Barriers to Primary Care Clinician Adherence to Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Metasynthesis of Qualitative Studies

Assessment and management patterns for chronic musculoskeletal pain in the family practice setting

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain affects 11% of the US population. Most patients who experience pain, particularly chronic musculoskeletal pain, seek care in primary care settings. Assessment of the patient pain experience is the cornerstone to optimal pain management; however, pain assessment remains a challenge for medical professionals. It is unknown to what extent the assessment of pain intensity is considered in context of function and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To understand common practices related to assessment of pain and function in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

A 42-item electronic survey was developed with self-reported numeric ratings and responses related to knowledge, beliefs, and current practices. All physicians and non-physician clinicians affiliated with the AAFP NRN and 2000 AAFP physician members were invited to participate.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Primary care clinicians report that chronic joint pain assessment should be comprehensive, citing assessment elements that align with the comprehensive pain assessment models. Pain intensity remains the primary focus of pain assessment in chronic joint pain and the most important factor in guiding treatment decisions, despite well-known limitations. Clinicians also report that patients with osteoarthritis should be treated by Family Medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain assessment is primarily limited to pain intensity scales which may contribute to worse patient outcomes. Given that most respondents believe primary care/family medicine should be primary responsible for the care of patients with osteoarthritis, awareness of and comfort with existing guidelines, validated assessment instruments and the comprehensive pain assessment models could contribute to delivery of more comprehensive care.

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

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

'Look up from the waiting list and see the bigger picture': a qualitative analysis of clinical specialist physiotherapist perspectives on low back pain care in Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare systems are struggling to deliver high-quality low back pain (LBP) care. In 2012 specialist physiotherapist-led musculoskeletal (MSK) triage services were introduced in Irish hospitals to expedite patient care and alleviate pressure on elective orthopaedic/ rheumatology consultant clinics. Specialist physiotherapists have expertise to inform health service improvement and reform, but their perspectives of LBP healthcare delivery have received scant attention.

OBJECTIVES

To explore specialist physiotherapists' perspectives on LBP care in Ireland, the barriers and facilitators to quality LBP care and the development of MSK interface services in primary care settings.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observational study using an anonymous electronic survey with thematic framework analysis of response data from open-ended questions.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-four clinical specialist physiotherapists in Irish MSK triage services.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis resulted in six overarching themes, grouped into two categories. One category pertained to LBP healthcare in Ireland with the following three themes: 1) Inadequate health services for patients with LBP; 2) Need for defined LBP clinical pathways; 3) Need for a multisectoral approach to spine health. Themes in the second category, pertaining to the development of community-based MSK interface services, were: 4) Concern regarding isolation from secondary care services; 5) Unrealistic expectations of MSK triage; 6) Improved communication and collaboration with primary care services.

CONCLUSION

Specialist physiotherapists have concerns regarding LBP health services and persistence of a biomedical, secondary care-led approach. They advocate for investment in primary care multi-disciplinary teams, enhanced integration across primary and secondary care, development of a national clinical pathway and a multisectoral approach. CONTRIBUTION OF PAPER.

Usual care for low back pain and barriers to best practice: A cross-sectional study in Danish general practice

OBJECTIVES

To describe the current content of low back pain (LBP) care in Danish general practice, the patients' self-management activities, and the clinicians' experienced barriers to providing best practice care.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study included adults with LBP seeking care in Danish general practice from August 2022 to June 2023. Patient-reported information included demographics, pain intensity, medical history, treatments, and self-management strategies. Clinicians provided data specific to each consultation, detailing the content of these consultations, and barriers to best practice in the specific cases.

RESULTS

The study involved 71 clinicians from 42 general practice clinics, with patient-reported data from 294 patients, and clinician-reported data from 283 (95%) consultations. The mean age for the included patients was 53 years, 56% were female, and 31% had been on sick leave for LBP during the previous 3 months. Moreover, 44% had seen two or more healthcare professionals in the previous month, 55% had previously undergone diagnostic imaging for LBP, 81% reported using any type of analgesics, and 14% reported using opioids. The majority (91%) reported engaging in self-management activities to alleviate pain. Consultations typically included a physical examination (84%), information about the cause of the pain (74%), and management advice (68%), as reported by clinicians or patients. In general, clinicians reported consultation elements more frequently than patients. Clinicians reported providing best practice care in 84% of cases, with time constraints (23%) and patient expectations (10%) being the most common barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides detailed insights into the management of LBP in Danish general practice. It reveals a complex landscape of patient engagement, varying management strategies, and differing perceptions of care content between patients and clinicians. Patients were often engaged in self-management activities and clinicians reported few barriers to providing best practice care.

Validation of the Arabic Version of the Attitude Toward Education and Advice for Low Back Pain Questionnaire

Purpose

This cross-sectional study aimed to validate the Arabic version of the Attitude toward Education and Advice for Low Back Pain (AxEL) Questionnaire.

Patients and Methods

This study was conducted in two phases. First, the AxEL questionnaire was translated into Arabic and cross-culturally adapted. Second, the psychometric properties (such as validity) of the translated AxEL were evaluated.

Results

The results showed that back translators and language specialists had no trouble translating the AxEL. The translators' agreement was very high (88.2%), and the questionnaire items were logically and clearly translated from English into Arabic.

Conclusion

The Arabic version of AxEL is a valid tool that can assess individuals' beliefs and attitudes towards low back pain (LBP). It fills a significant void in cross-cultural research and can help healthcare providers understand the attitudes and beliefs influencing individuals' management of LBP within the Arabic context.

Development of low back pain curriculum content standards for entry-level clinical training

BACKGROUND

The management of low back pain (LBP) is highly variable and patients often receive management that is not recommended and/or miss out on recommended care. Clinician knowledge and behaviours are strongly influenced by entry-level clinical training and are commonly cited as barriers to implementing evidence-based management. Currently there are no internationally recognised curriculum standards for the teaching of LBP content to ensure graduating clinicians have the appropriate knowledge and competencies to assess and manage LBP. We formed an international interdisciplinary working group to develop curriculum content standards for the teaching of LBP in entry-level clinical training programs.

METHODS

The working group included representatives from 11 countries: 18 academics and clinicians from healthcare professions who deal with the management of LBP (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, pharmacology, and psychology), seven professional organisation representatives (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, spine societies), and one healthcare consumer. A literature review was performed, including database and hand searches of guidelines and accreditation, curricula, and other policy documents, to identify gaps in current LBP teaching and recommended entry-level knowledge and competencies. The steering group (authors) drafted the initial LBP Curriculum Content Standards (LBP-CCS), which were discussed and modified through two review rounds with the working group.

RESULTS

Sixty-two documents informed the draft standards. The final LBP-CCS consisted of four broad topics covering the epidemiology, biopsychosocial contributors, assessment, and management of LBP. For each topic, key knowledge and competencies to be achieved by the end of entry-level clinical training were described.

CONCLUSION

We have developed the LBP-CCS in consultation with an interdisciplinary, international working group. These standards can be used to inform or benchmark the content of curricula related to LBP in new or existing entry-level clinical training programs.

Healthcare provider perspectives on integrating a comprehensive spine care model in an academic health system: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems (HCS) are challenged in adopting and sustaining comprehensive approaches to spine care that require coordination and collaboration among multiple service units. The integration of clinicians who provide first line, evidence-based, non-pharmacological therapies further complicates adoption of these care pathways. This cross-sectional study explored clinician perceptions about the integration of guideline-concordant care and optimal spine care workforce requirements within an academic HCS.

METHODS

Spine care clinicians from Duke University Health System (DUHS) completed a 26-item online survey via Qualtrics on barriers and facilitators to delivering guideline concordant care for low back pain patients. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 27 clinicians (57% response) responded to one or more items on the questionnaire, with 23 completing the majority of questions. Respondents reported that guidelines were implementable within DUHS, but no spine care guideline was used consistently across provider types. Guideline access and integration with electronic records were barriers to use. Respondents (81%) agreed most patients would benefit from non-pharmacological therapies such as physical therapy or chiropractic before receiving specialty referrals. Providers perceived spine patients expected diagnostic imaging (81%) and medication (70%) over non-pharmacological therapies. Providers agreed that receiving imaging (63%) and opioids (59%) benchmarks could be helpful but might not change their ordering practice, even if nudged by best practice advisories. Participants felt that an optimal spine care workforce would require more chiropractors and primary care providers and fewer neurosurgeons and orthopedists. In qualitative responses, respondents emphasized the following barriers to guideline-concordant care implementation: patient expectations, provider confidence with referral pathways, timely access, and the appropriate role of spine surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Spine care clinicians had positive support for current tenets of guideline-concordant spine care for low back pain patients. However, significant barriers to implementation were identified, including mixed opinions about integration of non-pharmacological therapies, referral pathways, and best practices for imaging and opioid use.

