What is usual care for low back pain? A systematic review of health care provided to patients with low back pain in family practice and emergency departments

What Gets Measured Gets Managed: A Scoping Review of Musculoskeletal Research Conducted Within Practice-Based Research Networks

ABSTRACT

Musculoskeletal conditions are often managed in primary care settings. To facilitate research and healthcare quality, practice-based research networks offer sustained collaborations between clinicians and researchers. A scoping review was conducted to describe characteristics of practice-based research networks used for musculoskeletal research and musculoskeletal research conducted through practice-based research networks. Practice-based research networks were identified from 1) musculoskeletal-studies identified in OVID Medline, CINAHL, and Embase databases from inception to 5 February 2023 and in ClinicalTrials.gov and 2) from practice-based research network registries and websites. Among active musculoskeletal-focused practice-based research networks (i.e., currently recruiting and conducting research), an assessment of practice-based research network research good practices was performed. After screening 3025 records, 85 studies from 46 unique practice-based research networks met our eligibility criteria. Common conditions studied were low back pain (28%), musculoskeletal conditions not otherwise specified (25%), and osteoarthritis (19%). Thirty-two practice-based research networks (70%) were deemed to be active. Among active musculoskeletal-focused practice-based research networks, best practice data management information was retrievable for most (53%). Because of the scarcity of publicly available information, a large proportion of practice-based research network research good practice items was not assessable. Practice-based research networks have provided an avenue to assess clinical practice and patient outcomes related to musculoskeletal conditions. Further work to increase the transparency of musculoskeletal practice-based research network research practices is warranted.

"I wish I knew then what I know now" - pain science education concepts important for female persistent pelvic pain: a reflexive thematic analysis

ABSTRACT

Pain science education (PSE) provides people with an understanding of "how pain works" grounded in the biopsychosocial model of pain; it has been demonstrated to improve outcomes in musculoskeletal pain conditions. Preliminary evidence suggests PSE may be effective for female individuals with persistent pelvic pain, but how the content of PSE needs to be modified for this group remains to be determined. A reflexive thematic analysis of qualitative data was performed to identify PSE concepts that female individuals with persistent pelvic pain consider important and why. Twenty individual, semistructured interviews were conducted with adult females who had engaged with PSE and had self-identified as having "improved" pelvic pain. Most participants had been diagnosed with endometriosis (n = 16). Four themes were generated capturing PSE concepts considered important by female individuals with "improved" pelvic pain: (1) "A sensitised nervous system leads to overprotective pain" validated their pelvic pain as being real; (2) "Pain does not have to mean the body is damaged (although sometimes it does)" provided reassurance that pelvic pain does not mean their condition is worsening; (3) "How I think, feel, and 'see' my pain can make it worse" enabled participants to find optimal ways to manage their pain; and (4) "I can change my pain… slowly" provided hope that pelvic pain can improve and empowered them to pursue pain improvement as a viable goal. This study generated 4 PSE learning concepts that were important to female individuals with improved pelvic pain and may be incorporated into PSE curricula for female individuals with pelvic pain.

Patient and Staff Insights on Digital Care Pathways for Patients With Low Back Pain in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Back pain is a huge global problem. For some people, the pain is so severe that they feel the need to present to an emergency department (ED). Our aim was to explore patient and staff perspectives for the development of a digital care pathway (DCP) for people with back pain who have presented to ED, including acceptability, barriers and facilitators.

METHODS

We used a descriptive phenomenology approach using semi-structured interviews with patient and staff participants at a tertiary hospital. Interviews were transcribed and data codes were developed using inductive thematic analysis. Themes were discussed between researchers until consensus was achieved.

RESULTS

A total of 16 interviews were carried out, half of which involved patient participants. We identified three major themes: (i) expectations and experiences of staff and patients with low back pain in ED; (ii) a digital care pathway can empower patients and support clinicians in providing care; and (iii) acceptability, barriers, facilitators and recommendations of engaging with a DCP to track the trajectory of back pain. Each theme was further categorised into subthemes.

CONCLUSION

Introducing a DCP was perceived as acceptable and beneficial by patients and staff. Both groups were aware of the potential participant burden if surveys were too long. Introducing a DCP could be a valuable adjunct to current management care models, providing a standardised source of education with the potential for individualised tracking and monitoring. The design and development of a DCP will need to consider reported facilitators and address perceived barriers for engagement.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This project sought insights from patients and staff about a digital care pathway. This forms the first step of patient and consumer consultation before implementing a digital care pathway. All consumers were offered the opportunity to review their responses and our interpretation.

Adherence to low back pain clinical guidelines in Australian hospital emergency departments: A public and private comparison

Managing LBP via clinical practice guidelines in healthcare settings is recommended, yet burgeoning evidence suggests adherence is suboptimal in emergency department settings. Whether adherence differs between public and private settings is unknown. A retrospective audit of two Australian emergency departments matched 86 private patients to 86 public patients by age ( ± 5 years), sex (male/female) and LBP duration (first time/history of LBP). Patient charts were reviewed according to the Australian clinical guidelines for the management of LBP. Guidelines were considered individually and via a collective guideline adherence score (GAS). Management GAS was lower in private patients compared to public patients (d [95 %CI]: -0.67 [-0.98, -0.36], P < 0.001). Public patients were more likely to have documentation of guideline-based advice (OR [95 %CI]: 4.4 [2.4, 8.4], P < 0.001) and less likely to be sent for imaging (OR [95 %CI]: 5.0 [2.6, 9.4], P < 0.001). Private patients were more likely to have documented screening for psychosocial risk factors (OR [95 %CI]: 21.8 [9.1, 52.1], P < 0.001) and more likely to receive guideline-based medication prescriptions at patient discharge (OR [95 %CI]: 2.2 [1.2, 4.2], P = 0.013). Differences exist in public and private hospital emergency department guideline adherence. Exploring barriers and facilitators underpinning these differences will assist in guiding future implementation science approaches.

An Artificial Intelligence-Based App for Self-Management of Low Back and Neck Pain in Specialist Care: Process Evaluation From a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Self-management is endorsed in clinical practice guidelines for the care of musculoskeletal pain. In a randomized clinical trial, we tested the effectiveness of an artificial intelligence-based self-management app (selfBACK) as an adjunct to usual care for patients with low back and neck pain referred to specialist care.

