The Global Spine Care Initiative: a summary of guidelines on invasive interventions for the management of persistent and disabling spinal pain in low- and middle-income communities

Ultrasound-guided and CT-guided selective cervical nerve root injection for the treatment of cervical radicular pain: A retrospective clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical effects and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided selective cervical nerve root injection (SCNI) and computed tomography (CT)-guided SCNI for patients with cervical radicular pain (CRP).

METHODS

Forty-two CT-guided SCNI procedures (26 eligible patients) and forty-two US-guided SCNI procedures (25 eligible patients) performed to treat CRP were identified from the medical record system between October 2017 and July 2021 and enrolled in the study. The numeric rating scale was used to assess pre- and postprocedural pain levels, and the neck disability index was used to assess the level of function. All immediate and delayed clinical complications were also recorded. The cost of each procedure and the radiation dose of the CT procedure were documented. The follow-up data were obtained by telephone calls or outpatient visits.

RESULTS

Five patients in the CT group and one patient in the US group were lost to follow-up at 1 year. No procedure-related complications were observed in either group. Significant pain relief and cervical function improvement were achieved after treatment in both the CT-guided SCNI and US-guided SCNI groups; however, there were no significant differences between the two groups. The average cost per CT-guided SCNI procedure was 133.2 USD, which was higher than the cost per US-guided SCNI procedure (42.2 USD). Meanwhile, the necessary radiation dose per patient in the CT group was 0.36 ± 0.08 mGy.

CONCLUSIONS

US-guided SCNI and CT-guided SCNI have similar efficacy in treating CRP, but US-guided SCNI is radiation free and less costly than the CT-guided procedure.

The John A. Sweaney Lecture: Virtual, September 2021, Given by Dr Michele Maiers. A Time to Lead: Reflections During a Pandemic

The following is The John A. Sweaney Lecture delivered by Dr Michele Maiers at the biannual Congress of the World Federation of Chiropractic that was held virtually on September 25, 2021.

Risk of New Fractures in Vertebroplasty for Multiple Myeloma. A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

Vertebroplasty is a percutaneous minimally invasive procedure indicated for vertebral collapse pain treatment. Among the known complications of the procedure is the augmented risk of new vertebral fractures. There are no specific studies in this patient population describing the risk of new vertebral fractures after vertebroplasty. This study analyzed risk factors associated with new vertebral fractures after vertebroplasty in patients with multiple myeloma.

METHODS

Observational retrospective study in patients with multiple myeloma. The data collection took place from January 1, 2010, to December 30, 2017, at the National Cancer Institute. Clinical data and procedural variables such as cement volume, cement leaks, fracture level, number of treated vertebrae, pedicular disease, and cement distribution pattern, with two years follow-up, were analyzed with the Wilcoxon test, and a logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors related to new vertebral fractures. A confidence interval of 95% was used for analysis.

RESULTS

At one-year follow-up, 30% of fractures were reported after vertebroplasty, most of them at low thoracic and lumbar level (50% adjacent level). Vertebroplasty was most commonly performed at the thoracolumbar and lumbar area. We demonstrated a 70.7% median numerical rating scale reduction at one-year follow-up; a significant decrease in opioid consumption occurred only during the first month.

CONCLUSIONS

Pedicle involvement, disc leakage, cement volume, thoracolumbar and lumbar level, and number of treated vertebrae by intervention are important risk factors when performing vertebroplasty. Prospective randomized studies are needed to evaluate these factors in this specific population.

Distance Management of Spinal Disorders During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Evidence-Based Patient and Clinician Guides From the Global Spine Care Initiative

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly limited patients' access to care for spine-related symptoms and disorders. However, physical distancing between clinicians and patients with spine-related symptoms is not solely limited to restrictions imposed by pandemic-related lockdowns. In most low- and middle-income countries, as well as many underserved marginalized communities in high-income countries, there is little to no access to clinicians trained in evidence-based care for people experiencing spinal pain.

Objective

The aim of this study is to describe the development and present the components of evidence-based patient and clinician guides for the management of spinal disorders where in-person care is not available.

Methods

Ultimately, two sets of guides were developed (one for patients and one for clinicians) by extracting information from the published Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) papers. An international, interprofessional team of 29 participants from 10 countries on 4 continents participated. The team included practitioners in family medicine, neurology, physiatry, rheumatology, psychology, chiropractic, physical therapy, and yoga, as well as epidemiologists, research methodologists, and laypeople. The participants were invited to review, edit, and comment on the guides in an open iterative consensus process.

