 (77.0%); non-Hispanic White; and 850 (1.2%), other or unknown race. Of all beneficiaries, 7104 (10.2%) received any PT or chiropractic care 3 months after a new CLBP episode. After adjustment, Black or African American (adjusted odds ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39-0.55) and Hispanic (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43-0.67) persons had lower odds of receiving chiropractic care within 3 months of CLBP diagnosis compared with non-Hispanic White persons. Median time to chiropractic care was longest for American Indian or Alaska Native (median, 8.5 days [IQR, 0-44.0 days]) and Black or African American (median, 7.0 days [IQR, 0-42.0 days]) persons and shortest for Asian or Pacific Islander persons (median, 0 days [IQR, 0-6.0 days]). No significant racial and ethnic differences were observed for PT.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with comorbid CLBP and OUD, receipt of PT and chiropractic care was low overall and lower across most racial and ethnic minority groups compared with non-Hispanic White persons. The findings underscore the need to address inequities in guideline-concordant pain management, particularly among Black or African American and Hispanic persons with OUD.

Needling Point Location Used in Sham Acupuncture for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Importance

When sham acupuncture is set as a control in evaluating acupuncture, the sham needling technique is usually different from acupuncture. However, the sham procedure is conducted either at the same points that are used for the acupuncture group or at nonindicated points.

Objective

To assess whether the outcome of sham acupuncture varies according to the needling points in sham-controlled trials of acupuncture for chronic nonspecific low back pain (CLBP) as an example.

Data sources

Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database were conducted on February 12, 2023.

Study selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the outcomes of acupuncture in sham acupuncture-controlled or waiting list-controlled trials on CLBP were included.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and outcomes and assessed quality. Sham acupuncture was classified according to whether it was conducted at the same acupuncture points used in the acupuncture group, referred to as sham acupuncture therapy (verum) (SATV) or at different points, referred to as sham acupuncture therapy (sham) (SATS). Clinical similarity, transitivity, and consistency tests were conducted, followed by a random-effects frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA).

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was pain, and the secondary outcome was back-specific function. The first assessment after the end of treatment was chosen for analysis. Effect sizes are reported as standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the certainty of evidence for findings was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

Ten RCTs involving 4379 participants were included. In comparison with SATS, acupuncture was significantly associated with improvements in both pain (SMD, -0.33; 95% CI, -0.52 to -0.15) and function outcomes (SMD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.25 to -0.02); however, there were no differences between acupuncture and SATV. In comparison with SATS, SATV was significantly associated with better pain (SMD, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.88 to -0.03) and function outcomes (SMD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.56 to -0.05). The risk of bias that could affect the interpretation of the results was usually low, and the certainty of evidence was moderate to low.

Conclusions and relevance

In this NMA, sham acupuncture needling at the same points as those in acupuncture was not a true placebo control for assessing the efficacy of acupuncture for CLBP and might underestimate the outcome of acupuncture in clinical settings.

Study protocol for a feasibility study of an online educational programme for people working and living with persistent low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the main cause of activity limitation and work absence across the world, leading to a high social and economic burden for individuals, families, the labour market and society. The overall aim of this multicentre study is to test the usability, acceptability and feasibility of an evidence-based, digital education programme for people living and working with persistent LBP who are in sedentary or physically demanding jobs and need advice on ergonomics, self-management of pain and healthy behavioural strategies.

METHODS

This is the protocol of a multinational, multicentre, prospective uncontrolled feasibility study targeting people with persistent LBP in Lithuania, Northern Ireland, Italy, Sweden and Portugal. Eligible participants will be offered the opportunity to use the MyRelief educational platform as part of their care and will undergo evaluations at baseline (enrollment) and 1-month follow-up. Feasibility will be assessed using measures of recruitment and retention, intervention engagement, outcome measure completion rates and within-group effect sizes in response to the digital education programme.

DISCUSSION

This study will identify the challenges and implications of delivering a digital training programme in advance of potentially delivering the programme via an online educational platform available on mobile devices. The findings will inform the design of a future randomised controlled trial if it proves feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04673773 . Registered 17 December 2020.

Telemedical Interdisciplinary Care Team Evaluation and Treatment of People With Low Back Pain: A Retrospective Observational Study

Objective

To evaluate the effects of an interdisciplinary care team (ICT) model delivered by telemedicine on patients with low back pain (LBP).

Design

Retrospective analysis of deidentified pre-existing data.

Setting

Retrospective observational study of patients presenting with LBP to a nationwide telemedicine practice using an ICT model.

Participants

Over a 9-month period all patients with a diagnosis related to LBP and who had an ICT evaluation (medical doctor, advanced practice provider, health coach, and physical therapist) were included in the study (n=36). A minimum of 2 follow-up physical therapy visits were required for inclusion.

Interventions

Patients were evaluated for LBP, received a diagnosis, and were offered a multidisciplinary treatment plan. Additional real-time audio visual medical, health coaching, registered dietician, and physical therapy services were received as deemed clinically appropriate.

Main Outcome Measures

Baseline, 30 day, and final pain (mean 81 day) measurements via numerical pain rating scale (NPRS). Baseline and final Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-10 Global Mental/Physical domains.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Use of prescription medication, referral for imaging, need for injections, or surgery.