Physiotherapists' experiences of implementation of the BetterBack model of care for low back pain in primary care - a focus group interview study

INTRODUCTION

The BetterBack model of care (MoC), a best practice physiotherapy MoC for low back pain (LBP), was implemented in Swedish primary care to improve management of patients with LBP and provide patients with support tools to better self-manage episodes of LBP.

PURPOSE

The objective was to describe how physiotherapists in primary care experienced the implementation of the BetterBack MoC for LBP.

METHODS

Focus group interviews were conducted with physiotherapists in 2018-2019, 14-18 months after the introduction of the BetterBack MoC. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Five focus group interviews with 23 (15 female and 8 male) physiotherapists, age range 24-61 years were analyzed. A supportive organization and adaptation to the local culture, combined with health care professionals' attitudes and collaboration between physiotherapists emerged as important factors for a successful implementation and for long-term sustainability of the MoC. Physiotherapists had differing opinions if the implementation led to change in clinical practice. Improved confidence in how to manage patients with LBP was expressed by physiotherapists.

CONCLUSIONS

Several barriers and facilitators influence the implementation of a best practice physiotherapy MoC for LBP in primary care, which need to be considered in future implementation and sustainability processes.

Is the use of diagnostic imaging and the self-reported clinical management of low back pain patients influenced by the attitudes and beliefs of chiropractors? A survey of chiropractors in the Netherlands and Belgium

BACKGROUND

No previous studies have examined the association between attitudes and beliefs of chiropractors and their adherence to low back pain (LBP) guidelines. The aim of this study is: (1) to assess the attitudes and beliefs towards the management of LBP of Dutch and Belgian chiropractors; and (2) to investigate the association of these attitudes and beliefs on the use of diagnostic imaging and on the adherence to diagnostic guidelines and guidelines in the management of patients with LBP.

METHODS

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using a web-based questionnaire in chiropractic private practices in the Netherlands and Belgium. The survey included sociodemographic characteristics, use of diagnostic imaging, the Pain Attitude and Beliefs Scale-Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) and 6 vignettes (3 acute and 3 chronic LBP patients). We used Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) to categorise the chiropractors into clusters depending on their PABS.PT outcome, whereby the classes differed primarily on the biomedical score. We used linear, logistic, and mixed models to examine the associations between these clusters, and adherence to the recommendations of guidelines on: (1) diagnostic imaging use, and (2) management of LBP (i.e. advice on activity, treatment, return-to-work, and bedrest).

RESULTS

The response rate of the Dutch and Belgian chiropractors was 61% (n = 149/245) and 57% (n = 54/95), respectively. The majority of chiropractors scored midrange of the biomedical scale of the PABS.PT. Three clusters were identified using LPA: (1) high biomedical class (n = 18), (2) mid biomedical class (n = 117) and (3) low biomedical class (n = 23). Results from the vignettes suggest that chiropractors in the high biomedical class better adhere to diagnostic imaging guidelines and to LBP guidelines when it concerns advice on return-to-work and activity compared to the other two classes. However, no differences were identified between the classes for treatment of LBP. All chiropractors adhered to the guidelines' recommendation on bedrest.

CONCLUSION

The high biomedical class demonstrated better overall adherence to the practice guidelines for the management of LBP and diagnostic imaging than the other classes. Due to the small numbers for the high and low biomedical classes, these results should be interpreted with caution.

Barriers to the use of clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative study of Danish physiotherapists and chiropractors

PURPOSE

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Providing evidence-based practice (EBP) for patients with LBP is more cost-effective compared with non-EBP. To help health care professionals provide EBP, several clinical practice guidelines have been published. However, a relatively poor uptake of the guidelines has been identified across various countries. To enhance future implementation of EBP, the aim of this study was to explore barriers to using LBP guidelines in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitative constructivist grounded theory design was employed in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the barriers. Semi-structured interviews (+/- observations) of nine physiotherapists and nine chiropractors from primary care in the Central Denmark Region were conducted.

RESULTS

Two key barriers were found to using guidelines in practice: (1) a scepticism due to doubts about validity and applicability of the guidelines, which emerged particularly among physiotherapists; and (2) a deep biomechanical professional identity, due to perceived role, interest, lack of skills, and patient preferences, which emerged particularly among chiropractors.

CONCLUSIONS

For guidelines to be better implemented in practice, these key barriers must be addressed in a tailored strategy. Furthermore, this study showed a difference in barriers between the two professions.

Increasing chronic disease preventive care in community mental health services: clinician-generated strategies

BACKGROUND

People with a mental health condition experience a high prevalence of chronic disease risk behaviours e.g., tobacco smoking and physical inactivity. Recommended 'preventive care' to address these risks is infrequently provided by community mental health services. This study aimed to elucidate, among community mental health managers and clinicians, suggestions for strategies to support provision of preventive care.

METHODS

Three qualitative focus groups (n = 14 clinicians) were undertaken in one regional community mental health service to gather perspectives of barriers to preventive care provision, deductively coded against the domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Drawing on the learnings from the focus groups, individual interviews (n = 15 managers and clinicians) were conducted in two services to identify suggestions for strategies to increase preventive care. Strategies were inductively coded and mapped into TDF domains.

RESULTS

Barriers were identified across a wide range of TDF domains, most notably knowledge and environmental context and resources. Nine strategies were identified across three themes: training, resources and systems changes; mapping to all 14 TDF domains.

CONCLUSION

Future research seeking to increase implementation of preventive care may be guided by these findings. There is need for greater recognition and resourcing of preventive care as a priority and integral component of mental health treatment.

The effect of clinical guidelines on the utilisation of radiographs in chiropractic clinics in Denmark - an interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

In Denmark, chiropractors have a statutory right to use radiography and the government-funded national Health Insurance provides partial reimbursement. Danish National Clinical Guidelines recommends against routine use of imaging for uncomplicated spinal pain; however, it is not clear if clinical imaging guidelines recommendations have had an effect on the utilisation of spinal radiography. This study aimed to describe the utilisation rate of radiographs in Danish chiropractic clinics in the period from 2010 to 2020 and to assess the impact of clinical guidelines and policy changes on the utilisation of radiographs in Danish chiropractic clinics.

METHODS

Anonymised data from January 1st, 2010, to December 31st, 2020, were extracted from the Danish Regions register on health contacts in primary care. Data consisted of the total number of patients consulting one of 254 chiropractic clinics and the total number of patients having or being referred for radiography. Data were used to investigate the radiography utilisation per month from 2010 to 2020. An 'interrupted time series' analysis was conducted to determine if two interventions, the dissemination of 1) Danish clinical imaging guidelines recommendations and policy changes related to referral for advanced imaging for chiropractors in 2013 and 2) four Danish clinical guidelines recommendations in 2016, were associated with an immediate change in the level and/or slope of radiography utilisation.

RESULTS

In total, 336,128 unique patients consulted a chiropractor in 2010 of which 55,449 (15.4%) had radiography. In 2020, the number of patients consulting a chiropractor had increased to 366,732 of which 29,244 (8.0%) had radiography. The pre-intervention utilisation decreased by two radiographs per 10,000 patients per month. Little absolute change, but still statistically significant for Intervention 1, in the utilisation was found after the dissemination of the clinical guidelines and policy changes in 2013 or 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of Danish chiropractic patients undergoing radiography was halved in the period from 2010 to 2020. However, the dissemination of clinical imaging guidelines recommendations and policy changes related to referrals for advanced imaging showed little meaningful change in the monthly utilisation of radiographs in the same period.