Results

The Patient Guide is a simple 2-step process. The first step describes the nature of the symptoms or concerns. The second step provides information that a patient can use when considering self-care, determining whether to contact a clinician, or considering seeking emergency care. The Clinician Guide is a 5-step process: (1) Obtain and document patient demographics, location of primary clinical symptoms, and psychosocial information. (2) Review the symptoms noted in the patient guide. (3) Determine the GSCI classification of the patient’s spine-related complaints. (4) Ask additional questions to determine the GSCI subclassification of the symptom pattern. (5) Consider appropriate treatment interventions.

Conclusions

The Patient and Clinician Guides are designed to be sufficiently clear to be useful to all patients and clinicians, irrespective of their location, education, professional qualifications, and experience. However, they are comprehensive enough to provide guidance on the management of all spine-related symptoms or disorders, including triage for serious and specific diseases. They are consistent with widely accepted evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. They also allow for adequate documentation and medical record keeping. These guides should be of value during periods of government-mandated physical or social distancing due to infectious diseases, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. They should also be of value in underserved communities in high-, middle-, and low-income countries where there is a dearth of accessible trained spine care clinicians. These guides have the potential to reduce the overutilization of unnecessary and expensive interventions while empowering patients to self-manage uncomplicated spinal pain with the assistance of their clinician, either through direct in-person consultation or via telehealth communication.

Perspectives on the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Degeneration: The Value Proposition for a Cell-Based Therapy, Immunomodulatory Properties of Discogenic Cells and the Associated Clinical Evaluation Strategy

Low back pain (LBP) is a serious medical condition that affects a large percentage of the population worldwide. One cause of LBP is disc degeneration (DD), which is characterized by progressive breakdown of the disc and an inflamed disc environment. Current treatment options for patients with symptomatic DD are limited and are often unsuccessful, so many patients turn to prescription opioids for pain management in a time when opioid usage, addiction, and drug-related deaths are at an all-time high. In this paper, we discuss the etiology of lumbar DD and currently available treatments, as well as the potential for cell therapy to offer a biologic, non-opioid alternative to patients suffering from the condition. Finally, we present an overview of an investigational cell therapy called IDCT (Injectable Discogenic Cell Therapy), which is currently under evaluation in multiple double-blind clinical trials overseen by major regulatory agencies. The active ingredient in IDCT is a novel allogeneic cell population known as Discogenic Cells. These cells, which are derived from intervertebral disc tissue, have been shown to possess both regenerative and immunomodulatory properties. Cell therapies have unique properties that may ultimately lead to decreased pain and improved function, as well as curb the numbers of patients pursuing opioids. Their efficacy is best assessed in rigorous double-blinded and placebo-controlled clinical studies.

Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations for practice, but the proliferation of CPGs issued by multiple organisations in recent years has raised concern about their quality. The aim of this study was to systematically appraise CPGs quality for low back pain (LBP) interventions and to explore inter-rater reliability (IRR) between quality appraisers. The time between systematic review search and publication of CPGs was recorded.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PEDro, TRIP), guideline organisation databases, websites, and grey literature were searched from January 2016 to January 2020 to identify GPCs on rehabilitative, pharmacological or surgical intervention for LBP management. Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool to evaluate CPGs quality and record the year the CPGs were published and the year the search strategies were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 21 CPGs met the inclusion criteria and were appraised. Seven (33%) were broad in scope and involved surgery, rehabilitation or pharmacological intervention. The score for each AGREE II item was: Editorial Independence (median 67%, interquartile range [IQR] 31-84%), Scope and Purpose (median 64%, IQR 22-83%), Rigour of Development (median 50%, IQR 21-72%), Clarity and Presentation (median 50%, IQR 28-79%), Stakeholder Involvement (median 36%, IQR 10-74%), and Applicability (median 11%, IQR 0-46%). The IRR between the assessors was nearly perfect (interclass correlation 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.91). The median time span was 2 years (range, 1-4), however, 38% of the CPGs did not report the coverage dates for systematic searches.

CONCLUSIONS

We found methodological limitations that affect CPGs quality. In our opinion, a universal database is needed in which guidelines can be registered and recommendations dynamically developed through a living systematic reviews approach to ensure that guidelines are based on updated evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TRIAL REGISTRATION: REGISTRATION PROSPERO DETAILS: CRD42019127619 .

Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Lumbar Medial Branch Thermal Radiofrequency Neurotomy, Stratified for Diagnostic Methods and Procedural Technique

Objective

To determine the effectiveness of lumbar medial branch thermal radiofrequency neurotomy based on different selection criteria and procedural techniques.

