Red flags presented in current low back pain guidelines: a review

Association of back pain with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among older men: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated whether more severe back pain phenotypes-persistent, frequent, or disabling back pain-are associated with higher mortality rate among older men.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of a prospective cohort, the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) study, we evaluated mortality rates by back pain phenotype among 5215 older community-dwelling men (mean age, 73 years, SD = 5.6) from 6 sites in the United States. The primary back pain measure used baseline and Year 5 back pain questionnaire data to characterize participants as having no back pain, nonpersistent back pain, infrequent persistent back pain, or frequent persistent back pain. Secondary measures of back pain from the Year 5 questionnaire included disabling back pain phenotypes. The main outcomes measured were all-cause and cause-specific death.

RESULTS

After the Year 5 exam, during up to 18 years of follow-up (mean follow-up = 10.3 years), there were 3513 deaths (1218 cardiovascular, 764 cancer, 1531 other). A higher proportion of men with frequent persistent back pain versus no back pain died (78% versus 69%; sociodemographic-adjusted HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.11-1.45). No association was evident after further adjustment for health-related factors, such as self-reported general health and comorbid chronic health conditions (fully adjusted HR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.86-1.15). Results were similar for cardiovascular deaths and other deaths, but we observed no association of back pain with cancer deaths. Secondary back pain measures, including back-related disability, were associated with increased mortality risk that remained statistically significant in fully adjusted models.

CONCLUSION

Although frequent persistent back pain was not independently associated with risk of death in older men, additional secondary disabling back pain phenotypes were independently associated with increased mortality rate. Future investigations should evaluate whether improvements in disabling back pain affect general health and well-being or risk of death.

Promoting running as the best treatment for lower back pain in physiotherapy practice: a best practice implementation project

OBJECTIVES

This project aimed to promote running as the best treatment for lower back pain (LBP) in an outpatient setting.

INTRODUCTION

LBP is one of the most prevalent conditions worldwide. Sixty-two percent of all Germans experience episodes of non-specific back pain at least once a year, with one-fifth developing chronic conditions. Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is a natural process, contributing to periods of acute LBP. However, the scientific literature and guidelines partially overlook the significance of water management in IVD. This implementation project sought to address this gap by educating patients about this process. Running and/or walking were chosen as general approaches for treatment rather than specific disease-related approaches.

METHODS

This implementation project was conducted in an outpatient physiotherapy clinic in Brandenburg, Germany, utilizing the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework. An evidence-informed clinical audit and feedback strategy was used to measure compliance with ten audit criteria. Five physiotherapists and 20 patients took part in the audits.

RESULTS

At baseline, only 20% of participating physiotherapists screened for yellow flags regarding psychological issues. However, after project implementation, this criterion scored 100% compliance. Some patients performed exercises independently, but confusion persisted regarding the choice of beneficial exercises. Patients continued running, but those who took a break due to pain expressed uncertainty about resuming.

CONCLUSIONS

The project highlighted the effectiveness of collaborative efforts between patients and therapists to address the issue. The project team's conviction in action and solution strategies serves as the foundation for this collaboration. This implementation strategy provided "running" patients with the confidence to either resume or reintegrate running after an extended break.

SPANISH ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A222.

Comparative Analysis of Artificial Intelligence Platforms: ChatGPT-3.5 and GoogleBard in Identifying Red Flags of Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent healthcare concern that is frequently responsive to conservative treatment. However, it can also stem from severe conditions, marked by 'red flags' (RF) such as malignancy, cauda equina syndrome, fractures, infections, spondyloarthropathies, and aneurysm rupture, which physicians should be vigilant about. Given the increasing reliance on online health information, this study assessed ChatGPT-3.5's (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA) and GoogleBard's (Google, Mountain View, CA, USA) accuracy in responding to RF-related LBP questions and their capacity to discriminate the severity of the condition.

METHODS

We created 70 questions on RF-related symptoms and diseases following the LBP guidelines. Among them, 58 had a single symptom (SS), and 12 had multiple symptoms (MS) of LBP. Questions were posed to ChatGPT and GoogleBard, and responses were assessed by two authors for accuracy, completeness, and relevance (ACR) using a 5-point rubric criteria.

RESULTS

Cohen's kappa values (0.60-0.81) indicated significant agreement among the authors. The average scores for responses ranged from 3.47 to 3.85 for ChatGPT-3.5 and from 3.36 to 3.76 for GoogleBard for 58 SS questions, and from 4.04 to 4.29 for ChatGPT-3.5 and from 3.50 to 3.71 for GoogleBard for 12 MS questions. The ratings for these responses ranged from 'good' to 'excellent'. Most SS responses effectively conveyed the severity of the situation (93.1% for ChatGPT-3.5, 94.8% for GoogleBard), and all MS responses did so. No statistically significant differences were found between ChatGPT-3.5 and GoogleBard scores (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In an era characterized by widespread online health information seeking, artificial intelligence (AI) systems play a vital role in delivering precise medical information. These technologies may hold promise in the field of health information if they continue to improve.

Chronic Low Back Pain: History, Symptoms, Pain Mechanisms, and Treatment

Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is the most frequently reported cause of years lived with disability. Identifying the anatomical structures or dysfunction contributing to patients' symptoms is critical to guiding treatment. The etiology of back pain and differential diagnosis is often broad, ranging from non-degenerative cLBP (trauma, tumor, inflammation, infection, etc.) to degenerative (also described as nonspecific) cLBP. After eliminating suspicion for more insidious causes of cLBP, a thorough investigation can be conducted in an attempt to identify a source of degenerative cLBP. Degenerative cLBP can originate from many sources, and a detailed understanding of the structures potentially involved is invaluable for an accurate diagnosis. This review article aims to provide a broad overview of the utility of clinical history, physical exam findings, imaging findings, and diagnostic procedures in identifying the cause of patients' cLBP. We provide a framework to help guide clinicians by dividing the structures into groups as follows: anterior vertebral column, posterior vertebral column, and extra-vertebral pain. For each condition listed, we touch on the treatment options that can be considered.

Extravertebral low back pain: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common reasons for consultation in general practice. Currently, LBP is categorised into specific and non-specific causes. However, extravertebral causes, such as abdominal aortic aneurysm or pancreatitis, are not being considered.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed across MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library, complemented by a handsearch. Studies conducted between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2020, where LBP was the main symptom, were included.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 6040 studies, from which duplicates were removed, leaving 4105 studies for title and abstract screening. Subsequently, 265 publications were selected for inclusion, with an additional 197 publications identified through the handsearch. The majority of the studies were case reports and case series, predominantly originating from specialised care settings. A clear distinction between vertebral or rare causes of LBP was not always possible. A range of diseases were identified as potential extravertebral causes of LBP, encompassing gynaecological, urological, vascular, systemic, and gastrointestinal diseases. Notably, guidelines exhibited inconsistencies in addressing extravertebral causes.

DISCUSSION

Prior to this review, there has been no systematic investigation into extravertebral causes of LBP. Although these causes are rare, the absence of robust and reliable epidemiological data hinders a comprehensive understanding, as well as the lack of standardised protocols, which contributes to a lack of accurate description of indicative symptoms. While there are certain disease-specific characteristics, such as non-mechanical or cyclical LBP, and atypical accompanying symptoms like fever, abdominal pain, or leg swelling, that may suggest extravertebral causes, it is important to recognise that these features are not universally present in every patient.

CONCLUSION

The differential diagnosis of extravertebral LBP is extensive with relatively low prevalence rates dependent on the clinical setting. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for extravertebral aetiologies, especially in patients presenting with atypical accompanying symptoms.

Acute back pain: Clinical and radiologic diagnosis: WFNS spine committee recommendations

Objective

To formulate the most current, evidence-based recommendations for the clinical and radiologic diagnosis of acute low back pain lasting <4 weeks.