Results

36 patients met criteria. Pain levels included mild (n=6, 16.7%), moderate (n=19, 52.8%), and severe (n=11, 30.6%). Clinically significant pain improvements were noted in 83.3% (n=25) of those with moderate or severe pain. PROMIS Mental and Physical Health categorization from Fair/Poor to Good/Excellent significantly improved over time. The initial 20% (n=7) in Fair/Poor Mental Health improved to 6.3% (n=2) at finish, while the 80% (n=28) in Good/Excellent Mental Health at start improved to 93.8% (n=30) at finish. Regarding Physical Health, 51.4% (n=18) rated Fair/Poor at start and 31.3% (n=10) at finish, while the 48.6% (n=17) rated Good/Excellent at start improved to 68.8% (n=22) at finish. The need for prescription medication was low (n=6, 16.7%) and spinal imaging orders were negligible (n=1, 2.8%). Injections were warranted in 11.4% (n=4) of patients and surgical referral with operative treatment in 2.8% (n=1).

Conclusion

Interdisciplinary care delivered through telemedicine can significantly improve pain and support improved health-related quality of life in patients with LBP, with low rates of imaging, prescription, and interventional use.

New Zealanders with low back pain seeking health care: a retrospective descriptive analysis of Accident Compensation Corporation-funded low back pain healthcare service usage

Introduction Most New Zealanders experience low back pain (LBP) at least once throughout their lifetime and many seek help from the large range of health providers in primary care. Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) funds a significant proportion of those claims, but which services are they funding and what are the costs? Method This was a retrospective audit and descriptive analysis of ACC-funded, non-public hospital healthcare service use by people with LBP in New Zealand (NZ). Outcome measures were the healthcare services accessed by people with ACC-funded LBP,the claims (all occurrences for a service that has generated a payment/year), single contact (with a service), and costs (NZ$) for services between 2009 and 2020. Results The number of claims for services were 129 000 for physiotherapy, 105 000 for general practitioner and 59 000 for radiology services. Per single contact, elective surgery and radiology services were the most expensive. During 2009-2020, there were 3.3 million ACC claims for LBP with a total cost of NZ$4 billion. Over this time, there was an increase in claims, costs and single contacts. Costs decreased slightly during 2010 due to changes in healthcare funding and in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion Consumers have considerable choice in where they access health care for ACC-funded LBP services. This study shows the services they use most frequently and the cost to NZ for those services. These data can inform service planning for ACC-funded LBP health care in NZ.

Imaging incidence and type in primary care patients with low back pain: a cross-sectional study on new referrals to an Australian specialist spinal surgical centre

Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is common and a significant cause of morbidity. Many patients receive inappropriate imaging for LBP in primary care. Aim To explore the incidence and type of spinal imaging conducted for LBP patients referred from general practice for specialist surgical opinion, and evaluate whether imaging conformed to clinical guidelines. Methods Audit of a sequential cohort (n  = 100) of new LBP patients referred from primary care for specialist opinion at a suburban Australian capital city independent Spinal Centre. Results In the 6 months before referral, 90% (95% CI 83-95%) of patients underwent spinal imaging. Imaging was performed in 95% of those who did and 79% of those who did not meet guidelines for radiological investigation. 35% of patients were inappropriately imaged and 3% inappropriately not imaged. Spinal computed tomography (CT) imaging was used in 52% of patients, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 42% and image-guided lumbar spinal interventional procedures in 28%. Discussion Most patients with LBP referred for surgical opinion have diagnostic radiological investigations whether or not it is indicated by clinical guidelines. The more frequent use of spinal CT compared to MRI may be due to idiosyncrasies of the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) rebate system. The findings of this pilot study provide support for the changes recommended by the 2016 MBS Review Taskforce on LBP that permit GP access to subsidised lumbar MRI, while constraining access to lumbar CT, and provide novel data about spinal imaging and practice in this cohort of patients.

The Use of Pain Severity and Its Impact as a Predictor for MRI Findings: A Cross-Sectional Study in Ta'if, Saudi Arabia

Background Low back pain (LBP) is common and considerably impacts daily lives across all age groups. MRI is not frequently used as a first-line investigation for patients presenting with LBP, except in the presence of red-flag symptoms. This study aimed to use pain severity and its impact as a predictor for MRI findings to help physicians decide whether a patient needs an MRI. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at the outpatient clinic of the neurosurgery department. The questionnaire included demographic data of the patients, red-flag symptoms, and the Dallas Pain Questionnaire (DPQ). The primary physician then determines whether the patient should have an MRI appointment. Results The study included 100 patients with LBP, of which 71 had chronic LBP (CLBP). Out of these 71, an MRI was requested for 62, but only 26 had findings related to LBP. Regarding the impact of CLBP on daily activities as measured by the DPQ, there was a significant association between those whose CLBP affected their daily activities and the decision to request an MRI. However, no significant statistical association was found between the three other parameters of the DPQ and the primary physician's decision to request an MRI. Conclusion Concerning the use of the DPQ questionnaire to predict MRI findings in patients with CLBP, the study indicates that significant pain impact on the DPQ does not necessarily correlate with MRI findings related to LBP. This suggests that the DPQ evaluation tool has no advantage over a physician's clinical judgment.

Virtual care exercise interventions in multidisciplinary chronic pain clinics: a qualitative study of perspectives of adults living with chronic pain

PURPOSE

Chronic pain affects 1 in 4 Canadians and is a leading contributor of disability. Although virtual care has become more prevalent, it is unclear how adults living with chronic pain perceive virtual delivery of exercise interventions within multidisciplinary chronic pain clinics (MCPC). This study explores the perspectives of adults living with chronic pain regarding their perceived barriers and facilitators and recommendations when implementing virtual care exercise interventions within MCPCs.