Design

Comprehensive systematic review.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted, and all authors screened and evaluated the studies. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess all eligible studies.

Outcome Measures

The primary outcome measure assessed was the success rate of the procedure, defined by varying degrees of pain relief following neurotomy. Data are stratified by number of diagnostic blocks and degree of pain relief, as well as procedural technique with perpendicular or parallel placement of electrodes.

Results

Results varied by selection criteria and procedural technique. At six months, 26% of patients selected via single medial branch block with 50% pain relief and treated via perpendicular technique achieved at least 50% pain relief; 49% of patients selected via dual medial branch blocks with 50% pain relief and treated via parallel technique achieved at least 50% pain relief. The most rigorous patient selection and technique—two diagnostic medial branch blocks with 100% pain relief and parallel electrode placement—resulted in 56% of patients experiencing 100% relief of pain at six months.

Conclusions

This comprehensive systematic review found differences in the effectiveness of lumbar medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy when studies were stratified by patient selection criteria and procedural technique. The best outcomes are achieved when patients are selected based on high degrees of pain relief from dual medial branch blocks with a technique employing parallel electrode placement.

Adult spinal deformity

Adult spinal deformity affects the thoracic or thoracolumbar spine throughout the ageing process. Although adolescent spinal deformities taken into adulthood are not uncommon, the most usual causes of spinal deformity in adults are iatrogenic flatback and degenerative scoliosis. Given its prevalence in the expanding portion of the global population aged older than 65 years, the disorder is of growing interest in health care. Physical examination, with a focus on gait and posture, along with radiographical assessment are primarily used and integrated with risk stratification indices to establish optimal treatment planning. Although non-operative treatment is regarded as the first-line response, surgical outcomes are considerably favourable. Global disparities exist in both the assessment and treatment of adults with spinal deformity across countries of varying incomes, which represents an area requiring further investigation. This Seminar presents evidence and knowledge that represent the evolution of data related to spinal deformity in adults over the past several decades.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: World Spine Care executive summary on reducing spine-related disability in low- and middle-income communities

PURPOSE

Spinal disorders, including back and neck pain, are major causes of disability, economic hardship, and morbidity, especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries. Currently, there is no model of care to address this issue. This paper provides an overview of the papers from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI), which was convened to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable, spinal healthcare model for communities around the world with various levels of resources.

METHODS

Leading spine clinicians and scientists around the world were invited to participate. The interprofessional, international team consisted of 68 members from 24 countries, representing most disciplines that study or care for patients with spinal symptoms, including family physicians, spine surgeons, rheumatologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, epidemiologists, research methodologists, and other stakeholders.

RESULTS

Literature reviews on the burden of spinal disorders and six categories of evidence-based interventions for spinal disorders (assessment, public health, psychosocial, noninvasive, invasive, and the management of osteoporosis) were completed. In addition, participants developed a stratification system for surgical intervention, a classification system for spinal disorders, an evidence-based care pathway, and lists of resources and recommendations to implement the GSCI model of care.

CONCLUSION

The GSCI proposes an evidence-based model that is consistent with recent calls for action to reduce the global burden of spinal disorders. The model requires testing to determine feasibility. If it proves to be implementable, this model holds great promise to reduce the tremendous global burden of spinal disorders. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: resources to implement a spine care program

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a list of resources necessary to implement a model of care for the management of spine-related concerns anywhere in the world, but especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

Contents from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) Classification System and GSCI care pathway papers provided a foundation for the resources list. A seed document was developed that included resources for spine care that could be delivered in primary, secondary and tertiary settings, as well as resources needed for self-care and community-based settings for a wide variety of spine concerns (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, pathology and spinal diseases). An iterative expert consensus process was used using electronic surveys.

RESULTS

Thirty-five experts completed the process. An iterative consensus process was used through an electronic survey. A consensus was reached after two rounds. The checklist of resources included the following categories: healthcare provider knowledge and skills, materials and equipment, human resources, facilities and infrastructure. The list identifies resources needed to implement a spine care program in any community, which are based upon spine care needs.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first international and interprofessional attempt to develop a list of resources needed to deliver care in an evidence-based care pathway for the management of people presenting with spine-related concerns. This resource list needs to be field tested in a variety of communities with different resource capacities to verify its utility. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: classification system for spine-related concerns

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a classification system that would apply to anyone with a spine-related concern and that can be used in an evidence-based spine care pathway.

METHODS

Existing classification systems for spinal disorders were assembled. A seed document was developed through round-table discussions followed by a modified Delphi process. International and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate.