Effects of Hip Pain Diagnostic Labels and Their Explanations on Beliefs About Hip Pain and How to Manage It: An Online Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of diagnostic labels and their explanations on people's beliefs about managing hip pain. DESIGN: Online randomized controlled trial involving 626 participants. METHODS: Participants aged ≥45 years with and without hip pain considered a hypothetical scenario (initial doctor consultation for hip pain). They were randomized to receive a diagnostic label and explanation of (1) hip osteoarthritis, (2) persistent hip pain, or (3) hip degeneration. Primary outcomes were the beliefs (1) exercise would damage the hip and (2) surgery is necessary at some stage (scales, 0 = definitely would not/unnecessary, 10 = definitely would/necessary). Secondary outcomes included beliefs about other treatments and care providers. RESULTS: Compared to hip degeneration, participants who were allocated to hip osteoarthritis and persistent hip pain believed exercise was less damaging (mean difference -1.3 [95% CI: -1.9, -0.7] and -1.8 [-2.3, -1.2], respectively) and surgery less necessary (-1.5 [-2.1, -1.0] and -2.2 [-2.7, -1.6], respectively). Compared to hip osteoarthritis, participants who were allocated to persistent hip pain believed surgery was less necessary (-0.7 [-1.2, -0.1]), but not that exercise was less damaging (-0.5 [-1.1, 0.1]). Compared to hip degeneration, participants who were allocated to hip osteoarthritis and persistent hip pain were less concerned about their hip and believed exercise and care from an exercise and sports physician, rheumatologist, or physiotherapist would be more helpful, and care from an orthopaedic surgeon less helpful. CONCLUSIONS: People who were allocated a diagnostic label and explanation of hip osteoarthritis or persistent hip pain believed exercise was less damaging and surgery less necessary for a hip problem than hip degeneration. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(11):673-684. Epub 5 October 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11984.

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

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

Effects of humanized nursing care on negative emotions and complications in patients undergoing hysteromyoma surgery

BACKGROUND

Uterine fibroids, are prevalent benign tumors affecting women of reproductive age. However, surgical treatment is often necessary for symptomatic hysteromyoma cases. This study examines the impact of humanized nursing care on reducing negative emotions and postoperative complications in patients receiving hysteromyoma surgery.

AIM

To investigate the impact of humanized nursing care on patients undergoing hysteromyoma surgery.

METHODS

Among patients who underwent hysteromyoma surgery at the Fudan University Affiliated Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, 200 were randomly assigned to either the control group (n = 100) or the humanized nursing care group (n = 100). The control group received traditional nursing care, while the humanized nursing care group received a comprehensive care plan encompassing psychological support, pain management, and tailored rehabilitation programs. In addition, anxiety and depression levels were assessed using the hospital anxiety and depression scale preoperatively and postoperatively. Postoperative complications were evaluated during follow-up assessments and compared between both groups.

RESULTS

The humanized nursing care group demonstrated a significant decrease in anxiety and depression levels compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The rate of postoperative complications, including infection, bleeding, and deep venous thrombosis, was also markedly lower in the humanized nursing care group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Humanized nursing care can effectively alleviate negative emotions and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications in patients undergoing hysteromyoma surgery. This approach should be considered a crucial component of perioperative care for these patients. Further research may be needed to explore additional benefits and long-term outcomes of implementing humanized nursing care in this population.

Primary healthcare provider experience of knowledge brokering interventions for mood management

Background

Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation strategy used in healthcare settings to facilitate the implementation of evidence into practice. How healthcare providers perceive and respond to various knowledge translation approaches is not well understood. This qualitative study used the Theoretical Domains Framework to examine healthcare providers' experiences with receiving one of two knowledge translation strategies: a remote knowledge broker (rKB); or monthly emails, for encouraging delivery of mood management interventions to patients enrolled in a smoking cessation program.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 healthcare providers recruited from primary care teams. We used stratified purposeful sampling to recruit participants who were allocated to receive either the rKB, or a monthly email-based knowledge translation strategy as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Interviews were structured around domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore determinants influencing practice change. Data were coded into relevant domains.

Results

Both knowledge translation strategies were considered helpful prompts to remind participants to deliver mood interventions to patients presenting depressive symptoms. Neither strategy appeared to have influenced the health care providers on the domains we probed. The domains pertaining to knowledge and professional identity were perceived as facilitators to implementation, while domains related to beliefs about consequences, emotion, and environmental context acted as barriers and/or facilitators to healthcare providers implementing mood management interventions.

Conclusion

Both strategies served as reminders and reinforced providers' knowledge regarding the connection between smoking and depressed mood. The TDF can help researchers better understand the influence of specific knowledge translation strategies on healthcare provider behavior change, as well as potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of evidence-informed interventions. Environmental context should be considered to address challenges and facilitate the movement of knowledge into clinical practice.

The barriers and facilitators for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in healthcare: an umbrella review of qualitative and quantitative literature

OBJECTIVES

To identify barriers and facilitators of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) implementation, and map those factors to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and behavior change wheel (BCW).

METHODS

We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Two investigators independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the methodological quality. The identified barriers and facilitators of CPG implementation were categorized and mapped to the TDF domains and BCW components.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included, and 193 barriers and 140 facilitators were identified. Intrinsic aspects (35 barriers and 28 facilitators) mainly included the CPGs' impracticality, complexity, and inaccessibility. Extrinsic aspects (158 barriers and 113 facilitators) mainly included lack of resources, training, funding, or awareness of CPG content in barriers; audits and feedback; strong leadership and management support; and educating and training about CPGs in facilitators. Environmental context and resources (n = 97, 19.48%) were the most reported barriers in TDF domains. Physical opportunity and social opportunity were the most frequently mentioned models in BCW.

CONCLUSION

Multiple barriers and facilitators for healthcare CPG implementation are identified, with further links to TDF and BCW. Future knowledge translation strategies should be developed accordingly in specified health care settings.

Barriers and facilitators of integrating physiotherapy into primary health care settings: A systematic scoping review of qualitative research

Purpose

This scoping review investigated the barriers and facilitators to integrating physiotherapy into primary health care (PHC).

Materials and methods

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, ProQuest, and REHABDATA were searched. Two independent reviewers were involved in screening, selecting, and extracting data. Data were synthesized using thematic analysis.

Results

Of the 483 screened documents, 44 qualitative studies, primarily from high-income countries, were included. All of the studies had good methodological quality. Barriers and facilitators of integrating physiotherapy into PHC were extracted within the WHO six building blocks framework. In total, 41 items were identified as barriers to the integration process. The studies included 49 recommendations to facilitate integrating physiotherapy services into PHC.

Conclusion

Integrating physiotherapy services into PHC faces many barriers. The most commonly suggested potential barriers are poor knowledge of physicians about physiotherapy, ineffective teamwork, physiotherapists' time constraints/workload, a lack of clarity over the role and knowledge of physiotherapists, unawareness of physiotherapy users about these services, and lack of intra- and inter-professional collaborations. The most commonly suggested recommendations to facilitate the integration process include: Clarifying the role of involved professionals, strengthening teamwork, improving intra- and inter-professional collaborations, and providing comprehensive training programs for physiotherapists.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

Descriptive qualitative design.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The lived experiences of musculoskeletal physiotherapists managing patient expectations for diagnostic imaging: A qualitative study using a phenomenological analysis

OBJECTIVES

Unnecessary diagnostic imaging for musculoskeletal presentations is a pervasive phenomenon, placing a substantial weight on healthcare resources. Their overuse can lead to iatrogenic consequences associated with overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Factors which contribute to inappropriate imaging are multifactorial. Clinician-patient beliefs, behaviours, and expectations have been identified as central drivers. Physiotherapists play an important role in the utilisation of diagnostic imaging for musculoskeletal presentations throughout healthcare settings. This study aims to explore the lived experiences of physiotherapists managing patient expectations for diagnostic imaging.

DESIGN

A qualitative study using an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Five participants were purposefully recruited and took part in semi-structured individual interviews.

RESULTS

The central themes identified were expectations for diagnostic imaging, managing expectations, communicating imaging findings, imaging as a therapeutic tool, and risk and uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study gives new insights into how musculoskeletal physiotherapists manage expectations for diagnostic imaging, the associated complexities, and the challenges encountered.