METHODS

We conducted an interpretive description qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with adults (age ≥18 years) living with chronic pain from a MCPC in Toronto, Canada, between March 1 and April 30, 2021.

RESULTS

We completed fifteen (N = 15) interviews of adults living with chronic pain. We identified eight themes that addressed the study objectives: 1) virtual care supplements in-person care, 2) virtual care improves accessibility, 3) impact of technology on participation, 4) navigating the home environment, 5) impact of pain on participation, 6) impact of supervision and feedback, 7) the need for tailored care, and 8) the need for preparation and additional support.

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal that adults living with chronic pain view virtual care exercise interventions positively however, the implementation of these interventions must be carefully considered within MCPCs. Specifically, virtual care was considered an excellent adjunct to in-person care but should not replace it completely.Implications for RehabilitationChronic pain is a leading contributor of disability.Exercise interventions are recommended component of comprehensive pain management.Virtual delivery of exercise interventions are becoming more prevalent.Adults living with chronic pain view virtual care exercise interventions positively as they can supplement in-person care and improve access to this type of care.

Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Does Targeting a Specific Vertebral Level Make a Difference?: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine whether targeting spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), by applying the intervention to a specific vertebral level, produces superior clinical outcomes than a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched up to May 31, 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing targeted SMT (mobilization or manipulation) to a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain, and measuring the effects on pain intensity and patient-reported disability. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data extraction, risk of bias, and evaluation of the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were performed by 2 authors independently. Meta-analyses were performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 931 patients) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference between targeted SMT and a nontargeted approach for pain intensity at postintervention (weighted mean difference = -0.20 [95% CI: -0.51, 0.10]) and at follow-up (weighted mean difference = 0.05 [95% CI: -0.26, 0.36]). For patient-reported disability, there was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference at postintervention (standardized mean difference = -0.04 [95% CI: -0.36, 0.29]) and at follow-up (standardized mean difference = -0.05 [95% CI: -0.24, 0.13]). Adverse events were reported in 4 trials, and were minor and evenly distributed between groups. CONCLUSION: Targeting a specific vertebral level when administering SMT for patients with nonspecific low back pain did not result in improved outcomes on pain intensity and patient-reported disability compared to a nontargeted approach. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-11. Epub: 28 July 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11962.

The Prevalence of Mental Health Service Use in Australian Workers with Accepted Workers' Compensation Claims for Low Back Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability globally and interferes with work performance and quality of life. For work-related LBP, Australian workers can receive workers' compensation and access funded healthcare to promote recovery, including mental health services, as there are strong links between chronic LBP and mental health. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of funded mental health services for workers with compensated LBP.

METHODS

Claims and services data from four Australian workers' compensation jurisdictions were analysed. Prevalence of accessing at least one mental health service was reported as a percentage of all claims overall and by duration of time loss, age group, sex, financial year of claim lodgement, jurisdiction, socioeconomic status and remoteness. Odds of accessing at least one service was determined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Almost 10% of LBP claims accessed at least one mental health service (9.7%) with prevalence increasing with time loss. Prevalence was highest in Victoria however a higher percentage of workers with LBP accessed mental health services earlier in Queensland. Odds of accessing services was highest with longest time loss duration, among females and in Queensland. Lower odds were observed in regional areas and among those aged over 56 years.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest opportunities for workers' compensation regulators and insurers to provide greater access to appropriate mental health services alongside physical treatment as standard practice, such as those in more remote locations or earlier in a claim, to improve recovery outcomes for workers with LBP.

Effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy on pain intensity and disability in older people with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The aim of the present systematic review was to investigate the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy on pain intensity and disability in older people with chronic nonspecific low back pain.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in the MEDLINE, COCHRANE LIBRARY, EMBASE, AMED, PSYCINFO, and PEDRO databases up to 2022. Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Estimated mean differences and respective 95% confidence intervals were presented for each paired comparison and the strength of the current evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Thirty-one original trials involving 2120 participants were included. All outcomes were self-rated. Pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale or Numerical Rating Scale. Disability was evaluated using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index or Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire. Short-term: Moderate quality of evidence that mindfulness reduces disability compared to patient education (mean difference [MD] =  - 1.38 [95% CI - 2.02 to - 0.73]); low-quality evidence that mixed exercise (MD = - 50.33 [95% CI - 57.11 to - 43.56]) reduces pain compared to no intervention, waiting list, placebo or sham; low quality of evidence that there is no effect for opioid compared to placebo (MD = - 8.26 [95% CI - 19.29 to 2.77]) with regards to reducing pain and opioid/acetaminophen reduces disability more compared to pregabalin (MD = 2.36 [95% CI] 1.86-2.86]).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings showed low or very low quality of evidence for non-pharmacological interventions with a large effect in short- and long-term follow-up. The two studies that provided moderate quality of evidence had a small clinical effect. Only two studies were found that investigated pharmacological therapies-both with low quality of evidence. However, the studies were methodologically weak and had small sample sizes. Given the adverse effects of low back pain and the scarce information on the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for older people, future randomized trials should be encouraged.

Nurses' assessment and management practices of pain among intensive care patients in King Khalid Hospital, Kharj, Riyadh

Background

Pain is a disagreeable combination of sensory and emotional sensations. Employing behavioral pain assessment tools is strongly associated with improved identification of pain.