RESULTS

Thirty-six experts from 15 countries participated. After the second round, there was 95% agreement of the proposed classification system. The six major classifications included: no or minimal symptoms (class 0); mild symptoms (i.e., neck or back pain) but no interference with activities (class I); moderate or severe symptoms with interference of activities (class II); spine-related neurological signs or symptoms (class III); severe bony spine deformity, trauma or pathology (class IV); and spine-related symptoms or destructive lesions associated with systemic pathology (class V). Subclasses for each major class included chronicity and severity when different interventions were anticipated or recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

An international and interprofessional group developed a comprehensive classification system for all potential presentations of people who may seek care or advice at a spine care program. This classification can be used in the development of a spine care pathway, in clinical practice, and for research purposes. This classification needs to be tested for validity, reliability, and consistency among clinicians from different specialties and in different communities and cultures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: model of care and implementation

PURPOSE

Spine-related disorders are a leading cause of global disability and are a burden on society and to public health. Currently, there is no comprehensive, evidence-based model of care for spine-related disorders, which includes back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, spinal diseases, and pathology, that could be applied in global health care settings. The purposes of this paper are to propose: (1) principles to transform the delivery of spine care; (2) an evidence-based model that could be applied globally; and (3) implementation suggestions.

METHODS

The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) meetings and literature reviews were synthesized into a seed document and distributed to spine care experts. After three rounds of a modified Delphi process, all participants reached consensus on the final model of care and implementation steps.

RESULTS

Sixty-six experts representing 24 countries participated. The GSCI model of care has eight core principles: person-centered, people-centered, biopsychosocial, proactive, evidence-based, integrative, collaborative, and self-sustaining. The model of care includes a classification system and care pathway, levels of care, and a focus on the patient's journey. The six steps for implementation are initiation and preparation; assessment of the current situation; planning and designing solutions; implementation; assessment and evaluation of program; and sustain program and scale up.

CONCLUSION

The GSCI proposes an evidence-based, practical, sustainable, and scalable model of care representing eight core principles with a six-step implementation plan. The aim of this model is to help transform spine care globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries and underserved communities. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: methodology, contributors, and disclosures

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to describe the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) contributors, disclosures, and methods for reporting transparency on the development of the recommendations.

METHODS

World Spine Care convened the GSCI to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable healthcare model for spinal care. The initiative aims to improve the management, prevention, and public health for spine-related disorders worldwide; thus, global representation was essential. A series of meetings established the initiative's mission and goals. Electronic surveys collected contributorship and demographic information, and experiences with spinal conditions to better understand perceptions and potential biases that were contributing to the model of care.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight clinicians and scientists participated in the deliberations and are authors of one or more of the GSCI articles. Of these experts, 57 reported providing spine care in 34 countries, (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income countries, as well as underserved communities in high-income countries.) The majority reported personally experiencing or having a close family member with one or more spinal concerns including: spine-related trauma or injury, spinal problems that required emergency or surgical intervention, spinal pain referred from non-spine sources, spinal deformity, spinal pathology or disease, neurological problems, and/or mild, moderate, or severe back or neck pain. There were no substantial reported conflicts of interest.

CONCLUSION

The GSCI participants have broad professional experience and wide international distribution with no discipline dominating the deliberations. The GSCI believes this set of papers has the potential to inform and improve spine care globally. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: care pathway for people with spine-related concerns

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to describe the development of an evidence-based care pathway that can be implemented globally.

METHODS

The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) care pathway development team extracted interventions recommended for the management of spinal disorders from six GSCI articles that synthesized the available evidence from guidelines and relevant literature. Sixty-eight international and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate. An iterative consensus process was used.

RESULTS

After three rounds of review, 46 experts from 16 countries reached consensus for the care pathway that includes five decision steps: awareness, initial triage, provider assessment, interventions (e.g., non-invasive treatment; invasive treatment; psychological and social intervention; prevention and public health; specialty care and interprofessional management), and outcomes. The care pathway can be used to guide the management of patients with any spine-related concern (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spinal injury, neurological conditions, pathology, spinal diseases). The pathway is simple and can be incorporated into educational tools, decision-making trees, and electronic medical records.

CONCLUSION

A care pathway for the management of individuals presenting with spine-related concerns includes evidence-based recommendations to guide health care providers in the management of common spinal disorders. The proposed pathway is person-centered and evidence-based. The acceptability and utility of this care pathway will need to be evaluated in various communities, especially in low- and middle-income countries, with different cultural background and resources. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.