Clinical reasoning in managing chronic hip pain: One in two Australian and New Zealand physiotherapists diagnosed a case vignette with clinical criteria for hip OA as hip OA. A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Using a case vignette of an adult (George) presenting with hip pain consistent with hip OA, this study aimed to describe: (a) whether physiotherapists make diagnoses and identify bodily structures using either patient history and/or physical examination findings; (b) which diagnoses and bodily structures physiotherapists attribute to the hip pain; (c) how confident physiotherapists were in their clinical reasoning using patient history and physical examination findings; (d) what treatments physiotherapists would offer to George.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of physiotherapists in Australia and New Zealand. We used descriptive statistics to analyse closed questions and content analysis for open-text responses.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty physiotherapists completed the survey (39% response-rate). After receiving the patient history, 64% diagnosed George's pain and 49% of these as hip OA; 95% attributed George's pain to a bodily structure(s). After receiving the physical examination, 81% diagnosed George's hip pain and 52% of these as hip OA; 96% attributed George's hip pain to a bodily structure(s). Ninety-six percent of respondents were at least somewhat confident in their diagnosis after the patient history, and 95% were similarly confident after the physical examination. Most respondents offered advice (98%) and exercise (99%), but fewer offered treatments for weight loss (31%), medication (11%), and psychosocial factors (<15%).

DISCUSSION

About half of the physiotherapists that diagnosed George's hip pain made a diagnosis of hip OA, despite the case vignette including clinical criteria for a diagnosis of OA. Physiotherapists offered exercise and education, but many physiotherapists did not offer other clinically indicated and recommended treatments, such as weight loss and sleep advice.

Exploring usual care for patients with low back pain in primary care: a cross-sectional study of general practitioners, physiotherapists and chiropractors

OBJECTIVES

To explore the elements and composition of care provided by general practitioners (GPs), physiotherapists (PTs) and chiropractors (DCs) to patients with low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Primary care setting, Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care clinicians (GPs, PTs and DCs) in the Region of Southern Denmark were invited to register consecutive adult patient visits with LBP as the primary complaint.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinicians reported care elements provided to patients with LBP. Elements varied due to professional differences (eg, prescriptive rights). Data were descriptively analysed, on group and individual levels, for frequency and combination of care elements, and practice patterns were explored with latent class analysis.

RESULTS

The clinicians (33 GPs, 67 PTs and 43 DCs with a median experience of 15 years and 59% were females) registered 3500 patient visits. On average, the visits involved patients aged 51 years, and 51% were with females. The frequencies of common care elements across professions were information (42%-56% of visits between professions) and advice (56%-81%), while other common elements for GPs were pain medication (40%) and referrals to PTs (36%), for PTs, use of exercises (81%) and for DCs, use of manual therapy (96%). Substantial variation was observed within professions and distinct practice patterns, with different focuses of attention to information and advice versus exercise and manual therapy, were identified for PTs and DCs.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate substantial variation in the care elements provided by GPs, PTs and DCs to LBP patients. The compositions of care and practice patterns identified challenge the understanding of usual care as a uniform concept and professions as homogeneous groups. Strategic use of particular care elements in different parts of treatment courses is indicated. Longitudinal data and qualitative enquiry are needed to assess if or how care is tailored to individual patients.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SETTING

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

DESIGN

A qualitative study.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Pain catastrophising and kinesiophobia mediate pain and physical function improvements with Pilates exercise in chronic low back pain: a mediation analysis of a randomised controlled trial

QUESTION

How much are the reductions in pain intensity and improvements in physical function from Pilates exercise mediated by changes in pain catastrophising and kinesiophobia?

DESIGN

This was a secondary causal mediation analysis of a four-arm randomised controlled trial testing Pilates exercise dosage (once, twice or thrice per week) against a booklet control.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred and fifty-five people with chronic low back pain.

DATA ANALYSIS

All analyses were conducted in R software (version 4.1.2) following a preregistered analysis plan. A directed acyclic graph was constructed to identify potential pre-treatment mediator-outcome confounders. For each mediator model, we estimated the intervention-mediator effect, the mediator-outcome effect, the total natural indirect effect (TNIE), the pure natural direct effect (PNDE), and the total effect (TE).

RESULTS

Pain catastrophising mediated the effect of Pilates exercise compared with control on the outcomes pain intensity (TNIE MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.03) and physical function (TNIE MD -0.64, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.18). Kinesiophobia mediated the effect of Pilates exercise compared with control on the outcomes pain intensity (TNIE MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.02) and physical function (TNIE MD -1.06, 95% CI -1.70 to -0.49). The proportion mediated by each mediator was moderate (21 to 55%).

CONCLUSION

Reductions in pain catastrophising and kinesiophobia partially mediated the pathway to improved pain intensity and physical function when using Pilates exercise for chronic low back pain. These psychological components may be important treatment targets for clinicians and researchers to consider when prescribing exercise for chronic low back pain.

"You're stuck in the middle here": a qualitative study of GPs' experiences of managing knee pain attributed to a degenerative meniscal tear

BACKGROUND

Exercise is the recommended first-line therapy for a degenerative meniscal tear (DMT). Despite this, knee pain attributed to DMTs are a common presentation to specialist orthopaedic clinics. In the primary care setting, the general practitioner (GP) plays a central role in managing patients with knee pain, but to date their perspective has not been explored in relation to DMTs. This study explored GPs' experiences of managing people with knee pain attributed to a DMT.

METHODS

A qualitative research design was adopted and practices in the South and Mid-West of Ireland were contacted via recruitment emails circulated through professional and research networks. Interested GPs contacted the researchers via email, and purposive and snowball sampling was used for recruitment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted online or over the telephone. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Data was analysed using an inductive approach to thematic analysis. Ethical approval was granted by the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP_REC_21_0031).

RESULTS

Seventeen semi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted. Three main themes were identified with related subthemes: (1) GPs' experiences of relational aspects of care, (2) GP beliefs about what constitutes best care for patients with a DMT, and (3) how GP practice is enacted within the current healthcare setting. GPs described the challenge of maintaining a strong clinical alliance, while managing perceived patient expectations of a 'quick fix' and advanced imaging. They reported slowing down clinical decisions and feeling 'stuck' with limited options when conservative treatment had failed. GPs believed that exercise should be the core treatment for DMTs and emphasised engaging patients in an active approach to recovery. Some GPs believed arthroscopy had a role in circumstances where patients didn't improve with physiotherapy. Limited access to public physiotherapy and orthopaedic services hampered GPs' management plans and negatively impacted patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

GP beliefs around what constitutes best care for a DMT generally aligned with the evidence base. Nonetheless, there was sometimes tension between these beliefs and the patient's own treatment expectations. The ability to enact their beliefs was hampered by limited access to conservative management options, sometimes leading to early escalation of care.

Development and validation of the global assessment of the evidence implementation environment [GENIE] tool

BACKGROUND

Overcoming the various barriers to evidence implementation is critical to delivering evidence-based health care. Identifying and managing these obstacles is somewhat challenging however, due to interprofessional and interjurisdictional variations in reported barriers. An efficient, systematic, comprehensive and innovative approach to isolating the barriers to evidence implementation is therefore needed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a mixed methods design, the study aimed to develop, refine and validate a tool to assess the evidence implementation environment for complementary medicine (CM) professions. The tool was developed using a five-stage process, and refined and validated using a two-round e-Delphi technique.

RESULTS

Informed by reviews examining the barriers and enablers to evidence implementation in CM, and shaped by the Behaviour Change Wheel Framework, a preliminary 33-item tool was created (i.e. the Global Assessment of the Evidence Implementation Environment [GENIE] tool). A two-round Delphi technique was used to refine the criteria, with a panel of 23 experts agreeing to the removal of two criteria, and the addition of two items. In the end, the Delphi panel reached consensus on 33 criteria, which were sorted into nine stakeholder groups.

CONCLUSION

This study has for the first time, created an innovative tool to assess the capacity and capability of CM professions to engage in evidence-based practice at an optimal level. By assessing the evidence implementation environment of CM professions, the GENIE tool is able to determine where resources, infrastructure and personnel should be directed in order to optimise the uptake of evidence-based practices within CM professions.

Representations of clinical practice guidelines and health equity in healthcare literature: An integrative review

AIM

This paper reports an integrative review of international health literature that discusses health equity in relation to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals (HCPs), policy makers, and decision makers rely on sound empirical evidence to make fiscally responsible and appropriate decisions about the allocation of health resources and health service delivery. CPGs provide statements and recommendations that aim to standardize care with an implicit goal of achieving equity of care among diverse populations. Developers of CPGs must be careful not to exacerbate inequity when making recommendations. As such, it is important to determine how equity is discussed within the context of CPGs.