Purpose

The main purpose of the study is to investigate Nurses' Assessment and Management Practices of Pain among Intensive Care Patients in King Khalid Hospital, Kharj, Riyadh.

Materials and methods

A self-administered questionnaire was employed in a descriptive cross-sectional study. The study focused on nurses employed in the intensive care unit at King Khalid Hospital in Al-Kharj Province. The researchers utilized convenience sampling to recruit participants. Out of the total 48 nurses approached 45 of them provided responses, leading to a response rate of 94%. The Critically Ill questionnaire was utilized to gather information regarding the treatment and evaluation of pain in patients who were in critical condition. Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were employed to analyze the collected data.

Principal results

it was found that 88% of them utilized instruments to evaluate pain in patients who could express themselves. Among these instruments, the numeric rating scale was the most commonly employed. Furthermore, 77% of the nurses (35 in total) used a pain assessment tool for patients who were unable to communicate, with the Adult Nonverbal Pain Scale being the most frequently used tool in this case. The nurses' perception of the significance of pain assessment was positively associated with the regular utilization of pain assessment tools. Additionally, the nurses considered the use of pain assessment tools with patients who could communicate as more important compared to using such tools with patients who could not communicate.

Conclusions

Most ICU nurses utilized nurses' pain assessment instruments to assess the discomfort levels of both patients who could communicate and those who couldn't express themselves effectively. By employing such tools, nurses can improve patient outcomes, ensure effective pain management, and demonstrate a high standard of professional care.

Chronic Low Back Pain: Prevalence, Impact on Quality of Life, and Predictors of Future Disability

BACKGROUND

In primary healthcare settings, chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a widespread health issue with a great global impact.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analytical study was performed on 918 adults attending primary healthcare settings in Makkah, Saudi Arabia, to estimate the cLBP prevalence, its effect on health-related quality of life (QOL), and predictors of subsequent disability. The visual analog scale of pain (VAS), World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale (WHO-QOL), and Oswestry low back pain disability index (ODI) were used to assess back pain severity, impact on QOL, and physical disability, respectively.

RESULTS

The prevalence of cLBP among adults attending primary care settings in Makkah City was 25.9%, and 88.6% of them had a limited range of motion of the spine. About 58.1% had abnormal radiological findings detected by MRI. Based on the VAS scale, most patients (83.8%) had mild pain. The median (IQR) QOL score was 70 (60-80). Minimal and moderate disability scores were prevalent among 16.2% and 65.7% of patients, respectively. Disability scores were independently predicted by a lower QOL score (beta = -0.39, 95%CI = -0.49 to -0.29, p < 0.001) and higher VAS scores (beta = 0.47, 95%CI = 0.38-0.56, p < 0.001). Furthermore, disability was independently associated with having post-void residual volume (PVRV) (beta = 5.84, 95%CI = 1.97-9.72, p = 0.004) and abnormal X-ray findings (beta = 7.10, 95%CI = 1.77-12.4, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

cLBP is common among adults attending primary care settings in Makkah City; it is associated with moderate disability and lower health-related QOL.

Exercise therapy for treatment of acute non-specific low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability globally. It generates considerable direct costs (healthcare) and indirect costs (lost productivity). The many available treatments for LBP include exercise therapy, which is practised extensively worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of exercise therapy for acute non-specific low back pain in adults compared to sham/placebo treatment or no treatment at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term follow-up.

SEARCH METHODS

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005. We conducted an updated search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and two trial registers. We screened the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews published since 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that examined the effects of exercise therapy on non-specific LBP lasting six weeks or less in adults. Major outcomes for this review were pain, functional status, and perceived recovery. Minor outcomes were return to work, health-related quality of life, and adverse events. Our main comparisons were exercise therapy versus sham/placebo treatment and exercise therapy versus no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We evaluated outcomes at short-term follow-up (time point within three months and closest to six weeks after randomisation; main follow-up), intermediate-term follow-up (between nine months and closest to six months), and long-term follow-up (after nine months and closest to 12 months); and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies (13 from the previous review, 10 new studies) that involved 2674 participants and provided data for 2637 participants. Three small studies are awaiting classification, and four eligible studies are ongoing. Included studies were conducted in Europe (N = 9), the Asia-Pacific region (N = 9), and North America (N = 5); and most took place in a primary care setting (N = 12), secondary care setting (N = 6), or both (N = 1). In most studies, the population was middle-aged and included men and women. We judged 10 studies (43%) at low risk of bias with regard to sequence generation and allocation concealment. Blinding is not feasible in exercise therapy, introducing performance and detection bias. There is very low-certainty evidence that exercise therapy compared with sham/placebo treatment has no clinically relevant effect on pain scores in the short term (mean difference (MD) -0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.79 to 4.19; 1 study, 299 participants). The absolute difference was 1% less pain (95% CI 4% more to 6% less), and the relative difference was 4% less pain (95% CI 20% more to 28% less). The mean pain score was 20.1 (standard deviation (SD) 21) for the intervention group and 20.9 (SD 23) for the control group. There is very low-certainty evidence that exercise therapy compared with sham/placebo treatment has no clinically relevant effect on functional status scores in the short term (MD 2.00, 95% CI -2.20 to 6.20; 1 study, 299 participants). The absolute difference was 2% worse functional status (95% CI 2% better to 6% worse), and the relative difference was 15% worse (95% CI 17% better to 47% worse). The mean functional status score was 15.3 (SD 19) for the intervention group and 13.3 (SD 18) for the control group. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for pain and functional status by one level for risk of bias and by two levels for imprecision (only one study with fewer than 400 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence that exercise therapy compared with no treatment has no clinically relevant effect on pain or functional status in the short term (2 studies, 157 participants). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence by two levels for imprecision and by one level for inconsistency. One study associated exercise with small benefits and the other found no differences. The first study was conducted in an occupational healthcare centre, where participants received one exercise therapy session. The other study was conducted in secondary and tertiary care settings, where participants received treatment three times per week for six weeks. We did not pool data from these studies owing to considerable clinical heterogeneity. In two studies, there were no reported adverse events. One study reported adverse events unrelated to exercise therapy. The remaining studies did not report whether any adverse events had occurred. Owing to insufficient reporting of adverse events, we were unable to reach any conclusions on the safety or harms related to exercise therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Exercise therapy compared to sham/placebo treatment may have no clinically relevant effect on pain or functional status in the short term in people with acute non-specific LBP, but the evidence is very uncertain. Exercise therapy compared to no treatment may have no clinically relevant effect on pain or functional status in the short term in people with acute non-specific LBP, but the evidence is very uncertain. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to very low for inconsistency, risk of bias concerns, and imprecision (few participants).