OBJECTIVE

This study is a process evaluation aiming to explore patients' engagement and experiences with the selfBACK app and specialist health care practitioners' views on adopting digital self-management tools in their clinical practice.

METHODS

App usage analytics in the first 12 weeks were used to explore patients' engagement with the SELFBACK app. Among the 99 patients allocated to the SELFBACK interventions, a purposive sample of 11 patients (aged 27-75 years, 8 female) was selected for semistructured individual interviews based on app usage. Two focus group interviews were conducted with specialist health care practitioners (n=9). Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Nearly one-third of patients never accessed the app, and one-third were low users. Three themes were identified from interviews with patients and health care practitioners: (1) overall impression of the app, where patients discussed the interface and content of the app, reported on usability issues, and described their app usage; (2) perceived value of the app, where patients and health care practitioners described the primary value of the app and its potential to supplement usual care; and (3) suggestions for future use, where patients and health care practitioners addressed aspects they believed would determine acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the app's uptake was relatively low, both patients and health care practitioners had a positive opinion about adopting an app-based self-management intervention for low back and neck pain as an add-on to usual care. Both described that the app could reassure patients by providing trustworthy information, thus empowering them to take actions on their own. Factors influencing app acceptance and engagement, such as content relevance, tailoring, trust, and usability properties, were identified.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04463043; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04463043.

Chiropractors' perceptions on the use of spinal radiographs in clinical practice: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Radiography is commonly used in the assessment of spinal disorders, despite a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating improved clinical outcomes or additional benefit to the patient. There is disagreement amongst chiropractors regarding the appropriate use of radiography for clinical management. This study aims to qualitatively explore chiropractors' perceptions on the use of spinal radiographs in clinical practice with respect to how they determine when to order radiographs; and how they use radiographs to inform clinical management.

METHODS

Online qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 Australian chiropractors who currently manage patients with spinal disorders. Convienence, snowball, and purposive sampling strategies were used to ensure an appropriate breadth and depth of participant characterisitcs and beliefs. Interview data were recorded, transcribed and analysed using framework analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were developed to describe how chiropractors determined when to order radiographs. These themes included specific findings from the clinical encounter that may inform clinical management, their perceptions of radiation risk, and the influence of clinical experience/intuition. Three themes and four subthemes were developed for how chiropractors use radiographs to inform their management. These themes explored the use of radiography for the application of chiropractic technique, as well as the role of radiographs in predicting patient prognosis, and as an educational tool to provide reassurance.

CONCLUSION

Australian chiropractors' decision-making around spinal radiography is diverse and can be influenced by a number of clinical and external factors. Previously unexplored uses of spinal radiography in clinical practice were highlighted. Some chiropractors reported potential benefits of radiography that are currently not supported by research evidence. Future research should address how radiographic findings are reported to patients with spinal disorders and how this could be optimised to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of Prescription Medicines on Work-Related Outcomes in Workers with Musculoskeletal Disorders or Injuries: A Systematic Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Medicines are often prescribed to workers with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and injuries to relieve pain and facilitate their recovery and return to work. However, there is a growing concern that prescription medicines may have adverse effects on work function. This scoping review aimed to summarize the existing empirical evidence on prescription medicine use by workers with MSD or injury and its relationship with work-related outcomes.

METHODS

We identified studies through structured searching of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane library databases, and via searching of dissertations, theses, and grey literature databases. Studies that examined the association between prescription medicine and work-related outcomes in working age people with injury or MSDs, and were published in English after the year 2000 were eligible.

RESULTS

From the 4884 records identified, 65 studies were included for review. Back disorders and opioids were the most commonly studied musculoskeletal conditions and prescription medicines, respectively. Most studies showed a negative relationship between prescription medicines and work outcomes. Opioids, psychotropics and their combination were the most common medicines associated with adverse work outcomes. Opioid prescriptions with early initiation, long-term use, strong and/or high dose and extended pre- and post-operative use in workers' compensation setting were consistently associated with adverse work function. We found emerging but inconsistent evidence that skeletal muscle relaxants and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were associated with unfavorable work outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Opioids and other prescription medicines might be associated with adverse work outcomes. However, the evidence is conflicting and there were relatively fewer studies on non-opioid medicines. Further studies with more robust design are required to enable more definitive exploration of causal relationships and settle inconsistent evidence.

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.

'Specialist before physiotherapist': physicians' and physiotherapists' beliefs and management of chronic low back pain in Ghana - A qualitative study

PURPOSE

This study provides an understanding of the chronic low back pain (CLBP) beliefs and management practices of physicians/doctors and physiotherapists in Ghana, and the mechanisms underlying their beliefs and practices.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Thirty-three individual semi-structured interviews, involving eighteen physio-therapists and fifteen physicians involved with CLBP management, were carried out. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analysed using Straussian grounded theory principles and critical realist philosophy.

RESULTS

Five categories were derived: The predominance of bio-medical/mechanical beliefs, maladaptive beliefs, maladaptive practices, limited involvement of physiotherapists and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) and evidence-based beliefs and practices. The predominant mechanisms underlying the HCPs beliefs and practices were: the healthcare environment (professional roles/identity hinged around paternalistic and biomedical care, fragmented CLBP management, limited physiotherapy/HCPs' knowledge) and sociocultural environment (sociocultural/patients' expectations of passive therapy and paternalism).

CONCLUSION

The CLBP beliefs and practices of HCPs involved with CLBP in Ghana is modelled around a professional identity that is largely hinged on paternalism and bio-medical/mechanical understandings. Lack of collaboration and sociocultural expectations also play a significant role. There is the need for a reconstitution of Ghanaian HCPs' CLBP beliefs and management approaches to align with evidenced-based approaches (e.g., imaging should not be universally prescribed, biopsychosocial and patient-centred 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.

Chiropractic spinal manipulation and likelihood of tramadol prescription in adults with radicular low back pain: a retrospective cohort study using US data

OBJECTIVES

Patients receiving chiropractic spinal manipulation (CSM) for low back pain (LBP) are less likely to receive any opioid prescription for subsequent pain management. However, the likelihood of specifically being prescribed tramadol, a less potent opioid, has not been explored. We hypothesised that adults receiving CSM for newly diagnosed radicular LBP would be less likely to receive a tramadol prescription over 1-year follow-up, compared with those receiving usual medical care.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

US medical records-based dataset including >115 million patients attending academic health centres (TriNetX, Inc), queried 9 November 2023.