DESIGN

This integrative review was conducted according to integrative review methods as outlined by Whittemore and Knafl (2005), and Toronto and Remington (2020). These authors outlined a systematic process for the identification of relevant literature across health disciplines to examine the state of knowledge pertaining to a phenomenon such as health equity.

SEARCH METHODS

The computerized databases PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science were searched using a combination of keywords. Search parameters included international peer-reviewed published, full-text, English language articles, editorials, and reports over the last decade (January 2011 to February 2022). A reference search of included articles was conducted to identify any additional articles. Dissertations and theses were not included.

SEARCH OUTCOME

A total of 139 peer-reviewed English language articles were identified.

RESULTS

The findings of this review revealed five main ways in which health equity is in context of CPGs including if they target or exacerbate inequity among disadvantaged populations, equity and CPG development, implementation, and evaluation, and checklists and tools to assist developers and users of CPG to consider equity. Although critical appraisal tools exist to assist users of CPGs assess and to evaluate how well CPGs address issues of equity, the definition of equity and how CPG development panels should incorporate and articulate it remains unclear and haphazard. As such, recommendations intended to be implemented by HCPs to optimize health equity remains diverse and unclear.

CONCLUSION

The way equity is discussed within the reviewed health literature has implications for their uptake by and utility for HCPs. The ability of HCPs to implement CPGs may be hindered without an appreciation and integration of equity considerations across the various phases of CPG conceptualization, development, implementation, and evaluation, and their relevance and appropriateness to diverse geographic and socioeconomic contexts with variable access to health human resources and services. This situation could be improved if equity were more clearly articulated within all aspects of the CPG process.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Understanding how equity is discussed in the literature relative to CPGs has implications for their uptake by and utility for HCPs in their goal of providing equitable health care. Successful implementation of CPGs with consideration equity could be improved if equity were more clearly articulated within all aspects of the CPG process including conceptualization, development, implementation, and evaluation.

A Guideline-Implementation Intervention to Improve the Management of Low Back Pain in Primary Care: A Difference-in-Difference-in-Differences Analysis

BACKGROUND

Real-world adherence to clinical practice guidelines is often poor, resulting in sub-standard patient care and unnecessary healthcare costs. This study evaluates the effect of a guideline-implementation intervention for the management of low back pain (LBP) in general practice-the Fear Reduction Exercised Early (FREE) approach-on LBP-related injury insurance claims, healthcare utilisation, and costs of treatment.

DESIGN

Data were extracted from comprehensive nationwide New Zealand injury insurance claims records. Data were analysed using a 'triple-difference' (difference-in-difference-in-differences) method to isolate the causal effect of FREE training on LBP claims activity, comparing the difference in general practitioner (GP) LBP claims and associated activity before and after training with their non-musculoskeletal injury claims for the same periods (assumed to be unaffected by training), relative to the same comparisons for GPs not trained in the FREE approach.

RESULTS

Training GPs in the FREE approach resulted in significant reductions in the number of LBP injury claims lodged (- 19%, 95% CI -34 to -5), the use of physiotherapy (-30%, 95% CI - 42 to - 18) and imaging (- 27%, 95% CI - 46 to - 8%), and the healthcare costs (- 21%, 95% CI - 41 to - 1) of LBP injury. Changes in claims for earnings' compensation (- 10%, 95% CI - 34 to 13) were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

A brief guideline-implementation intervention following best-practice LBP management and guideline-implementation strategies achieved significant reductions, persisting over at least 6 to18 months, in healthcare utilisation consistent with improved delivery of guideline-concordant care.

The slow de-implementation of non-evidence-based treatments in low back pain hospital care-Trends in treatments using Dutch hospital register data from 1991 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide and has an excessive societal burden. Accumulating evidence has shown that some medical approaches such as imaging in absence of clear indications, medication and some invasive treatments may contribute to the problem rather than alleviating it.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the extent of de-implementation of non-evidence-based hospital treatments for LBP care in the Netherlands in the last three decades.

METHODS

Using a register-based population-level observational study with Dutch hospital data, providing a nearly complete coverage of hospital admissions in the Netherlands in 1991-2018, we assessed five frequently applied non-evidence-based hospital treatments for LBP. Time trends in treatment use (absolute and per 100,000 inhabitants) were plotted and analysed using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

The use of bed rest for non-specific LBP and hernia nuclei pulposi, and discectomy for spinal stenosis decreased 91%, 81% and 86% since the availability of evidence/guidelines, respectively. De-implementation, beyond 84%, was reached after 18 and 17 years for bed rest for non-specific LBP and discectomy respectively, while it was not reached after 28 years for bed rest for hernia nuclei pulposi. For spinal fusion and invasive pain treatment, there was an initial increase followed by a reduction. Overall, these treatments reduced by 85% and 75%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Netherlands, de-implementation of five non-recommended hospital LBP treatments, if at all, took several decades. Although de-implementation was substantial, slow de-implementation has likely resulted in considerable waste of resources and avoidable harm to many patients in Dutch hospitals.

SIGNIFICANCE

Medically intensive approaches to low-back pain care contribute to the high societal burden of this disease. There have been calls to avoid such care. Using Dutch hospital data, we showed that de-implementation of five non-recommended hospital low-back pain treatments, if at all, took several decades (i.e. ≥17 years) after availability of evidence and guidelines. Slow de-implementation has likely resulted in considerable waste of resources and avoidable harm to hospital patients; better ways for de-implementation of non-evidence-based care are needed.

Factors associated with non-pharmacological, non-operative treatment utilization prior to thoracolumbar spine surgery in Manitoba: A Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) study

BACKGROUND

Evidence for managing chronic low back pain suggests beginning with non-invasive treatments and having surgery as a last resort. Currently, no studies examine treatment engagement for back pain in the six-months preceding elective spine surgery assessment.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to: 1) determine the engagement in non-pharmacological, non-operative treatment before elective thoracolumbar spine surgery (ETSS) assessment in XXXXXXXX; and 2) investigate potential factors associated with engagement in this population.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort design.

METHODS

Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) registry data were analyzed to compare groups who reported minimal engagement in non-pharmacological, non-operative treatment before ETSS assessment to those who engaged. Binary logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with engagement.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients qualified, 41.7% reported minimal engagement with non-pharmacological, non-operative treatment in the six-months preceding ETSS assessment. Four statistically significant factors associated with minimal engagement were identified: 1) 61-90 years of age (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-10.7, p < .001); 2) Oswestry disability index (ODI) score >60% (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-9.2, p = .010; 3) body mass index (BMI) score 25-29.9 (OR 6.7, 95% CI 2.2-20.9, p < .001) and BMI ≥ 30 (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.4-12.2, p = .009); and 4) female biological sex (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.6, p = .039.

CONCLUSIONS

In total, 41.7% of CSORN patients had minimal engagement with non-pharmacological, non-operative treatment in the six-months prior to ETSS assessment in XXXXXXXX. Factors associated with minimal engagement included: older age, high disability, increased BMI, and female biological sex.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DISCUSSION

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

Feasibility of testing the effectiveness of a theory-informed intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

General medical practitioner (GP) recruitment and subsequent data collection in clinical practice are challenging and may limit successful completion of a large-scale trial. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial to test an intervention to reduce non-indicated imaging for low back pain in general medical practice.

METHODS

A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial was performed, with recruitment of GPs and randomisation of GP clinics. All GPs attended a training session and were asked to record low back pain codes in electronic medical records for any low back pain presentations. Intervention group GPs were trained in the use of a patient education booklet to be used during low back pain patient visits. Control group GPs provided usual care. Outcomes for the proposed trial were collected to determine feasibility. GP recruitment was assessed as the proportion of GPs approached who consented to participate. Low back pain imaging outcomes were collected from electronic medical records (counts of patients presenting with low back pain) and from Australian healthcare administrative (Medicare) data (counts of imaging use). GP compliance with study procedures was assessed and qualitative data reported.