Telerehabilitation for the treatment in chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Although there is growth in the approach to telerehabilitation (TLRH) in different pathologies, research on TLRH for the management of low back pain is scarce and controversial. Thus, the purpose of this study was to analyze whether a TLRH program is as effective as a clinical exercise program in improving pain and different functional variables in patients with nonspecific low back pain (NLBP).

METHOD

A single-blind, two-armed randomized controlled trial was carried out with 68 individuals with chronic NLBP. Participants were randomly allocated to either the TLRH group (TG) (n = 34) or the clinic group (CG) (n = 34). The TG received an exercise-based TLRH video and an educational program on the neurophysiology of pain. The CG received the same pain education and exercise program at the clinic facility supervised by a clinician. Both groups performed 2 weekly sessions for 8 weeks. Active movements of the lumbar spine, pain and range of motion, and kinesiophobia were assessed at baseline, at the end of 8 weeks of treatment, and at 3 months.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences for time-by-group interaction were identified in range of motion of right (F = 11.668; p = 0.001) and left (F = 4.219; p = 0.042) legs when knee extended test is performed; as well as in pain intensity when the same test (F = 5.176; p = 0.043). Moreover, higher pain level during flexion (F = 5.133; p = 0.009) and extension movements (F = 6.335; p = 0.003) in patients with bilateral pain location than those with unilateral or central pain location has been appreciated.

CONCLUSION

A TLRH rehabilitation program via mobile app is as effective as the same exercise program supervised in a clinic.

Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) has a high economic burden and is strongly related to the degenerative process of the spine, especially in the intervertebral disc and of the facet joints. Numerous treatment modalities have been proposed for the management of LBP, and the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as an innovative therapeutic option for degenerative disease of the spine. The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections in managing low back pain.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, a registered at PROSPERO Systematic Reviews Platform, under number CRD42021268491. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched to identify relevant articles, along with hand searching to identify gray literature articles, with no language restrictions. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized trials (NRTs), and case series (CSs) with more than 10 patients were considered eligible. The quality assessment and the risk of bias of the randomized clinical trials were evaluated using the RoB II tool. An evaluation of the description of the preparation methods was performed using an adapted version of the MIBO checklist.

RESULTS

An electronic database search resulted in 2324 articles, and after the exclusion of noneligible articles, 13 RCTs and 27 NRTs or CSs were analyzed. Of the 13 RCTs, 11 found favorable results in comparison to the control group in pain and disability, one showed no superiority to the control group, and one was discontinued because of the lack of therapeutic effect at eight-week evaluation. Description of the PRP preparation techniques were found in almost all papers. The overall risk of bias was considered high in 2 papers and low in 11. An adapted MIBO checklist showed a 72.7% compliance rate in the selected areas.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we analyzed articles from English, Spanish and Russian language, from large databases and grey literature. PRP was in general an effective and safe treatment for degenerative LPB. Positive results were found in almost studies, a small number of adverse events were related, the risk of bias of the RCTs was low. Based on the evaluation of the included studies, we graded as level II the quality of the evidence supporting the use of PRP in LBP. Large-scale, multicenter RCTs are still needed to confirm these findings.

Red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common presentation across different healthcare settings. Clinicians need to confidently be able to screen and identify people presenting with low back pain with a high suspicion of serious or specific pathology (e.g. vertebral fracture). Patients identified with an increased likelihood of having a serious pathology will likely require additional investigations and specific treatment. Guidelines recommend a thorough history and clinical assessment to screen for serious pathology as a cause of low back pain. However, the diagnostic accuracy of recommended red flags (e.g. older age, trauma, corticosteroid use) remains unclear, particularly those used to screen for vertebral fracture.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of red flags used to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. Where possible, we reported results of red flags separately for different types of vertebral fracture (i.e. acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, vertebral traumatic fracture, vertebral stress fracture, unspecified vertebral fracture).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 26 July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered primary diagnostic studies if they compared results of history taking or physical examination (or both) findings (index test) with a reference standard test (e.g. X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), single-photon emission computerised tomography (SPECT)) for the identification of vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. We included index tests that were presented individually or as part of a combination of tests.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data for diagnostic two-by-two tables from the publications or reconstructed them using information from relevant parameters to calculate sensitivity, specificity, and positive (+LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We extracted aspects of study design, characteristics of the population, index test, reference standard, and type of vertebral fracture. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of studies and index tests, therefore the analysis was descriptive. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and LRs for each test and used these as an indication of clinical usefulness. Two review authors independently conducted risk of bias and applicability assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool.