PARTICIPANTS

Opioid-naive adults aged 18-50 with a new diagnosis of radicular LBP were included. Patients with serious pathology and tramadol use contraindications were excluded. Variables associated with tramadol prescription were controlled via propensity matching.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were divided into two cohorts dependent on treatment received on the index date of radicular LBP diagnosis (CSM or usual medical care).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Risk ratio (RR) for tramadol prescription (primary); markers of usual medical care utilisation (secondary).

RESULTS

After propensity matching, there were 1171 patients per cohort (mean age 35 years). Tramadol prescription was significantly lower in the CSM cohort compared with the usual medical care cohort, with an RR (95% CI) of 0.32 (0.18 to 0.57; p<0.0001). A cumulative incidence graph demonstrated that the reduced incidence of tramadol prescription in the CSM cohort relative to the usual medical care cohort was maintained throughout 1-year follow-up. Utilisation of NSAIDs, physical therapy evaluation and lumbar imaging was similar between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that US adults initially receiving CSM for radicular LBP had a reduced likelihood of receiving a tramadol prescription over 1-year follow-up. These findings should be corroborated by a prospective study to minimise residual confounding.

Telehealth delivery of physical therapist-led interventions for persons with chronic low back pain in underserved communities: lessons from pragmatic clinical trials

In this perspective, we present our experience developing and conducting two pragmatic clinical trials investigating physical therapist-led telehealth strategies for persons with chronic low back pain. Both trials, the BeatPain Utah and AIM-Back trials, are part of pragmatic clinical trial collaboratories and are being conducted with persons from communities that experience pain management disparities. Practice guidelines recommend nonpharmacologic care, and advise against opioid therapy, for the primary care management of persons with chronic low back pain. Gaps between these recommendations and actual practice patterns are pervasive, particularly for persons from racial or ethnic minoritized communities, those with fewer economic resources, and those living in rural areas including Veterans. Access barriers to evidence-based nonpharmacologic care, which is often provided by physical therapists, have contributed to these evidence-practice gaps. Telehealth delivery has created new opportunities to overcome access barriers for nonpharmacologic pain care. As a relatively new delivery mode however, telehealth delivery of physical therapy comes with additional challenges related to technology, intervention adaptations and cultural competence. The purpose of this article is to describe the challenges encountered when implementing telehealth physical therapy programs for persons with chronic low back pain in historically underserved communities. We also discuss strategies developed to overcome barriers in an effort to improve access to telehealth physical therapy and reduce pain management disparities. Inclusion of diverse and under-represented communities in pragmatic clinical trials is a critical consideration for improving disparities, but the unique circumstances present in these communities must be considered when developing implementation strategies.

Trends in Chiropractic Care and Physical Rehabilitation Use Among Adults with Low Back Pain in the United States, 2002 to 2018

BACKGROUND

While nonpharmacologic treatments are increasingly endorsed as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP) in clinical practice guidelines, it is unclear if use of these treatments is increasing or equitable.

OBJECTIVE

Examine national trends in chiropractic care and physical rehabilitation (occupational/physical therapy (OT/PT)) use among adults with LBP.

DESIGN/SETTING

Serial cross-sectional analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2002 to 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

146,087 adults reporting LBP in prior 3 months.

METHODS

We evaluated the association of survey year with chiropractic care or OT/PT use in prior 12 months. Logistic regression with multilevel linear splines was used to determine if chiropractic care or OT/PT use increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines. We also examined trends in use by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. When trends were similar over time, we present differences by these demographic characteristics as unadjusted ORs using data from all respondents.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2018, less than one-third of adults with LBP reported use of either chiropractic care or OT/PT. Rates did not change until 2016 when uptake increased with the introduction of clinical guidelines (2016-2018 vs 2002-2015, OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.10-1.19). Trends did not differ significantly by sex, race, or ethnicity (p for interactions > 0.05). Racial and ethnic disparities in chiropractic care or OT/PT use were identified and persisted over time. For example, compared to non-Hispanic adults, either chiropractic care or OT/PT use was lower among Hispanic adults (combined OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.65-0.73). By contrast, compared to White adults, Black adults had similar OT/PT use (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.94-1.03) but lower for chiropractic care use (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.47-0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Although use of chiropractic care or OT/PT for LBP increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines in 2016, only about a third of US adults with LBP reported using these services between 2016 and 2018 and disparities in use have not improved.

Beneficial and harmful effects of physical activity on care-seeking for low back pain: the AUTBACK study

PURPOSE

People who seek more care for low back pain (LBP) tend to experience poorer recovery (e.g. higher pain and disability levels). Understanding the factors associated with care-seeking for LBP might improve patient outcomes and potentially alleviate the burden of LBP on global health systems. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between different intensities, volumes, and domains of physical activity and care-seeking behaviours, in people with a history of LBP.

METHODS

Longitudinal data from adult twins were drawn from the AUstralian Twin BACK study. The primary outcome was the total self-reported frequency (counts) of overall utilisation of care for LBP, over 1 year. Secondary outcomes were the utilisation of health services, and the utilisation of self-management strategies, for LBP (assessed as total frequency over 1 year). Explanatory variables were device-based measures of sedentary behaviour and moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity, and self-reported physical workload, and work, transport, household, and leisure domain physical activity, at baseline.

RESULTS

Data from 340 individuals were included. Median age was 56.4 years (IQR 44.9-62.3 years) and 73% of participants were female. Medium-to-high baseline volumes of sedentary behaviour were significantly associated with greater counts of overall care utilisation (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.04-2.44) and utilisation of self-management strategies (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.02-2.50) for LBP, over 1 year. Medium-to-high baseline volumes of household domain physical activity were significantly associated with greater counts of utilising self-management strategies for LBP over 1 year (IRR 1.62, 95%CI 1.04-2.53). No explanatory variables were associated with the utilisation of health services for LBP.