Methods

A systematic literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar databases was performed from 2012 to 2022 using the search terms "acute back pain AND clinical diagnosis" and "acute back pain AND radiologic diagnosis". Screening criteria resulted in a total of 97 papers analyzed. Using the Delphi method and two rounds of voting, the WFNS (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies) Spine Committee generated ten final consensus statements.

Results

Ten final consensus statements address the clinical diagnosis of acute LBP, including which clinical conditions cause acute LBP and how we can distinguish between the different causes of LBP, including discogenic, facet joint, sacroiliac joint, and myofascial pain. The most important step for the radiologic diagnosis of acute LBP is to evaluate the necessity of radiologic investigation, as well as its timing and the most appropriate type of imaging modality. Importantly, imaging should not be a routine diagnostic tool, unless red flag signs are present. In fact, routine imaging for acute LBP can actually have a negative effect as it may reveal incidental radiographic findings that exacerbate patient fear and anxiety.

Conclusion

Overall, the quality of evidence is not high for most of our consensus statements, and further studies are needed to validate the WFNS Spine Committee recommendations on the clinical and radiographic diagnosis of acute LBP.

Knowledge of Back Pain and Spinal Disorders Among the General Population in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia

Introduction  Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common global health problems and the second most common reason for seeking medical advice. However, most LBP does not indicate a serious disorder. Over half of the Saudi Arabian population experiences LBP at least once in their lives. Therefore, it is important to assess and understand how people manage this health problem. This study assessed back pain and spinal disorder knowledge among the general population in Saudi Arabia's western region. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of the general population in western Saudi Arabia. The data were collected using an online, self-administered, Arabic version of the validated questionnaire about LBP. A statistical analysis of the collected data was performed using a software program. Results A total of 754 eligible participants completed the questionnaire. Less than half of the participants could correctly define acute and chronic LBP and sciatica. Only 19.2% of participants were aware that medical history and clinical examinations are used to diagnose LBP. Young participants, university graduates, and unmarried participants had good LBP knowledge. Conclusion This study showed that the general population of Saudi Arabia in the Western region needs more knowledge about the definitions of acute and chronic LBP. However, they had fair knowledge about the aggravating factors and triggers of LBP. Young participants had better knowledge about LBP. Awareness campaigns with brochures and flyers can be used to increase the population's knowledge.

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.

First Provider Seen for an Acute Episode of Low Back Pain Influences Subsequent Health Care Utilization

OBJECTIVE

Costs associated with low back pain (LBP) continue to rise. Despite numerous clinical practice guidelines, the evaluation and treatments for LBP are variable and largely depend on the individual provider. As yet, little attention has been given to the first choice of provider. Early research indicates that the choice of first provider and the timing of interventions for LBP appear to influence utilization. We sought to examine the association between the first provider seen and health care utilization.

METHODS

Using 2015-2018 data from a large insurer, this retrospective analysis focused on patients (29,806) seeking care for a new episode of LBP. The study identified the first provider chosen and examined the following year of medical utilization. Cox proportional hazards models were calculated using inverse probability weighting on propensity scores to evaluate the time to event and the relationship to the first choice of provider.

RESULTS

The primary outcome was the timing and use of health care resources. Total health care use was lowest in those who first sought care with chiropractic care or physical therapy. Highest health care use was seen in those patients who chose the emergency department.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there appears to be an association between the first choice of provider and future health care use. Chiropractic care and physical therapy provide nonpharmacologic and nonsurgical, guideline-based interventions. The use of physical therapists and chiropractors as entry points into the health system appears related to a decrease in immediate and long-term use of health resources. This study expands the existing body of literature and provides a compelling case for the influence of the first provider on an acute episode of LBP.

IMPACT

The first provider seen for an acute episode of LBP influences immediate treatment decisions, the trajectory of a specific patient episode, and future health care choices in the management of LBP.

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.

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.

Diagnosis Value of Patient Evaluation Components Applicable in Primary Care Settings for the Diagnosis of Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review of Systematic Reviews

Low back pain ranks as the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Although best practice guidelines share a consistent diagnostic approach for the evaluation of patients with low back pain, confusion remains as to what extent patient history and physical examination findings can inform management strategies. The aim of this study was to summarize evidence investigating the diagnostic value of patient evaluation components applicable in primary care settings for the diagnosis of low back pain. To this end, peer-reviewed systematic reviews were searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases from 1 January 2000 to 10 April 2023. Paired reviewers independently reviewed all citations and articles using a two-phase screening process and independently extracted the data. Of the 2077 articles identified, 27 met the inclusion criteria, focusing on the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis, radicular syndrome, non- specific low back pain and specific low back pain. Most patient evaluation components lack diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of low back pain when considered in isolation. Further research is needed to develop evidence-based and standardized evaluation procedures, especially for primary care settings where evidence is still scarce.

Severe lumbar pain in an adolescent due to idiopathic vena cava thrombosis: a case report

BACKGROUND

Lumbar back pain in an adolescent is generally musculoskeletal, that is, due to a muscle strain or scoliosis. This case describes a young individual without any previous health issues who rapidly developed a life-threatening condition, though initially presenting with "only" back pain.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 16-year-old Caucasian male patient was admitted twice to the emergency department with debilitating lumbar pain without neurological or vascular symptoms. Imagery showed an extensive thrombosis of the inferior vena cava. No external cause, structural abnormality, or any systemic disease were found that predisposed the patient to this highly unusual vaso-occlusive incident.

CONCLUSION

Thrombosis of the inferior vena cava is a rare but life-threatening entity. It is underrecognized and associated with serious short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Increased awareness is essential because deep vein thrombosis in children seems to cause atypical symptoms, such as spinal pain or the absence of edema of the lower limbs, as in the present case.

Cauda equina screening in Physiotherapy: A qualitative study of physiotherapists in a community musculoskeletal service: Are we asking the right questions and are we asking the questions right?

Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a surgical emergency. With Physiotherapists increasingly taking on first-contact and spinal triage roles, screening for CES must be as thorough and effective as possible. This study explores whether Physiotherapists are asking the correct questions, in the correct way and investigates their experiences when screening for this serious condition. Thirty physiotherapists working in a community musculoskeletal service were purposively sampled and participated in semi-structured interviews. Data was transcribed and thematically analysed. All participants routinely asked bladder, bowel function and saddle anaesthesia screening questions although only 9 routinely asked about sexual function. Whether questions are asked in the correct way has never been studied. Sufficient depth of questioning, using lay terminology and explicit language was achieved by two-thirds of participants. Less than half of the participants framed the questions before asking them and only 5 participants combined all four dimensions. Whilst most clinicians felt comfortable asking general CES questions, half reported feeling uncomfortable when asking about sexual function. Issues around; gender, culture and language were also highlighted. Four main themes emerged from this study; i) Physiotherapists ask the right questions but frequently omit sexual function questions, ii) mostly, Physiotherapists ask CES questions in a way that patients understand however, there needs to be improvement in framing the context of the questions, iii) Physiotherapists generally feel comfortable with CES screening but there is some awkwardness surrounding discussion of sexual function and iv) Physiotherapists perceive there to be barriers to effective CES screening caused by culture and language.

Critical Appraisal of Current Acute LBP Management and the Role of a Multimodal Analgesia: A Narrative Review

Acute low back pain (LBP) stands as a leading cause of activity limitation and work absenteeism, and its associated healthcare expenditures are expected to become substantial when acute LBP develops into a chronic and even refractory condition. Therefore, early intervention is crucial to prevent progression to chronic pain, for which the management is particularly challenging and the most effective pharmacological therapy is still controversial. Current guideline treatment recommendations vary and are mostly driven by expertise with opinion differing across different interventions. Thus, it is difficult to formulate evidence-based guidance when the relatively few randomized clinical trials have explored the diagnosis and management of LBP while employing different selection criteria, statistical analyses, and outcome measurements. This narrative review aims to provide a critical appraisal of current acute LBP management by discussing the unmet needs and areas of improvement from bench-to-bedside, and proposes multimodal analgesia as the way forward to attain an effective and prolonged pain relief and functional recovery in patients with acute LBP.