MAIN RESULTS

This review is an update of a previous Cochrane Review of red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. We included 14 studies in this review, six based in primary care, five in secondary care, and three in tertiary care. Four studies reported on 'osteoporotic vertebral fractures', two studies reported on 'vertebral compression fracture', one study reported on 'osteoporotic and traumatic vertebral fracture', two studies reported on 'vertebral stress fracture', and five studies reported on 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. Risk of bias was only rated as low in one study for the domains reference standard and flow and timing. The domain patient selection had three studies and the domain index test had six studies rated at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of the data. Results from single studies suggest only a small number of the red flags investigated may be informative. In the primary healthcare setting, results from single studies suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs (range: 1.93 to 12.85) for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 6.42, 95% CI 2.94 to 14.02). Results from single studies suggest 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for studies in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 70 years: 11.19, 95% CI 5.33 to 23.51). Results from single studies suggest 'corticosteroid use' may be an informative red flag in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR range: 3.97, 95% CI 0.20 to 79.15 to 48.50, 95% CI 11.48 to 204.98) and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.46, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.34); however, diagnostic values varied and CIs were imprecise. Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and female gender' in primary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (16.17, 95% CI 4.47 to 58.43). In the secondary healthcare setting, results from a single study suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.18, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.54) and 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 75 years: 2.51, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.27). Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and trauma' in secondary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 4.35, 95% CI 2.92 to 6.48). Results from a single study suggest when '4 of 5 tests' were positive in secondary care, they demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 9.62, 95% CI 5.88 to 15.73). In the tertiary care setting, results from a single study suggest 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture' (+LR: 31.09, 95% CI 18.25 to 52.96).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that only a few red flags are potentially useful in guiding clinical decisions to further investigate people suspected to have a vertebral fracture. Most red flags were not useful as screening tools to identify vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. In primary care, 'older age' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture', and 'trauma' and 'corticosteroid use' were both informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture'. In secondary care, 'older age' was informative for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' and 'trauma' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. In tertiary care, 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture'. Combinations of red flags were also informative and may be more useful than individual tests alone. Unfortunately, the challenge to provide clear guidance on which red flags should be used routinely in clinical practice remains. Further research with primary studies is needed to improve and consolidate our current recommendations for screening for vertebral fractures to guide clinical care.

Real-time ultrasound evaluation of CORE muscle activity in a simultaneous contraction in subjects with non-specific low back pain and without low-back pain. Protocol of an observational case-control study

Non-specific low back pain represents 90-95% of all cases of low back pain and it has a prevalence of 18% in the adult population, assuming a great socioeconomic impact. The main objective of this observational case-control study study is to evaluate if there are differences in the simultaneous contraction of the core muscles between nonspecific low back pain and healthy subjects. This study will be carried out in the Physiotherapy department of the University of Alcalá. Eighty-two participants <18 years old, will be recruited, paired with NSLBP (n = 41) and healthy (n = 41). The main outcome will be the onset muscle contraction of lateral abdominal wall (internal oblique, external oblique and transversus abdominis), pelvic floor, lumbar multifidus and respiratory diafragm. The maneuvers that the subjects will perform will be abdominal drawing in maneouver, contralateral arm lift, valsalva, and voluntary pelvic floor contraction in sitting and standing. As a secondary objective, to analyze the amount of contraction of each muscle group and the capacity of the diaphragms to be excreted in both groups of subjects. Finally, to relate pain and disability.

A multidimensional nomogram combining clinical factors and imaging features to predict 1-year recurrence of low back pain with or without radicular pain after spinal manipulation/mobilization

BACKGROUND

In this retrospective study, we aimed to develop a nomogram to predict recurrence during a 1-year period of spinal manipulation/mobilization (SM/M) in patients with low back pain (LBP) with greater pain intensity, more severe comorbid conditions, or a neuropathic component.

METHODS

A total of 786 consecutive patients with LBP treated with SM/M as primary therapy were divided into training (n = 545) and validation (n = 241) sets. Cox regression analyses were used to assess the relative value of clinical factors and lumbar magnetic resonance imaging features associated with recurrence during the 1-year period. Predictors of recurrence with significant differences were used to construct a nomogram in the training set. We evaluated the performance of the model on the training and validation sets to determine its discriminative ability, calibration, and clinical utility. The prognostic value of the nomogram for predicting recurrence was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic analyses.

RESULTS

A nomogram comprising hospitalization time, previous history of LBP, disease duration, lumbar range of motion, lower extremity tendon reflex, muscle strength, ratio of herniation to uncompressed dural sac area, and Pfirrmann classification was established for recurrence during a 1-year period after SM/M in patients with LBP. Favorable calibration and discrimination were observed in the nomogram training and validation sets (C-index 0.753 and 0.779, respectively). Decision curve analysis confirmed the clinical utility of the nomogram. Over a 1-year period, the nomogram showed satisfactory performance in predicting recurrence in LBP after SM/M.