CONCLUSION

People who engage in higher baseline volumes of sedentary behaviour or physical activity in the household setting (e.g. housework, gardening, yard work, general household maintenance) utilise 1.6 times more care for LBP over 1 year. Findings suggest that higher volumes of these behaviours may be harmful for LBP. No intensities, volumes, or domains of physical activity demonstrated clear benefits for LBP. Where feasible, patients and clinicians should collaborate to screen and develop strategies to reduce engagement in sedentary behaviour or physical activity in the household setting. Contextual factors (e.g. patient symptom severity, sociocultural roles, occupational demands) should be considered when devising appropriate behaviour change strategies.

Irish general practitioner (GP) perspectives on impact of direct access radiology on patient care in the community: results from a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Since winter 2020/21, general practitioners (GPs) in the Republic of Ireland (RoI) have been granted access to diagnostic imaging studies on a new publicly funded pathway, expediting access to services previously obtained via hospital-based doctors.

AIMS

Outline GP perspectives on imaging studies obtained via the new "GP Access to Community Diagnostics" initiative.

METHODS

A mixed-methods design was employed. Referrals over the first six months of 2019 and 2021 were collated by a private imaging provider, and a randomly selected subset of 2021 studies (maximum 30 referrals per GP) was returned to participating GPs to provide detail on the impact on each patient's care. In-depth qualitative interviews were also conducted with participating GPs.

RESULTS

Eleven GPs supplied detailed information on 81 studies organized through the new initiative. GPs reported that the initiative had led to a large proportion of cases being managed solely in general practice, with an 81% reduction in referrals to acute hospital settings and a 58% reduction in referrals to secondary care clinics. GPs felt imaging studies improved patient care in 86% of cases and increased GP workload in 58% of cases. GP qualitative interviews revealed four key themes: improved patient care, increased GP workload, reduction in hospital referrals, and opinions on ongoing management of such initiatives, including guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs felt enhancing access to diagnostics improved patient care by expediting diagnosis, decision-making, and treatment and by reducing hospital referrals. GPs were generally positive about the initiative and made some suggestions on future management of the initiative.

Notochordal cells: A potential therapeutic option for intervertebral disc degeneration

Intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) is a prevalent musculoskeletal degenerative disorder worldwide, and ~40% of chronic low back pain cases are associated with IDD. Although the pathogenesis of IDD remains unclear, the reduction in nucleus pulposus cells (NPCs) and degradation of the extracellular matrix (ECM) are critical factors contributing to IDD. Notochordal cells (NCs), derived from the notochord, which rapidly degrades after birth and is eventually replaced by NPCs, play a crucial role in maintaining ECM homeostasis and preventing NPCs apoptosis. Current treatments for IDD only provide symptomatic relief, while lacking the ability to inhibit or reverse its progression. However, NCs and their secretions possess anti-inflammatory properties and promote NPCs proliferation, leading to ECM formation. Therefore, in recent years, NCs therapy targeting the underlying cause of IDD has emerged as a novel treatment strategy. This article provides a comprehensive review of the latest research progress on NCs for IDD, covering their biological characteristics, specific markers, possible mechanisms involved in IDD and therapeutic effects. It also highlights significant future directions in this field to facilitate further exploration of the pathogenesis of IDD and the development of new therapies based on NCs strategies.

Appropriateness of specialized care referrals for LBP: a cross-sectional analysis

Background

Low back pain (LBP) accounts for a significant proportion of primary care visits. Despite the development of evidence-based guidelines, studies point to the inefficient use of healthcare resources, resulting in over 60.0% of patients with LBP being referred to spine surgeons without any surgical indication. Centralized waiting lists (CWLs) have been implemented to improve access to specialized care by managing asymmetry between supply and demands. To date, no study has provided data on patients' clinical profiles and referral patterns to medical specialists for LBP in the context of a publicly funded healthcare system operating a prioritization model. The objective of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of specialized care referrals for LBP after the implementation of a CWL.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 500 randomly selected electronic health records of patients who attended the outpatient neurosurgery clinic of the administrative Mauricie-et-Centre-du-Québec region was performed. Inclusion criteria were neurosurgery consultation referrals for adults ≥18 years suffering from a primary complaint of LBP, and performed between September 1st, 2018, and September 1st, 2021. Data relevant for drawing a comprehensive portrait of patients referred to the neurosurgery service and for judging referrals appropriateness were manually extracted.

Results

Of the 500 cases analyzed, only 112 (22.4%) were surgical candidates, while 221 (44.2%) were discharge from the neurosurgery service upon initial assessment. Key information was inconsistently documented in medical files, thus preventing the establishment of a comprehensive portrait of patients referred to the neurosurgery service for LBP. Nevertheless, over 80.0% of referrals made during the study period were deemed inappropriate. Inappropriate referrals were characterized by higher proportion of patients symptomatically improved, presenting a back-dominant chief complaint, exhibiting no objective neurological symptoms, and diagnosed with non-specific LBP.

Conclusion

This study reveals a significant proportion of inappropriate referrals to specialized care for LBP. Further research is needed to better understand the factors that prompt referrals to medical specialists for LBP, and the criteria considered by neurosurgeons when selecting the appropriate management strategy. Recent studies suggest that triaging approaches led by musculoskeletal experts may improve referral appropriateness to specialized care.

Opioid Therapy and Implications for Oxidative Balance: A Clinical Study of Total Oxidative Capacity (TOC) and Total Antioxidative Capacity (TAC)

BACKGROUND

Opioids are used in pharmacotherapy for chronic pain. The phenomenon of their influence on the oxidative-antioxidant balance is poorly understood. Additionally, little is known about the oxidative status in patients receiving chronic opioid noncancer pain therapy.

METHODS

The primary goal was to explore oxidative status using the total oxidative capacity (TOC) and total antioxidative capacity (TAC) in patients with chronic lower back pain (LBP) treated with opioids. The secondary task was to present the risk factors connected with the duration of therapy or anthropometric parameters. Plasma TOC and TAC were analyzed in the study group (n = 28), i.e., patients with chronic LBP treated with opioids, and in the control group (n = 11), i.e., healthy volunteers.