The Impact of Low Back Pain on the Quality of Life of Children between 6 and 12 Years of Age

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of low back pain on the perceived health-related quality of life of children between 6 and 12 years of age. This is a cross-sectional study of three hundred seventy-seven students from three schools (two private and one public) located in the city of Botucatu, São Paulo. Data were collected using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL, version 4.0), a questionnaire comprising questions on personal background, sociodemographic and socioeconomic information, and a questionnaire about quality of life. Comparisons were made between groups with and without low back pain. The chi-squared test was used for analyzing categorical variables, and the non-parametric Mann–Whitney test was used for continuous variables. According to the findings obtained in this study, it was observed that low back pain in the last month was reported by 27.3% of the total participants. The perceived health-related quality of life was lower among individuals who had low back pain, and the scores of physical and emotional functioning domains were also lower in the presence of low back pain. The prevalence of low back pain among children and adolescents is relatively high. Furthermore, the repercussions of low back pain may lead to a lower overall perception of the health-related quality of life in this population and affect aspects of physical and emotional functioning.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Telemedicine Triage Model Among Medicaid Patients with Low Back Pain Referred to a Spine Center

Background

The data for primary triage via telemedicine for spine related conditions are sparse but has potential to improve access, quality of care, and offer significant cost savings for Medicaid insured patients who have very limited access to care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a telehealth triage framework using synchronous video conferencing appointments.

Methods

This is a prospective cohort feasibility study conducted within an academic spine center in the United States. Participants include Medicaid insured patients referred to an academic spine center for low back pain. We collected demographic information, a spine red flag survey, a patient satisfaction survey and demand and implementation feasibility metrics. Participants completed a demographic and red-flag survey followed by a telehealth spine appointment with a physiatrist. Immediately after the appointment, the participant completed a satisfaction survey.

Results

Nineteen patients met inclusion criteria but declined telehealth either due to preference for in-person appointment or lack of comfort with technology. Thirty-three participants enrolled and attended their initial telehealth appointment. Few participants reporting 1 or more red flag symptom also screened positive during their subsequent telehealth evaluation with the physician (n=7/28). Participant satisfaction was high across all domains including ease of scheduling, efficiency of virtual check in, ability to report their symptoms fully and accurately to the provider, imaging review, explanation of diagnosis and treatment plan. Most participants (n=19/20, 95%) would recommend an initial telehealth appointment.

Conclusions

The telehealth framework used was feasible and provided an acceptable form of care for Medicaid patients who were interested and able to participate in this form of care. Our acceptability results are promising but should be interpreted with caution given the proportion of patients who declined to participate.

Using general practitioners with an extended role in spinal practice for the initial assessment of patients referred to spinal surgeons: preliminary experience and challenges

AIM

To describe experience using general practitioners (GPs), with an extended role (GPwER) in spinal medicine, to expedite assessment, triage, and management of patients referred from primary care for specialist spinal surgical opinion.

BACKGROUND

Low back and neck pain are common conditions in primary care. Indiscriminate or inappropriate referral to a spinal surgeon contributes to long waiting times. Previous attempts at triaging patients who really require a surgical opinion have used practice nurses, physiotherapists, clinical algorithms, and interdisciplinary screening clinics.

METHODS

Within the setting of an independent spinal care centre, we have used GPs specially trained in spinal practice to expedite the assessment and triage of new referrals between 2015 and 2021. We reviewed feedback from a Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire and the postgraduate backgrounds, training, practice with regard to triage of new referrals, and experiences of the GPs who were recruited.

FINDINGS

Six GPwER had a mean of 26 years of postgraduate experience before appointment (range 10-44 years). The first four GPwER, appointed between 2015 and 2018, underwent an ad hoc in-house, interdisciplinary training programme and saw 2994 new patients between 2016 and 2020. After GPwER, assessment in only 18.9% (range 12.6 to 22.7%) of these patients was a spinal surgical opinion deemed necessary. Waiting times to see the spinal surgeon remained at 6-8 weeks despite a three-fold annual increase (from 340 to 1058) in new referrals. A Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire revealed high levels of satisfaction with the performances of the GPwER across seven dimensions. A dedicated training programme was designed in 2020, and the last two appointees underwent 20 h of clinical teaching prior to practice. Initial experience using GPwER, here termed 'Spinal Clinicians', suggests they are efficient at screening for patients needing spinal surgical referral. Establishing a recognised training programme, assessment, and certification for these practitioners are the next challenges.

Epigenetic Factors Related to Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common causes of pain and disability. At present, treatment and interventions for acute and chronic low back pain often fail to provide sufficient levels of pain relief, and full functional restoration can be challenging. Considering the significant socio-economic burden and risk-to-benefit ratio of medical and surgical intervention in low back pain patients, the identification of reliable biomarkers such as epigenetic factors associated with low back pain could be useful in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to review the available literature regarding the epigenetic factors associated with low back pain. This review was carried out in accordance with Preferential Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was carried out in October 2022. Only peer-reviewed articles were considered for inclusion. Fourteen studies were included and showed promising results in terms of reliable markers. Epigenetic markers for LBP have the potential to significantly modify disease management. Most recent evidence suggests that epigenetics is a more promising field for the identification of factors associated with LBP, offering a rationale for further investigation in this field with the long-term goal of finding epigenetic biomarkers that could constitute biological targets for disease management and treatment.

[Modern aspects to the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of low back pain]

Low back pain is one of the most common complaints in primary care. This pain is usually nonspecific and musculoskeletal. However, identification and exclusion of specific causes of pain as early as possible are important for specialists since their underestimation can sometimes lead to life-threatening consequences. The authors analyze literature data on the key facts of anamnesis («red flags»), management of patients with low back pain with emphasis on modern concepts and recommendations for diagnostics, identifying the dominant nature and cause of pain, differential diagnosis, and diagnostic significance of neuroimaging. Special attention is paid to existing options for conservative (drug and non-drug therapy) and interventional treatment methods, which have become increasingly popular in recent years.

Sequential correction using satellite rod for the treatment of severe rigid spinal deformity: a retrospective study of 19 cases

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of sequential correction using satellite rod in patients with severe rigid spinal deformity undergoing posterior-only PVCR.

METHODS

19 patients with severe rigid spinal deformity who underwent PVCR at our center from January 2014 to December 2019 were reviewed. Radiographic measurements, including major coronal Cobb angle, kyphotic curve angle, coronal and sagittal balance were measured. Clinical results were noted, including the SRS-22 questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Index score, and complications.

RESULTS

Total 19 patients were followed at least 2 years. The mean coronal Cobb angle decreased from 122.7° ± 13.17° to 57.89° ± 8.65° postoperatively, and to 58.42° ± 8.98° at final follow-up. Correction rate is 52.8%. The kyphotic curve angle improved from 102.2° ± 17.05° preoperatively to 39.68° ± 13.67° postoperatively, and to 37.74° ± 12.14° at final follow-up. Correction rate is 61.2%. Compared to preoperative results, apex vertebral translation, ODI and SRS-22 were significantly improved at the final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with severe rigid spinal deformities, sequential correction with an auxiliary satellite rod can effectively reduce surgical difficulty and improve correction rate.