RESULTS

Thirty-four GP clinics were approached, with four participating (12%). At these clinics, 13/19 (68%) GPs consented to participate, and 10/19 (53%) started the study. Outcome data were collected from medical records for all GPs. Three GPs (30%) withdrew consent to access Medicare data, limiting reporting of imaging outcome measures. Three GPs (30%) self-reported low compliance entering low back pain codes.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot cluster randomised controlled trial demonstrated the feasibility of many aspects of a full-scale effectiveness study, while also identifying a number of challenges that need to be resolved. Recommendations related to GP recruitment, study compliance, data collection, and outcome measures were made to increase the success of a future trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR), Trial ID: ACTRN12619000991112; Registered 11 July 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376973.

Influence of Initial Health Care Provider on Subsequent Health Care Utilization for Patients With a New Onset of Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this research was to examine the scope of evidence for the influence of a nonmedical initial provider on health care utilization and outcomes in people with low back pain (LBP).

METHODS

Using scoping review methodology, we conducted an electronic search of 4 databases from inception to June 2021. Studies investigating the management of patients with a new onset of LBP by a nonmedical initial health care provider were identified. Pairs of reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and eligible full-text studies. We extracted health care utilization and patient outcomes and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Two reviewers descriptively analyzed the data and categorized findings by outcome measure.

RESULTS

A total of 26,462 citations were screened, and 11 studies were eligible. Studies were primarily retrospective cohort designs using claims-based data. Four studies had a low risk of bias. Five health care outcomes were identified: medication, imaging, care seeking, cost of care, and health care procedures. Patient outcomes included patient satisfaction and functional recovery. Compared with patients initiating care with medical providers, those initiating care with a nonmedical provider showed associations with reduced opioid prescribing and imaging ordering rates but increased rates of care seeking. Results for cost of care, health care procedures, and patient outcomes were inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Prioritizing nonmedical providers at the first point of care may decrease the use of low-value care, such as opioid prescribing and imaging referral, but may lead to an increased number of health care visits in the care of people with LBP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.

IMPACT

This scoping review provides preliminary evidence that nonmedical practitioners, as initial providers, may help reduce opioid prescription and selective imaging in people with LBP. The trend observed in this scoping review has important implications for pathways of care and the role of nonmedical providers, such as physical therapists, within primary health care systems.

LAY SUMMARY

This scoping review provides preliminary evidence that nonmedical practitioners, as initial providers, might help reduce opioid prescription and selective imaging in people with LBP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

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.

Providing information at the initial consultation to patients with low back pain across general practice, chiropractic and physiotherapy - a cross-sectorial study of Danish primary care

OBJECTIVE

Clinical guidelines for managing low back pain (LBP) emphasise patient information, patient education and physical activity as key components. Little is known about who actually receives information. This study investigates to what extent information at the first consultation with general practitioner (GP), chiropractor (DC) and physiotherapist (PT) in Danish primary care is provided to patients with LBP.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This cross-sectorial study was conducted as a prospective survey registration of LBP consultations at the three primary health care professions in Denmark.

INTERVENTION

Clinicians ticked off a paper survey chart during or after consultations with patients who visited the clinic for LBP (Approval number: ID # 11.220).

SUBJECTS

33 GPs, 43 DCs and 61 PTs registered first-time consultations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was provision of information, overall and across care settings.

RESULTS

The overall proportion of patients provided with information was 72%, but this varied among professions (GP, 44%; DC, 76%; and PT, 74%). Provision of information increased to 78% if patients had increased emotional distress or back-related leg pain below the knee. The strongest association with provision of information was having two or three signs of elevated distress (OR 2.58 and 5.05, respectively, p= 0.00) or physical disability (OR 2.55, p= 0.00).

CONCLUSION

In more than a quarter of first-time consultations, patient information was not provided. Large variation in providing information was found across the settings. The proportion provided with information increased for sub-populations having elevated distress or back-related leg pain below the knee.Key Points Clinical guidelines recommend patient information, patient education and physical activity for managing low back pain (LBP)  • Information is not provided in more than a quarter of first-time consultations in Danish primary care settings that manage these patients. • Information increased for the sub-populations having elevated distress and back-related leg pain below the knee. • The conducted primary care surveys monitored clinical activity and illustrated variations in provision of information.

Factors Associated with the Quality and Transparency of National Guidelines: A Mixed-Methods Study

We assessed the methodological quality and transparency of all the national clinical practice guidelines that were published in Croatia up until 2017 and explored the factors associated with their quality rating. An in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis was performed using rigorous methodology. We evaluated the guidelines using a validated AGREE II instrument with four raters; we used multiple linear regressions to identify the predictors of quality; and two focus groups, including guideline developers, to further explore the guideline development process. The majority of the guidelines (N = 74) were developed by medical societies. The guidelines’ quality was rated low: the median standardized AGREE II score was low, 36% (IQR 28–42), and so were the overall-assessments. The aspects of the guidelines that were rated best were the “clarity of presentation” and the “scope and purpose” (median ≥ 59%); however, the other four domains received very low scores (15–33%). Overall, the guideline quality did not improve over time. The guidelines that were developed by medical societies scored significantly worse than those developed by governmental, or unofficial working groups (12–43% per domain). In focus group discussions, inadequate methodology, a lack of implementation systems in place, a lack of awareness about editorial independence, and broader expertise/perspectives in working groups were identified as factors behind the low scores. The factors identified as affecting the quality of the national guidelines may help stakeholders who are developing interventions and education programs aimed at improving guideline quality worldwide.

Improving adherence to guidelines for spine pain care: what tools could support primary care clinicians in conforming to guidelines?

Background

Spine pain is one of the most common conditions seen in primary care and is often treated with ineffective, aggressive interventions, such as prescription pain medications, imagery and referrals to surgery. Aggressive treatments are associated with negative side effects and high costs while conservative care has lower risks and costs and equivalent or better outcomes. Despite multiple well-publicised treatment guidelines and educational efforts recommending conservative care, primary care clinicians (PCCs) widely continue to prescribe aggressive, low-value care for spine pain.

Methods

In this qualitative study semistructured interviews were conducted with PCCs treating spine pain patients to learn what prevents clinicians from following guidelines and what tools or support could promote conservative care. Interviews were conducted by telephone, transcribed and coded for thematic analysis.

Results

Forty PCCs in academic and private practice were interviewed. Key reflections included that while familiar with guidelines recommending conservative treatment, they did not find guidelines useful or relevant to care decisions for individual patients. They believed that there is an insufficient body of real-world evidence supporting positive outcomes for conservative care and guidance recommendations. They indicated that spine pain patients frequently request aggressive care. These requests, combined with the PCCs’ commitment to reaching shared treatment decisions with patients, formed a key reason for pursuing aggressive care. PCCs reported not being familiar with risk-screening tools for spine patients but indicated that such screens might increase their confidence to recommend conservative care to low-risk patients.

Conclusions

PCCs may be more willing to give conservative, guideline-consistent care for spine pain if they had tools to assist in making patient-specific evaluations and in countering requests for unneeded aggressive care. Such tools would include both patient risk screens and shared decision-making aids that include elements for resolving patient demands for inappropriate care.

Well-described exercises for chronic low back pain in Life Science Literature: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic exercise (TE) is recommended in multimodal treatment for patients with non-specific chronic back pain (cLBP).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify an exercise or a spectrum of exercises, well described and reproducible by the clinician, for cLBP patients.

METHODS

Systematic review by researching in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and Scopus. Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) supported the TE in patients with non-specific cLBP, provided that it was well described and could be repeated by another therapist. Methodological evaluation was performed using the PEDro scale and only studies with a score of ⩾ 6 were included. The assessment of the intervention description was carried out with the TIDieR checklist. The risk of bias was examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included in this systematic review. The defective description and the poorly reporting of the intervention makes it more difficult for the clinician to include the TE into clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study showed that the reporting of the intervention in high quality RCT on chronic low back pain is low, threatening the external validity of the results.

User perspectives on systematic data collection regarding back pain managed in general practice - a qualitative study

Background

Back pain is a main driver of disability and the most prevalent reason why people in Demark visit a general practitioner (GP). However, little is known about back pain management in primary care. For new strategies to be sustainable and to accommodate the recommendations for evidence-based practice, patients’ perspectives are paramount to complement clinical expertise and research evidence.

This study aimed to identify recommendations for systematic data collection in a nationwide cohort regarding the management of back pain in general practice from the perspectives of GPs and patients.

Method

We applied an adapted exploratory sequential design using focus groups and individual interviews. Seven GPs and ten patients with back pain participated, and four focus groups and seventeen individual interviews were conducted. Data were analyzed using abductive reasoning.