RESULTS

The TAC was significantly lower in the study group compared to the control group (p < 0.05), while the TOC did not differ significantly. A statistically lower TOC for buprenorphine compared to oxycodone (p = 0.019) and tramadol (p = 0.036) was observed. The TOC did not differ between tramadol and oxycodone. The highest TAC was described for oxycodone, while the TAC for buprenorphine and tramadol was significantly lower in comparison with oxycodone (p = 0.007 and p = 0.016). The TOC/TAC ratio was higher in patients with nicotinism in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving chronic opioid therapy presented a lower antioxidative capacity. There were differences in opioid-induced oxidative imbalance, which is very important clinically. Nicotinism increases the oxidative-antioxidative imbalance. The least oxidative capacity was associated with buprenorphine, while oxycodone showed the greatest antioxidant activity. The most favorable TOC/TAC ratio was observed for buprenorphine. It is suggested that buprenorphine or oxycodone has the best profile, and there is no correlation with the duration of opioid therapy or the opioid dose. However, all opioid substances can potentially enhance the oxidative-antioxidative status.

Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Physiotherapy Intervention Compared With Face-to-Face Physiotherapy in Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Nonspecific low back pain (LBP) is a leading contributor to disability worldwide, and its socioeconomic burden is substantial. Self-management support is an important recommendation in clinical guidelines for the physiotherapy treatment of patients with LBP and may support cost-effective management. However, providing adequate individually tailored self-management support is difficult. The integration of web-based applications into face-to-face care (ie, blended care) seems promising to optimize tailored treatment and enhance patients' self-management and, consequently, may reduce LBP-related costs.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stratified blended physiotherapy (e-Exercise LBP) compared with face-to-face physiotherapy in patients with nonspecific LBP.

METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a prospective, multicenter, cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care physiotherapy. Patients with nonspecific LBP were treated with either stratified blended physiotherapy (e-Exercise LBP) (n=104) or face-to-face physiotherapy (n=104). The content of both interventions was based on the Dutch physiotherapy guidelines for nonspecific LBP. Blended physiotherapy was stratified according to the patients' risk of developing persistent LBP using the STarT Back Screening Tool. The primary clinical outcome was physical functioning (Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1a). For the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs; EQ-5D-5L) and physical functioning were the primary outcomes. Secondary clinical outcomes included fear avoidance beliefs and self-reported adherence. Costs were measured from societal and health care perspectives using self-report questionnaires. Effectiveness was estimated using linear mixed models. Seemingly unrelated regression analyses were conducted to estimate total cost and effect differences for the economic evaluation.

RESULTS

Neither clinically relevant nor statistically substantial differences were found between stratified blended physiotherapy and face-to-face physiotherapy regarding physical functioning (mean difference [MD] -1.1, 95% CI -3.9 to 1.7) and QALYs (MD 0.026, 95% CI -0.020 to 0.072) over 12 months. Regarding the secondary outcomes, fear avoidance beliefs showed a statistically significant improvement in favor of stratified blended physiotherapy (MD -4.3, 95% CI -7.3 to -1.3). Societal and health care costs were higher for stratified blended physiotherapy than for face-to-face physiotherapy, but the differences were not statistically significant (societal: €972 [US $1027], 95% CI -€1090 to €3264 [US -$1151 to $3448]; health care: €73 [US $77], 95% CI -€59 to €225 [US -$62 to $238]). Among the disaggregated cost categories, only unpaid productivity costs were significantly higher for stratified blended physiotherapy. From both perspectives, a considerable amount of money must be paid per additional QALY or 1-point improvement in physical functioning to reach a relatively low to moderate probability (ie, 0.23-0.81) of stratified blended physiotherapy being cost-effective compared with face-to-face physiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The stratified blended physiotherapy intervention e-Exercise LBP is neither more effective for improving physical functioning nor more cost-effective from societal or health care perspectives compared with face-to-face physiotherapy for patients with nonspecific LBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 94074203; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN94074203.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1186/s12891-020-3174-z.

Efficacy of mHealth Interventions for Improving the Pain and Disability of Individuals With Chronic Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Low back pain is one of the main causes of disability worldwide. Individuals with chronic conditions have been widely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, mobile health (mHealth) has become popular, mostly due to the widespread use of smartphones. Despite the considerable number of apps for low back pain available in app stores, the effectiveness of these technologies is not established, and there is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of the isolated use of mobile apps in the self-management of low back pain.

Objective

We summarized the evidence on the effectiveness of mHealth interventions on pain and disability for individuals with chronic low back pain.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing mHealth to usual care or no intervention. The search terms used were related to low back pain and mHealth. Only randomized controlled trials were included. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability, and the secondary outcome was quality of life. Searches were carried out in the following databases, without date or language restriction: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), the Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey, in addition to article references. The risk of bias was analyzed using the PEDro scale. Data were summarized descriptively and through meta-analysis (pain intensity and disability). In the meta-analysis, eligible studies were combined while considering clinical and methodological homogeneity. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) criteria.

Results

A total of 5 randomized controlled trials were included, totaling 894 participants (447 allocated to the mHealth group and 445 to the usual care group), and they had similar methodological structure and interventions. Follow-up ranged from 6 weeks to 12 months. The studies did not demonstrate significant differences for pain intensity (mean difference -0.86, 95% CI -2.29 to 0.58; P=.15) and disability (standardized mean difference -0.24, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.20; P=.14) when comparing mHealth and usual care. All studies showed biases, with emphasis on nonconcealed allocation and nonblinding of the outcome evaluator. The certainty of evidence was rated as low for the analyzed outcomes.

Conclusions

mHealth alone was no more effective than usual care or no treatment in improving pain intensity and disability in individuals with low back pain. Due to the biases found and the low certainty of evidence, the evidence remains inconclusive, and future quality clinical trials are needed.

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.

Ultrasound guided lumbar erector spinae block: A case series on a novel technique for the treatment of acute low Back pain

Low back pain is among one of the most common presentations to the emergency department (ED). Regional anesthesia has recently gained traction as an option for analgesia in ED patients, especially in the wake of the opioid epidemic. Data on lumbar application of the ESPB in the setting of acute, refractory low back pain in the ED is scarce. We describe a series of three cases of patients who presented to the ED with severe low back pain refractory to traditional therapy, successfully treated using lumbar ESPB. Lumbar ESPB may be an effective approach to achieving rapid analgesia in patients who present with low back pain who may otherwise be poor candidates for more traditional therapy, such as with opioids or NSAIDs, or who may have refractory pain despite use of these medications.