Concurrent Spinal and Intracranial Subdural Hematomas as a Cause of Near-Fatal Low Back Pain in the Chiropractic Office: A Case Report

In older individuals, minor trauma may cause potentially fatal intracranial subdural hematoma (SDH). Rarely, these patients present with only low back and radicular pain as gravity redistributes the SDH to the lumbar spine. A 69-year-old male presented to a chiropractor with a 10-day history of acute on chronic low back pain, which radiated into his lower extremities bilaterally, involving weakness and difficulty walking, and a ground-level fall onto his elbows 16 days prior. He had visited his primary care provider, orthopedist, and traditional Chinese medicine practitioner, received oral analgesics and three ketorolac injections, and had lumbar radiographs, followed by acupuncture, cupping, and spinal manipulation without lasting relief. Considering the patient's concerning presentation, the chiropractor ordered lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on the first visit, revealing findings suggestive of late subacute lumbar SDH, and recommended urgent brain MRI and neurosurgical referral. The patient went to an orthopedic surgeon at a nearby hospital, becoming disoriented upon presentation, prompting admission. Brain MRI confirmed bilateral chronic intracranial SDH, prompting emergency hematoma evacuation via burr hole craniostomy. The patient's gait rapidly improved, and the pain subsided over the following two weeks. This case highlights an older male identified as having spinal SDH by a chiropractor, leading to referral and surgery for concurrent life-threatening intracranial SDH. Clinicians should be aware that spinal SDH may stem from asymptomatic intracranial SDH and should be suspicious of SDH in older individuals after a fall, signs of which warrant emergency referral for MRI and surgical evaluation.

Patients' self-reported medical care for low back pain: a nationwide population-based study

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the prevalence of medical care-seeking among adults with low back pain (LBP) and to characterise and compare use of diagnostic procedures and medical management between primary and secondary care.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Data from the EpiReumaPt, a nationwide population-based study conducted in Portugal including a representative sample of non-institutionalised adults (n=10 661) stratified by administrative territorial units was analysed.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals who self-reported history of LBP within the previous 12 months (n=6434) and sought medical care for this problem in the same period (n=2618).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients' self-reported diagnostic workup and management procedures performed by medical care for LBP collected through a structured questionnaire. Medical care procedures were stratified by level of care.

RESULTS

The prevalence of medical care-seeking for LBP was 38.0% (95% CI 35.9% to 40.1%). Primary care in isolation (45.3%) was the most sought level of care. Emergency departments (25.9%) and orthopaedics (19.4%) were the most sought secondary medical specialties. Several pathoanatomical diagnoses were used, supported by laboratory or imaging tests (91.1%). Disc herniation (20.4%) and osteoarthritis (19.7%) were the most frequent diagnoses, and X-ray (63.7%) was the most frequent diagnostic procedure self-reported by individuals. Most (75.1%) reported being treated for LBP: 80.4% with oral medication and 49.9% with injectables. The mean duration of pharmacological treatment was 104.24 (SD, 266.80) days. The use of pathoanatomical diagnoses, laboratory or imaging tests, and pharmacological treatments were generally more frequent for secondary care (p<0.05). Approximately one-quarter of individuals (24.5%) reported seeking care from additional healthcare providers, physiotherapists (66.9%) were the most frequent.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical care for LBP is frequent and associated with high levels of pathoanatomical diagnoses, imaging and laboratory tests and pharmacological therapy in both primary and secondary care settings. Funding and delivery actions should be prioritised to assure appropriate care for LBP.

The Specifics of Non-specific Low Back Pain: Re-evaluating the Current Paradigm to Improve Patient Outcomes

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of pain and debility worldwide and the most frequent reason for work-related disability. Global expenditures related to LBP are staggering and amount to billions of dollars each year in the United States alone. Yet, despite the considerable healthcare resources consumed, the care provided to patients with LBP has regularly been cited as both ineffective and exorbitant. Among the myriad reasons for this suboptimal care, the current approach to evaluation and management of patients with LBP is a likely contributor and is hitherto un-investigated. Following the current methodology, over 90% of patients with LBP are provided with no specific diagnosis, are managed inconsistently, and receive no express preventative care. We believed that this approach added costs and promoted chronic unresolved pain and disability. This narrative review highlights problems with the current methodology, proposes a novel concept for categorizing patients with LBP, and recommends strategies for improvement. Stratifying patients according to the etiology, in lieu of the prospects for morbidity, the strategy proposed in this article may help ascertain the cause of patient's LBP early, consolidate treatments, permit timely preventative measures, and, as a result, may improve patient outcomes.

Healthcare utilization and related costs among older people seeking primary care due to back pain: findings from the BACE-N cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To describe healthcare utilization and estimate associated costs during 1 year of follow-up among older people seeking primary care due to a new episode back pain and to describe healthcare utilization across patients with different risk profiles stratified using the StarT Back Screening Tool (SBST).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

A total of 452 people aged ≥55 years seeking Norwegian primary care with a new episode of back pain were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome of this study was total cost of healthcare utilization aggregated for 1 year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included components of healthcare utilization aggregated for 1 year of follow-up. Healthcare utilization was self-reported and included: primary care consultations, medications, examinations, hospitalisation, rehabilitation stay, and operations. Costs were estimated based on unit costs collected from national pricelists. Healthcare utilization across patients with different SBST risk profiles was compared using Kruskal-Wallis test, post hoc Mann-Whitney U tests and Bonferroni adjustment.

RESULTS

In total, 438 patients were included in the analysis. Mean (BCa 95% CI) total cost per patient over 1 year was €825 (682-976). Median (BCa 95% CI) total cost was €364 (307-440). The largest cost category was primary care consultations, accounting for 56% of total costs. Imaging rate was 34%. The most commonly used medication was paracetamol (27%-35% of patients). Medium- and high-risk patients had a significantly higher degree of healthcare utilization compared with low-risk patients (p<0.030).

CONCLUSION

This study estimated a 1 year mean and median cost of healthcare utilization of €825 and €364, respectively. Patients within the top 25th percentile accounted for 77% of all costs. Patients classified as medium risk and high risk had a significantly higher degree of healthcare utilization compared with patients classified as low risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04261309, results.

[Lower back pain in the primary care setting - Non-specific and specific pain]

A systematic survey of the symptoms of back pain in terms of triggering event and onset, nature and the extent of influenceability of the pain (lying or standing, under stress, nocturnal pain, localized percussion tenderness, B- symptoms, etc.), as well as structured clinical examination (segment height, radiance, projection, reflex status, sensitivity and motor function) allows an initial and therefore orienting classification of back pain as non-specific or specific. In the primary care setting many patients can be treated extremely effectively and economically from a cost perspective. In addition to the fastest possible pain relief, it is important to prevent the disease becoming chronic. A wide range of pharmacological treatment can be combined with non-pharmacological measures, such as early on exercises, promoting every day mobility, physiotherapy, manual therapy etc.. 20 % of patients with lower back pain have a determinable cause that needs to be rapidly identified. In addition to laboratory diagnostics, structured morphological imaging is necessary. Causes of specific back pain include: fractures, infections, radiculopathy, tumors, axial spondylarthritis as well as extravertebral causes. In the further cause of treatment, it may be necessary to consult medical specialists in the fields of radiology, orthopedics, neurology, neurosurgery, rheumatology, psychotherapy, psychiatry, among others. Treatment is managed by the primary care provider, who should also receive and re-evaluate all findings during the course of the disease.

Primary Care Physical Therapists' Experiences When Screening for Serious Pathologies Among Their Patients: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

A vital part of the initial examination performed by a physical therapist is to establish whether the patient would benefit from physical therapist intervention. This process includes knowledge about contraindications for treatment and screening for serious pathologies. However, little is known about the physical therapists' views and thoughts about their own practice when screening for serious pathologies. The purpose of this study was to explore the experience gained by physical therapists when screening for serious pathologies among their patients.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study based on individual semi-structured interviews with 9 primary care physical therapists. The interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, and generated themes were explained and reported with relevant quotes.