Results

Both GPs and patients with back pain found that 1) recruitment to a cohort should take place through the GPs, 2) the heterogeneity of patients with back pain and their need for individualized treatment and care should be considered, and 3) data from the cohort should feed into a flowchart or guideline to illustrate a generic patient pathway and visually assist both the patient and GP to obtain an overview and, thus, structure the patient pathway.

Conclusion

GPs and patients with back pain both considered the nationwide cohort with the overall aim to investigate back pain management as being extremely relevant in relation to improve t the patient pathway. User perspectives should be explored and integrated into health care interventions.

Emergency department evaluation, treatment, and functional outcomes among patients presenting with low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Low back pain (LBP) leads to more than 4.3 million emergency department (ED) visits annually. Despite the number of ED visits for LBP, emergency medicine societies have not established clear guidelines for the evaluation and care of these patients. This study aims to describe patterns in the evaluation, treatment, and outcomes of patients presenting to an urban, academic ED for atraumatic LBP.

METHODS

We prospectively identified a convenience sample of patients presenting with LBP to the University of Utah Hospital ED between January 2017 and June 2018. We collected baseline demographic information and calculated the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short Form 12a (PROMIS PFSF-12a) score to assess patient function and mobility (50 = average PROMIS PFSF-12a score, with higher scores indicating better function). We contacted patients 6 weeks after the ED visit to assess outpatient follow-up and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Over the 18-month study period, 103 patients presented with a chief complaint of LBP and agreed to participate in the study. Average age of the cohort was 48.5 years (SD = 18.3) and 55 (53.4%) were female. Notably, 61 patients (59.2%) had been seen previously in the ED for LBP and 32 (31.1%) had received an opioid for LBP in the preceding 3 months. In the ED, 35.9% of patient received an opioid while 18.5% had an opioid prescription at discharge. While in the ED, 37 (35.9%) had an x-ray and 47 (45.6%) underwent computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. At 6-week follow-up, 22 of 68 (32.4%) patients reported having missed work due to pain. PROMIS PFSF-12a score improved from 32.2 ("low" range) at time of ED visit to 42.0 ("low-average" range) at the 6-week follow up. Regarding outpatient follow-up after the ED visit, 22 patients (21.4%) saw a primary care provider, 12 patients (17.8%) saw orthopedics or neurosurgery, and 8 patients (11.8%) attended physical therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving ED care for LBP had a significant improvement in PROMIS PFSF-12a scores 6 weeks after the ED but return to function continued to lag despite interventions. Imaging patterns, medication prescriptions, and outpatient follow-up varied widely, emphasizing the needs for clear guidelines and treatment pathways for ED patients with LBP.

Diagnostic Imaging in Chiropractic Practice: A Survey of Opinions and Self-Reported Guideline Adherence of Dutch and Belgian Chiropractors

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was (1) to describe diagnostic imaging in Dutch and Belgian chiropractic practice in general, (2) to estimate adherence to the diagnostic imaging guidelines for patients with low back pain (LBP) via vignettes, and (3) to evaluate factors associated with diagnostic imaging and adherence to the guidelines.

METHODS

We used a web-based survey to collect sociodemographic data, practice characteristics, amount of imaging, opinions, and indications for requesting imaging from registered Dutch and Belgian chiropractors in 2013. Additionally, adherence to imaging guidelines for LBP was assessed by 6 vignettes in patients with LBP. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to explore associations between characteristics of chiropractors and the use of imaging. Generalized mixed models were used to explore guidelines adherence and their relationship with chiropractor's characteristics.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 60% (n = 203 out of 340). In total, 83% of chiropractors viewed diagnostic imaging in general as an important part of their practice. It is important to note that Dutch and Belgian chiropractors are not allowed to refer directly for imaging. Chiropractors reported that they would like to have imaging in 42% of their patients. Imaging had already been performed in 37% of patients before the first visit and was ordered by another health care provider (ie, general practitioner or medical specialist). The most common indication for ordering imaging was exclusion of contraindications (73%). The most common reason against imaging was the perceived limited value (45%). Many chiropractors (71%) were familiar with imaging guidelines. Adherence to the imaging guidelines for LBP based upon the vignettes was 66%. Dutch chiropractors and chiropractors with less than 10 years in practice demonstrated better adherence to guidelines and imaging use as compared with Belgian and those with more than 10 years of experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Dutch and Belgian chiropractors reported that imaging in general was important in chiropractic practice. Self-reported indications for ordering diagnostic imaging were in line with the imaging guidelines in the majority of cases. We found some variances between Belgian and Dutch chiropractors and years of experience related to guideline adherence.

Management of people with low back pain: a survey of opinions and beliefs of Dutch and Belgian chiropractors

Background

Chiropractors commonly provide care to people with low-back pain (LBP). The aim of this survey was to determine the opinions and beliefs of chiropractors regarding the support and management of LBP. We also investigated whether their management is in accordance with the three most commonly recommended approaches to LBP based upon international guidelines (i.e. advice regarding return-to-work, limit bedrest, and stay active).

Methods

A web-based survey was sent out in 2013 to collect data from registered Dutch and Belgian chiropractors. In addition to providing a description of their sociodemographic and practice characteristics, chiropractors were asked to complete six patient vignettes representing people with LBP who typically present to a chiropractor. The respondents indicated which intervention(s) they would recommend or undertake. Based upon these vignettes, we were able to determine whether their management approach adhered to clinical guidelines. Generalized mixed models were used to explore guidelines adherence and their relationship to chiropractors’ characteristics.

Results

In total, 60% (n = 203/340) of the chiropractors who were invited, chose to participate. Chiropractors reported applying a chiropractic adjustment in 90% of all vignettes, while the advice to exercise varied from one-third in the chronic cases to approximately half of those with acute LBP. More than 75% of the chiropractors would initially treat LBP 1–2 times a week. More than 90% of the chiropractors advised against bedrest. Overall, self-reported adherence to clinical guidelines for all six vignettes was [64.5% (CI 58.7–70.0)]. Adherence in the chronic vignettes [73.4% (CI 66.7–79.2)] was better than in the acute vignettes [55.9% (CI 50.5–61.1)]. Importantly, regarding recommended approaches to LBP, chiropractors more consistently followed guidelines regarding advice to limit bedrest [98.5% (CI 97.3–99.1)] than advice to stay active [77.5% (CI 72.3–81.9)] or return-to-work [59.4% (CI 55.2–63.4)]. Finally, Dutch chiropractors were more likely to adhere to the guidelines than Belgian chiropractors.

Conclusions

Chiropractic adjustments were the most common self-reported treatment modalities supplemented by exercise in the management of LBP patients. Two-thirds of the chiropractors reported adhering to the guidelines regarding management and advice for LBP patients. Practitioners should improve guideline adherence, particularly for acute LBP cases, and when advising on return-to-work.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12998-022-00437-1.

Barriers to following imaging guidelines for the treatment and management of patients with low-back pain in primary care: a qualitative assessment guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability and is among the top five reasons that patients visit their family doctors. Over-imaging for non-specific low back pain remains a problem in primary care. To inform a larger study to develop and evaluate a theory-based intervention to reduce inappropriate imaging, we completed an assessment of the barriers and facilitators to reducing unnecessary imaging for NSLBP among family doctors in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL).

Methods

This was an exploratory, qualitative study describing family doctors’ experiences and practices related to diagnostic imaging for non-specific LBP in NL, guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were collected using in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analyzed deductively (assigning text to one or more domains) and inductively (generating themes at each of the domains) before the results were examined to determine which domains should be targeted to reduce imaging.

Results

Nine family doctors (four males; five females) working in community (n = 4) and academic (n = 5) clinics in both rural (n = 6) and urban (n = 3) settings participated in this study. We found five barriers to reducing imaging for patients with NSLBP: 1) negative consequences, 2) patient demand 3) health system organization, 4) time, and 5) access to resources. These were related to the following domains: 1) beliefs about consequences, 2) beliefs about capabilities, 3) emotion, 4) reinforcement, 5) environmental context and resources, 6) social influences, and 7) behavioural regulation.