Guideline adherence and socioeconomic factors in Danish patients referred to secondary care for low back pain: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

The pre-referral history of patients with low back pain referred to secondary care is poorly documented, and it is unclear whether it complies with clinical guideline recommendations; specifically, whether they have received appropriate treatment in primary care. This study describes the patient population referred to a spine clinic at a Danish hospital and investigates whether they have received an adequate course of treatment in primary care before referral. Furthermore, a possible association between primary care treatment and socioeconomic factors is estimated.

METHODS

We examined self-reported data from 1035 patients with low back pain of at least eight weeks duration referred to secondary care at a medical spine clinic using a cross-sectional design. As an approximation to national clinical guidelines, the definition of an adequate course of treatment in primary care was at least five visits to a physiotherapist or chiropractor prior to referral.

RESULTS

Patients were on average 53 years old, and 56% were women. The average Oswestry Disability Index score was 36, indicating a moderate level of disability. Nearly half of the patients reported pain for over a year, and 75% reported pain below knee level. Prior to referral, 33% of the patients had not received an adequate course of treatment in primary care. Based on multiple logistic regression with the three socioeconomic variables, age and sex in the model, those who were unemployed had an odds ratio of 2.35 (1.15-4.79) for not receiving appropriate treatment compared to employed patients. Similarly, the odds ratio for patients without vs. with health insurance was 1.71 (1.17-2.50). No significant association was observed with length of education.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite national clinical guidelines recommending management for low back pain in primary care, one third of the patients had not received an adequate course of treatment before referral to secondary care. Moreover, the high probability of not having received recommended treatment for patients who were unemployed or lacked health insurance indicates an economic obstacle to adequate care. Therefore, reconsidering the compensation structure for the treatment of back pain patients is imperative to mitigate health inequality within low back pain management.

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

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

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.

Combination of health care service use and the relation to demographic and socioeconomic factors for patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a descriptive cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) access health care in different ways. Despite the high prevalence and significant costs, we know little about the different ways patients use health care. We aim to fill this gap by identifying which combinations of health care services patients use for new MSDs, and its relation to clinical characteristics, demographic and socioeconomic factors, long-term use and costs, and discuss what the implications of this variation are.

METHODS

The study combines Norwegian registers on health care use, diagnoses, comorbidities, demographic and socioeconomic factors. Patients (≥ 18 years) are included by their first health consultation for MSD in 2013-2015. Latent class analysis (LCA) with count data of first year consultations for General Practitioners (GPs), hospital consultants, physiotherapists and chiropractors are used to identify combinations of health care use. Long-term high-cost patients are defined as total cost year 1-5 above 95th percentile (≥ 3 744€).

RESULTS

We identified seven latent classes: 1: GP, low use; 2: GP, high use; 3: GP and hospital; 4: GP and physiotherapy, low use; 5: GP, hospital and physiotherapy, high use; 6: Chiropractor, low use; 7: GP and chiropractor, high use. Median first year health care contacts varied between classes from 1-30 and costs from 20€-838€. Eighty-seven percent belonged to class 1, 4 or 6, characterised by few consultations and treatment in primary care. Classes with high first year use were characterised by higher age, lower education and more comorbidities and were overrepresented among the long-term high-cost users.

CONCLUSION

There was a large variation in first year health care service use, and we identified seven latent classes based on frequency of consultations. A small proportion of patients accounted for a high proportion of total resource use. This can indicate the potential for more efficient resource use. However, the effect of demographic and socioeconomic variables for determining combinations of service use can be interpreted as the health care system transforming unobserved patient needs into variations in use. These findings contribute to the understanding of clinical pathways and can help in the planning of future care, reduction in disparities and improvement in health outcomes for patients with MSDs.

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.

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

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

Ultrasound-Guided Trigger Point Injections for the Treatment of Neck and Back Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES

Patients frequently present to the emergency department (ED) with neck or back pain, which can be difficult to treat. We sought to compare ultrasound-guided trigger point injection (TPI) to standard medications for patients with neck or back pain.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, open label, randomized controlled trial on ED patients with neck or back pain from myofascial pain syndrome comparing ultrasound-guided TPIs to those who received the combination of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and a muscle relaxant (MR). The primary outcome of this study was the reduction in mean pain score at the time of ED disposition.

RESULTS

In total, we analyzed 196 patients. At the time of ED disposition, patients in the TPI group had a mean reduction in their pain scores of 45.0 mm as compared to 49.9 mm in the NSAID plus MR group (difference: 4.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.0 to 12.7], P = .22). At the first reassessment, patients in the TPI group had greater pain reduction by 10.7 mm (95% CI 3.1 to 18.4). The rate of rescue therapy use was higher in the NSAID plus MR group (difference: 17.5% [95% CI 4.4 to 36.2]).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference in pain reduction at the time of ED disposition between patients randomized to the ultrasound-guided TPI group as compared to those who received an NSAID plus a MR. However, patients in the TPI group had greater pain reduction at the time of first reassessment and lower rates of rescue therapy use.

The Mediation Effect of Pain on the Relationship between Kinesiophobia and Lumbar Joint Position Sense in Chronic Low Back Pain Individuals: A Cross-Sectional Study

(1) Background: Fear of movement (kinesiophobia) and impaired lumbar joint position sense (LJPS) play a vital role in developing and maintaining non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, how kinesiophobia impacts LJPS is still being determined. The aims of this study are to (1) assess the correlation between kinesiophobia and LJPS in individuals with chronic low back pain; (2) compare LJPS between individuals with CLBP and those who are asymptomatic; and (3) evaluate if pain can mediate the relationship between kinesiophobia and LJPS in CLBP individuals. (2) Methods: Eighty-three individuals (mean age = 48.9 ± 7.5 years) with a diagnosis of CLBP and 95 asymptomatic individuals (mean age = 49.4 ± 7.0 years) were recruited into this cross-sectional study. Fear of movement in CLBP individuals was assessed using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK). LJPS was determined using the active target repositioning technique using a dual-digital inclinometer. LJPS was evaluated in lumbar flexion, extension, and side-bending left and right directions, and the repositioning accuracy was determined in degrees using a dual digital inclinometer. (3) Results: Kinesiophobia showed a significant (p < 0.001) moderate positive correlation with LJPS (flexion: r = 0.51, extension: r = 0.41, side-bending left: r = 0.37 and side-bending right: r = 0.34). LJPS errors were larger in CLBP individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals (p < 0.05). Mediation analyses showed that pain significantly mediated the relationship between kinesiophobia and LJPS (p < 0.05) in CLBP individuals. (4) Conclusions: Kinesiophobia and LJPS were positively associated. LJPS is impaired in CLBP individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals. Pain may mediate adverse effects on LJPS. These factors must be taken into account when assessing and developing treatment plans for those with CLBP.