RESULTS

Three overall themes were generated: (1) the role of physical therapists in the diagnostic process; (2) responsibility from the individual to the group; and (3) the difficult task of cooperation. The physical therapists described how they relied more on their clinical suspicion than on asking red-flag questions when screening for serious pathologies. They also questioned their differential diagnostic abilities. Finally, they saw a potential to further enhance their confidence in the area by reflecting on the matter with colleagues and by receiving more feedback about their clinical reasoning regarding serious pathologies from general practitioners.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that physical therapists primarily rely on their clinical suspicion when screening for serious pathologies but at the same time are uncertain about their differential diagnostic abilities.

IMPACT

These findings can inform future interventions targeting the physical therapists' abilities to detect serious pathology.

[Therapeutic injections and manual medicine in low-back pain : Bimodal synergies between evidence and empiricism]

Hintergrund

Angelehnt an die zielorientierte Therapieplanung und -führung in der Versorgung chronisch Rheumakranker, plädiert der Autor bei Patienten mit (chronischem) degenerativem tiefem Rückenschmerz (TRS), orientiert an den differenzialtherapeutischen Grundsätzen der Manuellen Medizin (MM), und unter Kenntnis von Techniken und Evidenzen therapeutischer Lokalinfiltrationen (TLI), für die Etablierung eines strukturierten mechanismenbasierten Therapiekonzeptes im Sinne des „treat to target“ (T2T) im ambulanten schmerztherapeutischen Versorgungsbereich.

Diagnostik

Dies setzt eine konsequente (Primär‑)Diagnostik mit Schmerzanalyse unter der Prämisse, dass TRS, wenn strukturell-funktionell bedingt, immer spezifisch ist, voraus. Eine breite biopsychosoziale Anamnese und strukturbezogene klinisch-bildgebende (Ausschluss‑)Diagnostik mit funktioneller Differenzierung nach MM-Grundsätzen und ggf. interventionelle Blocks, sollten am Ende zur Formulierung einer 3‑Ebenen-Diagnose als Voraussetzung zu einer mechanismenbasiert-zielorientiert-hierarchischen Stufentherapie bei TRS führen. Diese wird in diesem Artikel pragmatisch fallorientiert, unter Implementierung von Techniken und Evidenzen der TLI und MM, vorgestellt.

The Patient-Centered Approach in Rheumatologic Painful Diseases: A Narrative Review

A patient-centric approach to pain control represents a paradigm shift in analgesia and one that is both easy to endorse but challenging to execute. As pain mechanisms become increasingly elucidated, the understanding of pain has changed to encompass its complexities. Multiple types and mechanisms of pain have been described, and pain must be seen through the subjective experience of the patient. Earlier descriptions of pain based on intensity are one-dimensional and do not fully encompass the experience of pain. Thus, treating rheumatology patients or any patient in pain requires an understanding of the primary or secondary nature of the pain, underlying conditions, and patient factors such as anxiety, depression, fearfulness, and catastrophizing, all of which can shape and change the nature of the pain. Further, it is important to manage patient expectations concerning chronic pain as complete pain relief may not be possible, but a Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) may serve. Functional goals are often more meaningful to patients than pain scores. Pharmacologic therapy for pain must consider side effects as well as analgesia. Patient-centered pain control requires a focus on wellness and disease prevention, personalized care plans, education, support for self-care, and may involve coordination across disciplines to help the patient meet personally meaningful objectives. While patient-centric care has become a buzzword in modern medicine, it is extremely relevant and may be very beneficial to pain patients.

Differential diagnosis of back pain

Back pain (BP) is among the most common reasons for seeking medical attention worldwide. The nature of BP depends on the causative stimulus and its anatomical location. Clinically, BP is manifested by pain, muscle tension, and stiffness. The development of BP is a very complex, multifactorial process in which not only somatic stimuli (anatomical structures), but also psychosocial effects are involved. Using a variety of criteria, BP can be divided into specific where the cause of pain is known, nonspecific wherein the cause remains unclear, or according to its duration (i.e., acute, subacute, and chronic back pain). Simple low back pain must be distinguished from inflammatory BP. Inflammatory BP is one of the symptoms of spondyloarthritides. It is typically a resting pain of insidious onset, peaking at night or in the morning associated with morning stiffness, improved with exercise, and responding to non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs. A red-flag system was developed for the early identification of at-risk patients with a potentially severe disease presenting with BP. Early diagnosis and identification of the cause of complaints often requires multidisciplinary cooperation. The treatment involves pharmacological agents (analgesic and muscle relaxation therapies) and nonpharmacological approaches (rehabilitation, surgical intervention, etc.).

Orthopedic Asynchronous Teleconsultation for Primary Care Patients by a Large-Scale Telemedicine Service in Minas Gerais, Brazil

Background: Telemedicine was implemented in Brazil as a way to support primary health care (PHC). Orthopedic complaints are common in PHC, and, because musculoskeletal diseases are the most frequent causes of chronic pain, it is important to explore knowledge gaps of PHC as well as to understand the teleconsultations' impact on reducing referrals to secondary care. Materials and Methods: Observational, retrospective study that analyzed consecutive orthopedic asynchronous teleconsultations from the Telehealth Network of Minas Gerais, a large-scale public telehealth service, performed from September 17, 2013 to June 18, 2020. Teleconsultations were analyzed based on the type of query. Results: Throughout the study, 1,174 teleconsultations from 254 municipalities were analyzed. Most requests for teleconsultations were from nurses (37.8%) and physicians (48.7%). In 58.3%, challenges could be solved by a general practitioner, meanwhile 38.4% needed referral to an orthopedic specialist. Most queries related to a specific case (assistencial teleconsultation, 66.0%), and the others were classified as educational (34%). With regard to the motivation for the assistencial teleconsultations, 72% approached treatment options, 49.5% surrounded possible diagnosis, and 20.1% discussed patient's rehabilitation. In addition, 95.5% of requests could be solved by teleconsultation, without the need for referral to in-person consultation with the specialist. Conclusions: Teleconsultations can help investigate the most frequent queries in PHC. Most of them were solved without the need for referral, showing the potential of teleconsultations in daily practice as a way to manage patients and guarantee better access to first-rate health care. As for the public health system, teleconsultations represent a way to overcome the distance barrier to health care access.

Candidate Biomarkers to Distinguish Spinal Tuberculosis From Mechanical Back Pain in a Tuberculosis Endemic Setting

Background

Spinal tuberculosis (TB) may have a variable, non-specific presentation including back pain with- or without- constitutional symptoms. Further tools are needed to aid early diagnosis of this potentially severe form of TB and immunological biomarkers may show potential in this regard. The aim of this study was to investigate the utility of host serum biomarkers to distinguish spinal TB from mechanical back pain.

Methods

Patients with suspected spinal TB or suspected mechanical back pain were recruited from a tertiary hospital in the Western Cape, South Africa, and provided a blood sample for biomarker analysis. Diagnosis was subsequently confirmed using bacteriological testing, advanced imaging and/or clinical evaluation, as appropriate. The concentrations of 19 host biomarkers were evaluated in serum samples using the Luminex platform. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and General Discriminant Analysis were used to identify biomarkers with the potential to distinguish spinal TB from mechanical back pain.

Results

Twenty-six patients with spinal TB and 17 with mechanical back pain were recruited. Seven out of 19 biomarkers were significantly different between groups, of which Fibrinogen, CRP, IFN-γ and NCAM were the individual markers with the highest discrimination utility (Area Under Curve ROC plot 0.88-0.99). A five-marker biosignature (CRP, NCAM, Ferritin, CXCL8 and GDF-15) correctly classified all study participants after leave-one-out cross-validation.