CONCLUSION

We established and validated a novel nomogram that can accurately predict a patient's risk of LBP recurrence following SM/M. This realistic prognostic model may aid doctors and therapists in their decision-making process and strategy optimization for non-surgical treatment of LBP using SM/M.

Feasibility of a multidisciplinary group videoconferencing approach for chronic low back pain: a randomized, open-label, controlled, pilot clinical trial (EN-FORMA)

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common condition that becomes even more prevalent with aging. A non-pharmacological multidisciplinary approach for chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP) has been recommended, but integrating different healthcare professionals is challenging. A multidisciplinary group videoconferencing approach (MGVA) can be helpful. Our aim was to provide evidence on MGVA's feasibility in managing CNSLBP and its impact on clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, randomized, controlled, parallel-group pilot clinical trial with CNSLBP patients irresponsive to conservative treatment. Patients between 18 and 67 years of age were randomly assigned (1:1) to either Standard-of-Care + MGVA (experimental group) or Standard-of-Care alone (control group). MGVA consisted of integrated sessions for physical rehabilitation/physiotherapy, psychology, and social work treatments. The control group received standard clinical practice treatment. The feasibility was assessed by the number of study procedures completed to at least 80% as planned. The impact on clinical practice was evaluated by the number of patients who changed their status from "candidate" to "non-candidate" to low back surgery as the treatment of choice for CNSLBP. The SF-36, Oswestry Disability Index, and TMMS-24 questionnaires were used. We performed a whole population-based descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

We included 20 patients, but only 18 were randomized (2 withdrew consent before randomization). The mean (SD) age was 53.1 (5.9) years, and mostly women (13/18); 7 were actively employed. In the experimental group, 6/9 (67%, 95%CI:35-88%) patients attended at least 80% of the scheduled procedures, while in the control group, 8/9 (89%, 95%CI:57-98%) did. Additionally, 1 out of 4 (25%) patients in the experimental group changed their status from "candidate" for low back surgery to "non-candidate". None of the 2 patients in the control group did so. We found differences between groups in the SF-36 mental health component (p-value:0.061), Oswestry Disability Index (p-value:0.032), and TMMS-24 Repair component (p-value:0.014) at the end of the trial favoring MGVA.

CONCLUSIONS

The multidisciplinary group videoconferencing approach to managing chronic non-specific low back pain was feasible, suggesting overall beneficial effects on patients' health and could play a role in changing a patient's status from "candidate" to "non-candidate" for surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05093543 (ClinicalTrials.gov), first registered in 26/10/2021.

Management of acute non-specific low back pain in the emergency department: do emergency physicians follow the guidelines? Results of a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Clinical guidelines for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) recommend avoiding imaging studies or invasive treatments and to advise patients to stay active. The aim of this study was to evaluate the management of acute non-specific LBP in the emergency departments (ED).

SETTING

We invited all department chiefs of Swiss EDs and their physician staff to participate in a web-based survey using two clinical case vignettes of patients with acute non-specific LBP presenting to an ED. In both cases, no neurological deficits or red flags were present. Guideline adherence and low-value care was defined based on current guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

In total, 263 ED physicians completed at least one vignette, while 212 completed both vignettes (43% residents, 32% senior/attending physicians and 24% chief physicians). MRI was considered in 31% in vignette 1 and 65% in vignette 2. For pain management, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol and metamizole were mostly used. A substantial proportion of ED physicians considered treatments with questionable benefit and/or increased risk for adverse events such as oral steroids (vignette 1, 12% and vignette 2, 19%), muscle relaxants (33% and 38%), long-acting strong opioids (25% and 33%) and spinal injections (22% and 43%). Although guidelines recommend staying active, 72% and 67% of ED physicians recommended activity restrictions.

CONCLUSION

Management of acute non-specific LBP in the ED was not in agreement with current guideline recommendations in a substantial proportion of ED physicians. Overuse of imaging studies, the use of long-acting opioids and muscle relaxants, as well as recommendations for activity and work restrictions were prevalent and may potentially be harmful.

Care for the patient with low back pain

ABSTRACT

Low back pain (LBP) continues to be one of the most common conditions leading patients to seek medical care globally. The NP is on the frontline, playing an integral role in caring for patients with LBP. Understanding the etiology of LBP is essential in the treatment.

Guideline adherent screening and referral: do third year Doctor of Physical Therapy students identify red and yellow flags within descriptive patient cases? a United States based survey study

INTRODUCTION

The need for early detection and appropriate management of flags in physical therapy has been established. The lack of early detection has been shown to lead to poor outcomes such as serious pathology, increased disability, prolonged symptoms, and increased healthcare utilization.

OBJECTIVE

The main purpose of this survey study was to assess third-year Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students' adherence to clinical practice guidelines specifically in the identification and management of red and yellow flags through a case-based approach.

METHODS

A survey including three different flag case scenarios was sent to DPT students in 15 geographically diverse physical therapy programs. Previously published case scenarios measuring adherence to practice guidelines were used. Correlational analyses were performed to link student demographic details and guideline adherent management.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 64 students. Guideline adherent management was greater for red flags (85%) than yellow flag cases (25% and 42%). No significant relationship was noted between the student details and guideline adherent management.

CONCLUSION

DPT students may need additional educational content related to yellow flag screening. Educators may consider utilizing published red and yellow flag cases to guide decision-making and highlight best screening practices.