Redesigning care for back pain in an Australian hospital setting: A service evaluation to identify need for change

OBJECTIVE

This needs assessment study examined current processes of physiotherapy care for adults with back pain in a large teaching hospital serving a multicultural community in Sydney, Australia. Evaluation of current practices is a necessary first step in the design of a patient-centred, multidisciplinary service that promotes best practice in back pain management.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective service evaluation in the physiotherapy outpatient department by reviewing clinical data on episode of care and processes of care for adults managed for back pain over a 6-month period using a defined protocol (n = 252).

RESULTS

Patients (median age = 56 years; 72.2% born outside of Australia) were referred from various internal and external sources, with 79.8% having chronic back pain. The median length of episode of care was 8 weeks. Active interventions were almost universally used (98.4% of records). Key aspects of assessment were frequently recorded (84.5%-98% of records), but psychosocial risk assessment was not routinely recorded. Aspects of longitudinal management planning, including goal setting, outcome measurement, and routine follow-up, were also not routinely recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that physiotherapy processes of care in this setting followed key messages of best practice particularly with regard to interventions, in contrast to other settings and jurisdictions. However, the brief episodes of care and less evident focus on psychosocial aspects might not align with the needs of the majority with chronic back pain. These findings suggest the need to reframe processes of care with a biopsychosocial approach and structure episodes of care towards long-term management solutions.

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.

Ultrasound guided transgluteal sciatic nerve hydrodissection for the treatment of acute sciatica in the emergency department

Radicular pain due to sciatica is a common occurrence with a lifetime incidence of up to 40%. Typical approaches to treatment vary and may include topical and oral analgesics, such as opioids, acetaminophen, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); however, these medications may be contraindicated in some or result in untoward effects in others. The use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia is an important component of multimodal analgesia in the emergency department. Transgluteal sciatic nerve block has been described as an effective method to treat patients with sciatica but carries risk of injury and falls due to its resultant loss of motor function and potential for systemic toxicity when higher volumes are used. Ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve hydrodissection with D5W has been shown to be an effective treatment of various compressive neuropathies in the outpatient setting. Here we present 4 cases of patients who presented to the emergency department with severe acute sciatica and were treated successfully using an ultrasound guided transgluteal sciatic nerve hydrodissection (TSNH). This technique may offer a safe and effective approach to treating patients with sciatica, but more studies are needed to assess its utility on a larger scale.

A novel Home Exercise Assessment Tool (HEAT) to assess recall and performance: A reliability study

BACKGROUND

A reliable and valid tool to measure short-term recall does not exist.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was o assess the reliability of a novel tool designed to evaluate the immediate recall and performance of prescribed exercises. This reliability study was secondary from a parent randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Patients ages 18 to 65 with low back or unilateral knee pain longer than 6 weeks, reporting to a primary care or physical therapy clinic at one large military hospital. Participants were randomized into one of four groups based on number of exercises and type of instruction. The Home Exercise Assessment Tool (HEAT) is scored along an ordinal scale, (zero = low; three = high performance), with 2+ equal to meeting the intent of the exercise. Reliability of testing was assessed using a pool of four raters.

RESULTS

The interrater reliability of the HEAT performed on 30 participants (9 females, and 21males, mean age 36.7 (SD = 11.7)) and eight participants during pilot testing demonstrated moderate to good reliability (ICC = 0.66-0.77). Intrarater reliability during pilot testing was excellent (ICC = 0.93-0.96).

CONCLUSION

The HEAT demonstrated moderate to good interrater and excellent intrarater reliability. This tool is unique in that it assesses both recall and adherence, and merits further testing in other settings.

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.

Management of patients with low back pain admitted to hospital: An observational study of usual care

BACKGROUND

Knowledge gaps exist around diagnostic and treatment approaches for patients admitted to hospital with low back pain.

METHODS

Medical record review of patients admitted to three Sydney teaching hospitals with a provisional emergency department diagnosis of non-serious low back pain, from 2016 to 2020. Data on demographic variables, hospital costs, length of stay (LOS), diagnostic imaging and analgesic administration were extracted. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of longer hospital stay, advanced imaging, and concomitant use of sedating medicines.

RESULTS

Median inpatient LOS for non-specific low back pain was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR] 2-7), and for radicular low back pain was 4 days (IQR 3-10). Older patients with non-serious low back pain were more likely to stay longer, as were arrivals by ambulance. Plain lumbar radiography was used in 8.3% of admissions, whereas 37.6% of patients received advanced lumbar imaging (computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging). Opioids were administered in ~80% of admissions; 49% of patients with radicular low back pain were given an antiepileptic in addition to an opioid. In all, 18.4% of admissions resulted in at least one hospital-acquired complication, such as an accidental fall (3.1%) or a medication-related adverse effect (13.3%). Physiotherapists saw 82.6% of low back pain admissions. Costs of inpatient care were estimated at a mean of AU$ 14 000 per admission.

CONCLUSIONS

We noted relatively high rates of concomitant use of sedating pain medicines and referrals for advanced lumbar imaging and laboratory tests. Strategies to address these issues in inpatient care of low back pain are needed.

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.

Prevalence of spinal pain in a population of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Objectives

To determine the prevalence and risk factors of spinal pain in the population of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH).

Methods

This was a cross-sectional survey conducted online in November/December 2018. Participants were inhabitants of BiH of both sexes, aged ≥ 16 years. The sample was stratified based on region and demographic characteristics. Current pain was analyzed; point prevalence was measured.