Conclusion

This study identified host serum biomarkers with the potential to diagnose spinal TB, including a five-marker biosignature. These preliminary findings require validation in larger studies.

Expert Consensus on the Contraindications and Cautions of Foam Rolling-An International Delphi Study

Background: Foam rolling is a type of self-massage using tools such as foam or roller sticks. However, to date, there is no consensus on contraindications and cautions of foam rolling. A methodological approach to narrow that research gap is to obtain reliable opinions of expert groups. The aim of the study was to develop experts’ consensus on contraindications and cautions of foam rolling by means of a Delphi process. Methods: An international three-round Delphi study was conducted. Academic experts, defined as having (co-) authored at least one PubMed-listed paper on foam rolling, were invited to participate. Rounds 1 and 2 involved generation and rating of a list of possible contraindications and cautions of foam rolling. In round 3, participants indicated their agreement on contraindications and cautions for a final set of conditions. Consensus was evaluated using a priori defined criteria. Consensus on contraindications and cautions was considered as reached if more than 70% of participating experts labeled the respective item as contraindication and contraindication or caution, respectively, in round 3. Results: In the final Delphi process round, responses were received from 37 participants. Panel participants were predominantly sports scientists (n = 21), physiotherapists (n = 6), and medical professionals (n = 5). Consensus on contraindications was reached for open wounds (73% agreement) and bone fractures (84%). Consensus on cautions was achieved for local tissue inflammation (97%), deep vein thrombosis (97%), osteomyelitis (94%), and myositis ossificans (92%). The highest impact/severity of an adverse event caused by contraindication/cautions was estimated for bone fractures, deep vein thrombosis, and osteomyelitis. Discussion: The mechanical forces applied through foam rolling can be considered as potential threats leading to adverse events in the context of the identified contraindications and cautions. Further evaluations by medical professionals as well as the collection of clinical data are needed to assess the risks of foam rolling and to generate guidance for different applications and professional backgrounds.

The Symmetry of Lower Back Pain as a Potential Screening Factor for Serious Pathology: A Survey Study

Background: Pain maps provide reliable information on pain location in various conditions. This study explored the feasibility of pain maps as a screening tools for serious underlying conditions. The pain symmetry was evaluated as the possible distinguishing feature. Methods: A Web-based survey on the correlation of pain-related disability and pain pattern was developed. Respondents with lower back pain were asked to mark the exact location of their pain over the pain chart. The symmetry index was calculated and used to divide subjects into two groups that were then compared in terms of the prevalence of red flags for serious pathologies, as well as the pain-related disability measured with COMI and ODI instruments. Results: Of the 4213 respondents who completed the survey, 1018 were included in the study. The pain related disability was greater in respondents with asymmetrical pain patterns, as shown with all instruments. The distribution of red flags was also dependent on pain symmetry. The history of weight loss (6.70 vs. 1.76 p < 0.001) and fever (4.91 vs. 2.14 p < 0.001) were more prevalent with symmetrical pain patterns, and the history of trauma was more frequent with asymmetrical pain (21.41 vs. 10.71 p < 0.001). Conclusions: It was shown that the symmetry of pain is correlated to the prevalence of red flags and pain-related disability.

Low back pain expert systems: Clinical resolution through probabilistic considerations and poset

OBJECTIVE

Proper diagnosis of Low Back Pain (LBP) is quite challenging in especially the developing countries like India. Though some developed countries prepared guidelines for evaluation of LBP with tests to detect psychological overlay, implementation of the recommendations becomes quite difficult in regular clinical practice, and different specialties of medicine offer different modes of management. Aiming at offering an expert-level diagnosis for the patients having LBP, this paper uses Artificial Intelligence (AI) to derive a clinically justified and highly sensitive LBP resolution technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The paper considers exhaustive knowledge for different LBP disorders (classified based on different pain generators), which have been represented using lattice structures to ensure completeness, non-redundancy, and optimality in the design of knowledge base. Further the representational enhancement of the knowledge has been done through construction of a hierarchical network, called RuleNet, using the concept of partially-ordered set (poset) with respect to the subset equality (⊆) relation. With implicit incorporation of probability within the knowledge, the RuleNet is used to derive reliable resolution logic along with effective resolution of uncertainties during clinical decision making.

RESULTS

The proposed methodology has been validated with clinical records of seventy seven LBP patients accessed from the database of ESI Hospital Sealdah, India over a period of one year from 2018 to 2019. Achieving 83% sensitivity of the proposed technique, the pain experts at the hospital find the design clinically satisfactory. The inferred outcomes have also been found to be homogeneous with the actual or original diagnosis.

DISCUSSIONS

The proposed approach achieves the clinical and computational efficiency by limiting the shortcomings of the existing methodologies for AI-based LBP diagnosis. While computational efficiency (with respect to both time and space complexity) is ensured by inferring clinical decisions through optimal processing of the knowledge items using poset, the clinical acceptability has been ascertained reaching to the most-likely diagnostic outcomes through probabilistic resolution of clinical uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

The derived resolution technique, when embedded in LBP medical expert systems, would provide a fast, reliable, and affordable healthcare solution for this ailment to a wider range of general population suffering from LBP. The proposed scheme would significantly reduce the controversies and confusion in LBP treatment, and cut down the cost of unnecessary or inappropriate treatment and referral.

Chronic upper back and rib pain in a healthy man: re-examining the cause

INTRODUCTION Back and rib pain is a common presentation in primary care practice. Although most cases are secondary to non-specific musculoskeletal pain, it is essential for clinicians to identify patients presenting with life-threatening pathologies. AIM This case report serves as a reminder to clinicians to reconsider their initial diagnosis when a patient's pain fails to improve, while considering life-threatening pathologies. CASE HISTORY We describe a 44-year-old man from India who presents to his general practitioner with a 2-week history of rib and upper back pain. He was initially diagnosed with non-specific musculoskeletal pain. However, after representing twice 2 months later due to persistent pain and due to the uncertainty about his condition, he was investigated with different imaging modalities. It was discovered on bone scan that he had osteolytic lesions in the right 11th rib and T2 vertebrae. As the cause of his osteolytic lesions were unclear, he was referred to different specialists. Skeletal tuberculosis was suspected when one of his specialists discovered his recent visit to India, a tuberculosis-endemic country. This reminded the specialist of the possible risks of the patient's background and its association with his symptoms. Bone biopsy of his lytic lesions revealed Mycobacterium tuberculosis, consistent with skeletal tuberculosis. DISCUSSION Revisiting the diagnosis of back and rib pain while considering other obscure and urgent pathologies is essential if a patient fails to improve clinically. Clinicians should focus on aspects of their clinical assessment to explore these pathologies, enabling earlier recognition of the disease.

Primary care physiotherapists ability to make correct management decisions - is there room for improvement? A mixed method study

Background

With increasing interest in direct access to physiotherapy, it is important to consider the physiotherapists (PTs) ability to make correct management decisions, because identification of differential diagnostic pathologies and timely referral for specialist care is vital for patient safety.

The aims of the study were to investigate PTs ability to make correct management decisions in patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions and to identify explanatory factors associated with this ability. Furthermore, we wanted to explore the PTs views on the identified factors.

Methods

The study was a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design consisting of a questionnaire survey and semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire comprised 12 clinical vignettes describing patient scenarios for musculoskeletal conditions, non-critical medical conditions and critical medical conditions. Based on this, the PTs indicated whether the patient should be managed by the PT or were in need of medical referral. Associations between correct decisions and explanatory variables was analyzed by mixed- effects logistic regression. Interviews were performed with nine PTs to explore their reactions to the results. A directed content analysis was performed.