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.

Which aspects facilitate the adherence of patients with low back pain to physiotherapy? A Delphi study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of physiotherapy to reduce low back pain depends on patient adherence to treatment. Facilitators and barriers to patient adherence are multifactorial and include patient and therapist-related factors. This Delphi study aimed to identify an expert consensus on aspects facilitating the adherence of patients with back pain to physiotherapy.

METHOD

International experts were invited to participate in a three-round standard Delphi survey. The survey contained 49 items (32 original and 17 suggested by experts) which were rated on 5-point Likert scales. The items were assigned to six domains. The consensus level was defined as 60%.

RESULTS

Of 38 invited experts, 15 followed the invitation and completed all three rounds. A positive consensus was reached on 62% of the 49 proposed items to facilitate adherence. The highest consensus was achieved in the domains "Influence of biopsychosocial factors" (89%) and "Influence of cooperation between physiotherapists and patients" (79%). Additional important domains were the "Influence of competencies of physiotherapists" (71%) and "Interdisciplinary congruence" (78%). "Administration aspects" and the "Use of digital tools" did not reach expert consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

Biopsychosocial factors, therapeutic skills, and patient-physiotherapist collaboration should be considered in physiotherapy practice to facilitate adherence in patients with LBP. Future studies should prospectively evaluate the effectiveness of individual or combined identified aspects for their influence on patient adherence in longitudinal study designs.

Two cases of low back pain of unknown etiology diagnosed as multiple myeloma

We report two cases of patients complaining of lumbar back pain of unknown etiology which were finally diagnosed as multiple myeloma. The first case was a woman in her 80s with a chief complaint of lumbar back pain. The second case was a male in his 70s. He also consulted our institution because his pain did not subside despite receiving increased doses of oral medication and nerve blocks from his previous doctor. Both patients presented with compression fractures on plain radiography, and additionally with cytopenia, hyperproteinemia, and hypoalbuminemia in blood tests. Further tests were conducted due to suspected multiple myeloma, revealing a punched-out legion in the skull and elevated levels of β2 microglobulin and Immunoglobulin G. Subsequently, both patients were transferred to the hematology department. In these two cases, we had predicted the presence of multiple myeloma from the results of initial testing and subsequently successfully provided definitive diagnoses following additional examinations.

A Model of Triage of Serious Spinal Pathologies and Therapeutic Options Based on a Delphi Study

Background and Objectives: The relevance of red flags in serious spinal pathology (SSP) has evolved throughout the last years. Recently, new considerations have been proposed to expand the consideration of red flags. The purpose of this study was to determine, approve and test a model for the triage and management process of SSPs based on the latest data available in the literature. Materials and Methods: The SSP model was initially built on the basis of a literature review. The model was further determined and approved by an expert panel using a Delphi process. Finally, clinical scenarios were used to test the applicability of the model. Results: After three rounds of the Delphi process, panellists reached a consensus on a final version of the model. The use of clinical scenarios by experts brought about reflexive elements both for the determined model and for the SSPs depicted in the clinical cases. Conclusions: The validation of the model and its implementation in the clinical field could help assess the skills of first-line practitioners managing spinal pain patients. To this end, the development of additional clinical scenarios fitting the determined model should be further considered.

Comparison of intravenous paracetamol (acetaminophen) to intravenously or intramuscularly administered non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or opioids for patients presenting with moderate to severe acute pain conditions to the ED: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opiates/opioids, administered parenterally via intravenous or intramuscular route, are widely used to provide analgesia for patients with moderate to severe pain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the level of analgesia provided by intravenous paracetamol (IVP) alone compared with NSAIDs (intravenous or intramuscular), or opioids (intravenous) alone in adults attending the ED with acute pain.

METHODS

Two authors independently searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase (OVID), Cochrane Library, SCOPUS and Google Scholar (3 March 2021-20 May 2022) for randomised trials without any language or date restriction. Clinical trials were evaluated using the Risk of Bias V.2 tool. The primary outcome was mean difference (MD) for pain reduction at 30 min (T30) post analgesia delivery. The secondary outcomes were MD in pain reduction at 60, 90 and 120 min; the need for rescue analgesia; and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials (5427 patients) were included in the systematic review and 25 trials (5006 patients) in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in pain reduction at T30 between the IVP group and opioids (MD -0.13, 95% CI -1.49 to 1.22) or IVP and NSAIDs (MD -0.27, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.54. There was also no difference at 60 min, IVP group versus opioid group (MD -0.09, 95% CI -2.69 to 2.52) or IVP versus NSAIDs (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91). The quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluations methodology was low for MD in pain scores.The need for rescue analgesia at T30 was significantly higher in the IVP group compared with the NSAID group (risk ratio (RR): 1.50, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.83), with no difference found between the IVP group and the opioid group (RR: 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.70). AEs were 50% lower in the IVP group compared with the opioid group (RR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.62), whereas no difference was observed in the IVP group compared with the NSAID group (RR: 1.30, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.15).

CONCLUSION

In patients presenting to the ED with a diverse range of pain conditions, IVP provides similar levels of pain relief compared with opiates/opioids or NSAIDs at T30 post administration. Patients treated with NSAIDs had lower risk of rescue analgesia, and opioids cause more AEs, suggesting NSAIDs as the first-choice analgesia and IVP as a suitable alternative.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021240099.