Results

We received 1048 responses, of which data from 1017 could be used. The prevalence of spinal pain in BiH was 70.9%: 75.5% in women (n = 440) and 64.7% in men (n = 281). Low back pain (LBP) was more common compared to neck pain (NP) and thoracic pain (TP) in both sexes and all age groups. Significant associations with spinal pain in the bivariate analysis were found for the following groups: women, aged from 30 to 50 years, with high school education, employed persons and retirees, spinal pain in parents, smoking, irregular physical activity, longer use of TV or computer/mobile phone per day.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first study of the prevalence of spinal pain in BiH. Some factors associated with spinal pain are modifiable. Therefore, public health interventions should target those factors to reduce the burden of spinal pain in BiH.

BeatPain Utah: study protocol for a pragmatic randomised trial examining telehealth strategies to provide non-pharmacologic pain care for persons with chronic low back pain receiving care in federally qualified health centers

INTRODUCTION

Although evidence-based guidelines recommend non-pharmacologic treatments as first-line care for chronic low back pain (LBP), uptake has been limited, particularly in rural, low-income and ethnically diverse communities. The BeatPain study will evaluate the implementation and compare the effectiveness of two strategies to provide non-pharmacologic treatment for chronic LBP. The study will use telehealth to overcome access barriers for persons receiving care in federally qualified health centres (FQHCs) in the state of Utah.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

BeatPain Utah is a pragmatic randomised clinical trial with a hybrid type I design investigating different strategies to provide non-pharmacologic care for adults with chronic LBP seen in Utah FQHCs. The intervention strategies include a brief pain consult (BPC) and telehealth physical therapy (PT) component provided using either an adaptive or sequenced delivery strategy across two 12-week treatment phases. Interventions are provided via telehealth by centrally located physical therapists. The sequenced delivery strategy provides the BPC, followed by telehealth PT in the first 12 weeks for all patients. The adaptive strategy uses a stepped care approach and provides the BPC in the first 12 weeks and telehealth PT to patients who are non-responders to the BPC component. We will recruit 500 English-speaking or Spanish-speaking participants who will be individually randomised with 1:1 allocation. The primary outcome is the Pain, Enjoyment and General Activity measure of pain impact with secondary outcomes including the additional pain assessment domains specified by the National Institutes (NIH) of Health Helping to End Addiction Long Initiative and implementation measures. Analyses of primary and secondary measures of effectiveness will be performed under longitudinal mixed effect models across assessments at baseline, and at 12, 26 and 52 weeks follow-ups.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for the study was obtained from the University of Utah Institutional Review Board. On completion, study data will be made available in compliance with NIH data sharing policies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04923334.

Primary Investigation of Low Back Pain among Saudi Arabians: A Cross-Sectional Study

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent disease that affects all ages and is a symptom that induces immobility. Patients' beliefs may influence LBP management, and adjusting detrimental beliefs is required to improve treatment outcomes. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of LBP within the Saudi population and beliefs regarding LBP, physical activity, rest, imaging, and medication. People with LBP were targeted with a questionnaire containing sections on demographic information and the validated Back Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ), in addition to questions regarding imaging, physical activity, rest and medication. A total of 651 responses were received, 559 of them (86%) experienced LBP. The most common age group was those aged 18-21 (n = 221), 80% from females. The average BBQ score was 27.8 (SD = 5.58). The majority of the respondents held the following beliefs, which are contrary to the best available evidence: back pain must be rested (77.1%) and X-rays or scans are required to gain the best medical care for LBP (73.2%). The Saudi population holds unhelpful beliefs that may affect their quality of life. Healthcare professionals working with patients with LBP have an important role in changing detrimental beliefs and behaviors about the condition.

Low-value care in musculoskeletal health care: Is there a way forward?

BACKGROUND

Low-value care that wastes resources and harms patients is prevalent in health systems everywhere.

METHODS

As part of an invited keynote presentation at the Pain in Motion IV conference held in Maastricht, Holland, in May 2022, we reviewed evidence for low-value care in musculoskeletal conditions and discussed possible solutions.

RESULTS

Drivers of low-value care are diverse and affect patients, clinicians, and health systems everywhere. We show that low-value care for back pian, neck pain, and osteoarthritis is prevalent in all professional groups involved in caring for people who seek care for these conditions. Implementation efforts that aim to reverse low-value care seem to work better if designed using established conceptual and theoretical frameworks.

CONCLUSION

Low-value care is prevalent in the care of people with musculoskeletal conditions. Reducing low-value care requires behaviour change among patients and clinicians as well as in health systems. There is evidence that behaviour change can be facilitated through good conceptual and theoretical frameworks but not convincing evidence that it changes patient outcomes.

What influences graduate medical students' beliefs of lower back pain? A mixed methods cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition with substantial associated disability and costs, best understood using a biopsychosocial approach. Research demonstrates that beliefs about LBP are important, with biomedical beliefs influencing practitioner's management and patient recovery. Beliefs about LBP can be inconsistent amongst healthcare and medical students. The aim of this study was to investigate graduate medical student's beliefs of LBP and what influences them.

METHOD

A cross sectional mixed methods study of Phase 1 (first year) and Phase 3 (third and fourth year) current graduate medical students at the University of Warwick (MBChB) was conducted. Participants were recruited via voluntary response sampling. A survey investigated LBP beliefs, utilising the Back Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ) and Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Qualitative data was collected on what influences beliefs about the causes and management of LBP, which was analysed descriptively using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven students completed the questionnaire (61% female), with a mean age of 27.2 years. Eighty two percent of participants reported a history of LBP. Median BBQ scores were 31.5 for phase 1 and 31 for phase 3, with median HC-PAIRS scores of 57 and 60 for phase 1 and phase 3 students respectively. Three main themes emerged from the qualitative data: Sources of influence, influence of personal experience and influence of medical education. Participants discussed single or multiple sources influencing their beliefs about the causes and management of LBP. Another main theme was the influence of experiencing LBP personally or through discussions with family, friends and patients. The final main theme described the influence of medical education, including lectures, seminars and clinical placements.

CONCLUSIONS

The HC-PAIRS and BBQ scores suggest graduate medical students in this sample tended to have positive beliefs about the outcome of LBP and functional expectations of chronic LBP patients, consistent with other healthcare students. The findings from qualitative data suggest how medical students form beliefs about the causes and management of LBP is complex.