Results

A total of 195 PTs participated in the questionnaire survey and 9 PTs were interviewed. Overall, PTs were more likely to make correct management decisions in the musculoskeletal conditions category, whereas wrong decisions were more often chosen for underlying medical conditions categories. Positive associations between correct management decision in the critical medical category were found for experience: odds ratio (OR) 2.73 (1.33;5.57) and passed quality audit OR 2.90 (1.50;5.58). In the interviews, PTs expressed concerns about the differential diagnostic abilities. They all noted, that experience is immensely important in the clinical reasoning process because the ability to recognise diagnostic patterns evolves over time. Furthermore, the quality audit seems to address and systematize the clinical reasoning process and workflow within the clinics.

Conclusion

The lack of ability to make correct management decision in critical medical categories and the uncertainties expressed by PT’s should raise concern, as direct access to physiotherapy is already well-established and the results indicate that patient safety could be at risk. The findings that experience and passed quality audit was associated with correct management decisions highlights the need for ongoing awareness and education into differential diagnostics.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01546-1.

[Low back pain and abdominal aortic aneurysm: Red flags]

Approximately 70% of adults will experience low back pain at some point in their life. Most of the cases cannot be identified a cause, being nonspecific pains. The clinical guidelines on the management of low back pain indicate suspecting the presence of serious processes by means of the so-called red flags. Abdominal aortic aneurysm in 91% of cases is accompanied by low back pain, hence its importance of including it as a differential diagnosis. We present the case of a 75-year-old man with low back pain, without improvement with conservative treatment, referred to a rehabilitation consultation 3months after the onset of symptoms, and in the event of warning signs, imaging studies are requested that show abdominal aortic aneurysm and mass right kidney. We must bear in mind the red flags in patients with low back pain, and thus avoid outcomes that can put their lives at risk.

A Clinical Prediction Tool for MRI in Emergency Department Patients with Spinal Infection

Introduction

Patients with pyogenic spinal Infection (PSI) are often not diagnosed at their initial presentation, and diagnostic delay is associated with increased morbidity and medical-legal risk. We derived a decision tool to estimate the risk of spinal infection and inform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) decisions.

Methods

We conducted a two-part prospective observational cohort study that collected variables from spine pain patients over a six-year derivation phase. We fit a multivariable regression model with logistic coefficients rounded to the nearest integer and used them for variable weighting in the final risk score. This score, SIRCH (spine infection risk calculation heuristic), uses four clinical variables to predict PSI. We calculated the statistical performance, MRI utilization, and model fit in the derivation phase. In the second phase we used the same protocol but enrolled only confirmed cases of spinal infection to assess the sensitivity of our prediction tool.

Results

In the derivation phase, we evaluated 134 non-PSI and 40 PSI patients; median age in years was 55.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 38–70 and 51.5 (42–59), respectively. We identified four predictors for our risk score: historical risk factors; fever; progressive neurological deficit; and C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 50 milligrams per liter (mg/L). At a threshold SIRCH score of ≥ 3, the predictive model’s sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were, respectively, as follows: 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 100–100%); 56% (95% CI, 48–64%), and 40% (95% CI, 36–46%). The area under the receiver operator curve was 0.877 (95% CI, 0.829–0.925). The SIRCH score at a threshold of ≥ 3 would prompt significantly fewer MRIs compared to using an elevated CRP (only 99/174 MRIs compared to 144/174 MRIs, P <0.001). In the second phase (49 patient disease-only cohort), the sensitivities of the SIRCH score and CRP use (laboratory standard cut-off 3.5 mg/L) were 92% (95% CI, 84–98%), and 98% (95% CI, 94–100%), respectively.

Conclusion

The SIRCH score provides a sensitive estimate of spinal infection risk and prompts fewer MRIs than elevated CRP (cut-off 3.5 mg/L) or clinician suspicion.

Low back pain

Low back pain covers a spectrum of different types of pain (eg, nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic, or non-specific) that frequently overlap. The elements comprising the lumbar spine (eg, soft tissue, vertebrae, zygapophyseal and sacroiliac joints, intervertebral discs, and neurovascular structures) are prone to different stressors, and each of these, alone or in combination, can contribute to low back pain. Due to numerous factors related to low back pain, and the low specificity of imaging and diagnostic injections, diagnostic methods for this condition continue to be a subject of controversy. The biopsychosocial model posits low back pain to be a dynamic interaction between social, psychological, and biological factors that can both predispose to and result from injury, and should be considered when devising interdisciplinary treatment plans. Prevention of low back pain is recognised as a pivotal challenge in high-risk populations to help tackle high health-care costs related to therapy and rehabilitation. To a large extent, therapy depends on pain classification, and usually starts with self-care and pharmacotherapy in combination with non-pharmacological methods, such as physical therapies and psychological treatments in appropriate patients. For refractory low back pain, a wide range of non-surgical (eg, epidural steroid injections and spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain, and radiofrequency ablation and intra-articular steroid injections for mechanical pain) and surgical (eg, decompression for neuropathic pain, disc replacement, and fusion for mechanical causes) treatment options are available in carefully selected patients. Most treatment options address only single, solitary causes and given the complex nature of low back pain, a multimodal interdisciplinary approach is necessary. Although globally recognised as an important health and socioeconomic challenge with an expected increase in prevalence, low back pain continues to have tremendous potential for improvement in both diagnostic and therapeutic aspects. Future research on low back pain should focus on improving the accuracy and objectivity of diagnostic assessments, and devising treatment algorithms that consider unique biological, psychological, and social factors. High-quality comparative-effectiveness and randomised controlled trials with longer follow-up periods that aim to establish the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of low back pain management are warranted.

CE: Assessing Back Pain in Patients Presenting to the ED

ABSTRACT

Although back pain is common, most often benign, and generally resolves in a few days with self-care, nonspecific low back pain that does not resolve with self-care and prompts patients to seek treatment in an ED may result from a serious underlying pathology. In this article, the first in a series on clinical red flags-indicators that can be used in the clinical setting to screen for an elevated risk of severe underlying conditions-the author considers back pain manifestations that may signal the presence of a debilitating or even fatal disease process. Detecting such red flags and communicating their presence to the attending provider can facilitate appropriate diagnosis and management.

Physical therapy for patients with low back pain in Germany: a survey of current practice

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders worldwide. The National Disease Management Guideline (NVL) “Non-specific LBP” is a practical decision-making aid for both physicians and non-medical professionals in Germany to improve quality of health care. Although LBP is the most frequent diagnosis resulting in physical therapy treatment, information on the current management of patients with LBP and guideline adherence is limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate the current physical therapy management of patients with LBP in Germany, and to explore guideline adherence to the NVL “Non-specific LBP” recommendations.

Methods

An online survey among physical therapists working in Germany was conducted based on the recommendations given in the NVL “Non-specific LBP”. Participants were recruited using a snowball sampling approach and invited to complete the questionnaire. Guideline adherence was evaluated by comparing the survey findings with the recommendations of the NVL.

Results

In total, 1361 physical therapists (41 years of age (SD 11); 839 female, 514 male; 16 years of clinical experience (SD 10)) completed the survey.

Fifty percent (n = 675) of our respondents adhered to the recommendations of the NVL on the therapeutic diagnostic process, and 72% (n = 973) to the recommendations concerning treatment. The guideline adherence across the entire management process (i.e., both diagnosis and treatment) of LBP was 38% (n = 513). German physical therapists predominantly provide active interventions, e.g., exercise therapy, but also use interventions with low or conflicting evidence, respectively. Massage and Kinesio Taping were frequently used despite being not recommended. Less than one third of study participants (n = 400, 29%) answered to know the NVL or had dealt with its recommendations.