Conclusions

Family physicians a) fear that if they do not image they may miss something serious, b) face significant patient demand for imaging, c) are working in a system that encourages unnecessary imaging, d) don’t have enough time to counsel patients about why they don’t need imaging, and e) lack access to appropriate practitioners, community programs, and treatment modalities to prescribe to their patients. These barriers were related to seven TDF domains. Successfully reducing inappropriate imaging requires a comprehensive intervention that addresses these barriers using established behaviour change techniques. These techniques should be matched directly to relevant TDF domains. The results of our study represent the important first step of this process – identifying the contextual barriers and the domains to which they are related.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01751-6.

Does the implementation of clinical practice guidelines for low back and neck pain by physical therapists improve patient outcomes? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Physical therapy for neck and low back pain is highly variable despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPG). This review aimed to determine the impact of CPG implementation on patient-level outcomes for spinal pain. Implementation strategies were also examined to determine prevalence and potential impact.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched through April 2021 for studies assessing CPG implementation in physical therapy for neck and low back pain. Articles were screened for eligibility. The Modified Downs and Black checklist was utilized to determine study quality. Due to the heterogeneity between studies, a meta-analysis was not performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included in this review. Implementation strategies were significantly varied between studies. Outcomes pertaining to healthcare utilization, pain, and physical functioning were assessed in relation to the implementation of CPGs. Multiple implementation strategies were identified, with Managing Quality as the most frequently utilized key implementation process. Findings indicate CPG implementation decreased healthcare utilization, but inconsistent results were found with physical functioning and pain outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

CPG implementation appears to have a beneficial effect on healthcare utilization outcomes, but may not impact pain and physical functioning outcomes. Effective CPG implementation strategies remain unknown, though utilizing implementation framework may improve outcomes. More research is needed to determine the most effective implementation strategies and effects on pain and physical function outcomes.

Variation in General Practice Services Provided to Australian Workers with Low Back Pain: A Cross-Jurisdictional Comparative Study

PURPOSE

To compare the frequency of General Practitioner (GP) services and the time between first and last GP services (service duration) provided to workers with low back pain (LBP) between four Australian workers' compensation jurisdictions.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study using service level data collated from the Australian states of Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and Queensland. Negative binomial regression was used to compare GP service volume between jurisdictions in workers with accepted LBP compensation claims. Quantile regression was used to compare GP service duration. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic factors and occupation. Analyses were repeated in four cohorts with progressively more restrictive cohort definitions to account for the influence of jurisdictional policy variation in employer excess, service delivery and maximum time-loss benefit duration.

RESULTS

The study sample included 47,185 time-loss claims accepted between July 2010 and June 2015, that were linked with 452,391 GP services. Workers with LBP in Queensland recorded significantly fewer GP services funded and recorded significantly shorter average service duration than in other states. This pattern of jurisdictional variation was evident in all four cohorts, but was attenuated when cohorts excluded short- and long duration claims. In the final, most restricted cohort statistically significant adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.47-1.60 were observed in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia, while these states recorded additional service duration of 4.3-20.7 weeks at the median.

CONCLUSION

There is significant variation in provision of GP services to injured workers with LBP between four Australian workers' compensation jurisdictions. Administrative requirements for time-based provision of work capacity certificates by medical practitioners may be contributing to service variation.

Effect of diagnostic labelling on management intentions for non-specific low back pain: a randomised scenario-based experiment

Background

Diagnostic labels may influence treatment intentions. We examined the effect of labelling low back pain (LBP) on beliefs about imaging, surgery, second opinion, seriousness, recovery, work, and physical activities.

Methods

Six‐arm online randomized experiment with blinded participants with and without LBP. Participants received one of six labels: ‘disc bulge’,‘degeneration’,‘arthritis’,‘lumbar sprain’,‘non‐specific LBP’, ‘episode of back pain’. The primary outcome was the belief about the need for imaging.

Results

A total of 1375 participants (mean [SD] age, 41.7 years [18.4 years]; 748 women [54.4%]) were included. The need for imaging was rated lower with the labels ‘episode of back pain’ (4.2 [2.9]), ‘lumbar sprain’ (4.2 [2.9]) and ‘non‐specific LBP’ (4.4 [3.0]) compared to the labels ‘arthritis’ (6.0 [2.9]), ‘degeneration’ (5.7 [3.2]) and ‘disc bulge’ (5.7 [3.1]). The same labels led to higher recovery expectations and lower ratings of need for a second opinion, surgery and perceived seriousness compared to ‘disc bulge’,‘degeneration’ and ‘arthritis’. Differences were larger amongst participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care. No differences were found in beliefs about physical activity and work between the six labels.

Conclusions

‘Episode of back pain’,‘lumbar sprain’ and ‘non‐specific LBP’ reduced need for imaging, surgery and second opinion compared to ‘arthritis’,‘degeneration’ and ‘disc bulge’ amongst public and patients with LBP as well as reducing the perceived seriousness of LBP and enhancing recovery expectations. The impact of labels appears most relevant amongst those at risk of poor outcomes (participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care).

Patients' Perceptions and Outcome Measures after Undergoing the Enhanced Transtheoretical Model Intervention (ETMI) for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Mixed-Method Study

This study aimed to evaluate the outcome measures and perceptions of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) after being treated with the Enhanced Transtheoretical Model Intervention (ETMI). In this process evaluation mixed-methods study, 30 patients with CLBP electronically completed self-reported measures (function, pain, and fear-avoidance beliefs) before and after ETMI treatment. Subsequently, each patient participated in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically. Quantitative analysis showed significant improvements in function (p < 0.001), pain (p < 0.001), and fear-avoidance beliefs (p < 0.001) after receiving ETMI treatment, with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.234). Moreover, the average number of physiotherapy sessions was 2.6 ± 0.6 for the ETMI intervention, while the annual average number in Maccabi is estimated at 4.1 ± 1.5. Three main themes emerged from the thematic analysis: (1) communication between the patient and the practitioner; (2) psychosocial treatment elements, and (3) ETMI as a long-term solution for CLBP. The findings of the current study highlight patients’ perceived need for an open and sincere dialogue and for receiving reassurance and encouragement about their LBP. Notably, they had no problem with the fact that they did not receive passive treatment. Accordingly, together with the significant improvement in post-treatment outcome measures, patients perceived the ETMI method as a practical tool for self-managing their back problems in the long term.

GLA:D® Back Australia: a mixed methods feasibility study for implementation

Background

Practice-based guidelines recommend patient education and exercise as first-line care for low back pain (LBP); however, these recommendations are not routinely delivered in practice. GLA:D® Back, developed in Denmark to assist clinicians to implement guideline recommendations, offers a structured education and supervised exercise program for people with LBP in addition to a clinical registry to evaluate patient outcomes. In this study we evaluated the feasibility of implementing the GLA:D® Back program in Australia. We considered clinician and patient recruitment and retention, program fidelity, exploring clinicians’ and patients’ experiences with the program, and participant outcome data collection.

Methods

Clinicians (chiropractors and physiotherapists) were recruited and participated in a 2-day GLA:D® Back training course. Patients were eligible to participate if they had persistent or recurrent LBP. Feasibility domains included the ability to: (1) recruit clinicians to undergo training; (2) recruit and retain patients in the program; (3) observe program fidelity; and (4) perceive barriers and facilitators for GLA:D® Back implementation. We also collected data related to: (5) clinician confidence, attitudes, and behaviour; and (6) patient self-reported outcomes related to pain, disability, and performance tests.

Results

Twenty clinicians (8 chiropractors, 12 physiotherapists) participated in the training, with 55% (11/20) offering GLA:D® Back to their patients. Fifty-seven patients were enrolled in the program, with 67% (38/57) attending the final follow-up assessment. Loss to follow up was mainly due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed program fidelity, with clinicians generally delivering the program as intended. Interviews revealed two clinician themes related to: (i) intervention acceptability; and (ii) barriers and facilitators to implementation. Patient interviews revealed themes related to: (i) intervention acceptability; and (ii) program efficacy. At 3 months follow-up, clinicians demonstrated high treatment confidence and biomedical orientation. Patient outcomes trended towards improvement.

Conclusion

GLA:D® Back implementation in Australia appears feasible based on clinician recruitment, program acceptability and potential benefits for patient outcomes from the small sample of participating clinicians and patients. However, COVID-19 impacted patient recruitment, retention, and data collection. To scale-up GLA:D® Back in private and public settings, further work is warranted to address associated barriers, and to leverage facilitators.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12998-022-00427-3.