Conclusions

In the management of LBP, overall guideline adherence among German physical therapists was 38% with higher adherence in the treatment section than in the physical therapeutic diagnostic process. Widespread employment of implementation strategies and removal of existing barriers against the application of evidence-based guidelines could facilitate the transfer of scientific evidence into clinical practice and contribute to optimize the quality of health care.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00012607). Registered 04 October 2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04422-2.

New possibilities of graphics software in the analysis of thermograms of patient’s lower limbs – a technical note

The analysis involved thermograms of the lower limbs of a patient suffering from symptomatic L-S segment discopathy with spinal root compression syndrome (symptomatic lumbar discopathy) qualified for surgical treatment. The thermograms were obtained using the Flir Ebx 50 camera. They were developed with the use of the software included with the Flir Ebx 50 camera, as well as the Origin Pro 2020 data analysis and graphing software. ROIs (Regions of Interest) were specified and analyzed in terms of temperature (average, maximum or minimum) temperature distributions, isotherms, and specified surface areas limited by selected isotherms. According to the analysis of the thermograms, the images obtained with Origin Pro 2020 enable a more advanced presentation of the temperature distribution, by taking into account the isotherms with selected temperatures and by calculating the area limited by a given isotherm (or between two isotherms) they allow to introduce an additional surface parameter related to specific isotherms. It provides additional information (parameter) in comparison with analogous ROIs on healthy and pathologic limbs in the same patient.

Lack of Consensus Across Clinical Guidelines Regarding the Role of Psychosocial Factors Within Low Back Pain Care: A Systematic Review

It is widely accepted that psychosocial prognostic factors should be addressed by clinicians in their assessment and management of patient suffering from low back pain (LBP). On the other hand, an overview is missing how these factors are addressed in clinical LBP guidelines. Therefore, our objective was to summarize and compare recommendations regarding the assessment and management of psychosocial prognostic factors for LBP chronicity, as reported in clinical LBP guidelines. We performed a systematic search of clinical LBP guidelines (PROSPERO registration number 154730). This search consisted of a combination of previously published systematic review articles and a new systematic search in medical or guideline-related databases. From the included guidelines, we extracted recommendations regarding the assessment and management of LBP which addressed psychosocial prognostic factors (ie, psychological factors ["yellow flags"], perceptions about the relationship between work and health, ["blue flags"], system or contextual obstacles ["black flags") and psychiatric symptoms ["orange flags"]). In addition, we evaluated the level or quality of evidence of these recommendations. In total, we included 15 guidelines. Psychosocial prognostic factors were addressed in 13 of 15 guidelines regarding their assessment and in 14 of 15 guidelines regarding their management. Recommendations addressing psychosocial factors almost exclusively concerned "yellow" or "black flags," and varied widely across guidelines. The supporting evidence was generally of very low quality. We conclude that in general, clinical LBP guidelines do not provide clinicians with clear instructions about how to incorporate psychosocial factors in LBP care and should be optimized in this respect. More specifically, clinical guidelines vary widely in whether and how they address psychosocial factors, and recommendations regarding these factors generally require better evidence support. This emphasizes a need for a stronger evidence-base underlying the role of psychosocial risk factors within LBP care, and a need for uniformity in methodology and terminology across guidelines. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review summarized clinical guidelines on low back pain (LBP) on how they addressed the identification and management of psychosocial factors. This review revealed a large amount of variety across guidelines in whether and how psychosocial factors were addressed. Moreover, recommendations generally lacked details and were based on low quality evidence.

The prevalence of serious pathology in musculoskeletal physiotherapy patients - a nationwide register-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Musculoskeletal conditions are the single largest contributor to years lived with disability worldwide. Most musculoskeletal conditions can be managed in primary care, but for a small proportion of these patients the symptoms are caused by serious pathology. Although the general practitioner usually performs initial screening for serious pathology, evaluation and treatment by physiotherapists are often part of the treatment pathway. It is however unclear, how many patients in primary care physiotherapy have symptoms caused by serious pathology.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of neoplasm, cauda equina syndrome, spinal fracture, infection and inflammatory pathology among patients referred for musculoskeletal physiotherapy.

METHODS

The study was a nationwide register-based cohort study. The authors identified all referrals for primary care musculoskeletal physiotherapy in the Danish National Health Insurance Service Register from 2014 to 2017. Records of hospital contacts were extracted from the Danish National Patient Register within 180 days from first physiotherapy contact, identifying all diagnoses of serious pathology. Prevalence estimates of the serious pathology categories were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 1568704 courses of treatment were included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of serious pathology was 2.30%. The prevalence of neoplasm was 2.11%, cauda equina syndrome 0.01%, fractures 0.13%, infections 0.01% and inflammatory pathology 0.06%. Higher prevalence's were observed among patients with a previous history of serious pathology, aged above 50 and with comorbidites.

CONCLUSIONS

Although serious pathology among patients referred by the General Practitioner to musculoskeletal physiotherapy is rare, the present study found an overall prevalence of serious pathology which exceeded the guideline endorsed prevalence estimates.

Functional pain disorders - more than nociplastic pain

BACKGROUND

Nociplastic pain has been recently introduced as a third mechanistic descriptor of pain arising primarily from alterations of neural processing, in contrast to pain due to tissue damage leading to nociceptor activation (nociceptive) or due to lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system (neuropathic). It is characterized by hyperalgesia and allodynia, inconsistency and reversibility, as well as dynamic cross-system interactions with biological and psychobehavioral factors. Along with this renewed understanding, functional pain disorders, also classified as chronic primary pain, are being reframed as biopsychosocial conditions that benefit from multimodal treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current understanding of nociplastic pain and functional pain disorders, with a focus on conditions that are common in neurology practice.

METHODS

This was a narrative literature review.

RESULTS

Chronic back pain, fibromyalgia syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome are best understood within a biopsychosocial framework of pain perception that considers structural factors (predispositions and sequelae) and psychobehavioral mechanisms. Although pain is often the primary complaint, it should not be the only focus of treatment, as accompanying symptoms such as sleep or mood problems can significantly impact quality of life and offer useful leverage points for multimodal treatment. Analgesic pharmacotherapy is rarely helpful on its own, and should always be imbedded in a multidisciplinary setting.

Trends in the Evaluation and Management of Back Pain in Emergency Departments, United States, 2007-2016

OBJECTIVE

Back pain is one of the most common pain syndromes in the United States, but there has been limited recent description of the role of emergency departments (EDs) in caring for patients with back pain. We investigated trends in the evaluation and management of back pain in U.S. EDs from 2007 to 2016.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a nationally representative annual survey of ED visits, which includes data on patient-, hospital-, and visit-level characteristics. We evaluated trends among adult ED visits for back pain, including demographics, resource utilization, and disposition. Trends were assessed through the use of survey-weighted analyses.

RESULTS

Visit rates as a proportion of overall ED visits were stable from 2007 to 2016 (9.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 8.5-9.6] vs. 9.3% [95% CI: 8.6-10.0]; P = 0.44). Admission rates declined from 6.4% (95% CI: 5.1-8.0) to 5.0% (95% CI: 3.5-6.9; P < 0.001). Imaging utilization increased from 51.7% (95% CI: 49.3-54.1) to 57.6% (95% CI: 53.3-61.7; P = 0.023), with an increase of 58.3% in computed tomography. Overall opioid utilization declined from 53.5% (95% CI: 49.4-57.5) to 46.5% (95% CI: 43.2-49.8; P < 0.001). Tramadol use increased over the study period (4.1% [95% CI: 3.0-5.8] vs. 8.4% [95% CI: 6.6-10.7]; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid utilization during ED visits for back pain decreased from 2007 to 2016, whereas tramadol use more than doubled. Care intensity increased significantly despite declining admission rates. Further research into optimal strategies for back pain management in the ED is needed.