Review article: Best practice management of low back pain in the emergency department (part 1 of the musculoskeletal injuries rapid review series)

Adherence to recommended guidelines for low back pain presentations to an Australian emergency department: Barriers and enablers

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to evaluate the adherence to guidelines for the management of mechanical Low Back Pain within a single tertiary metropolitan Emergency Department setting. Our objectives were: METHODS: A two-stage multi-methods study design was undertaken. Stage 1 involved a retrospective chart audit of patients presenting with a diagnosis of mechanical Low Back Pain to establish documented adherence to clinical guidelines. Stage 2 explored clinicians' perspectives towards factors influencing adherence to the guidelines via a study-specific survey and follow up focus groups.

RESULTS

The audit demonstrated low adherence to the following guidelines: (i) appropriate prescription of analgesia, (ii) targeted education and advice, and (iii) attempts to mobilise. Three major themes were identified as factors influencing adherence to the guidelines: (1) clinician driven influences and factors, (2) workflow processes, and (3) patient expectations and behaviours.

CONCLUSION

There was low adherence to some published guidelines and factors influencing adherence to the guidelines were multi-factorial. Understanding the factors that influence care decisions and developing strategies to address these can improve Emergency Department management of mechanical Low Back Pain.

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.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

IMPACT

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

The care pathway of individuals with spinal disorders in a Health Care Network in the Federal District, Brazil: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Understanding the care pathway is essential to identify how to effectively treat spinal disorders. However, there is no specific data on the pathway of these individuals in the Health Care Networks (HCN) in Brazil.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the pathway of individuals with non-specific spinal disorders (NSD) in the HCN in the Federal District, Brazil, and verify the interventions adopted, and to test whether sociodemographic and clinical variables predict the number of imaging tests, prescribed medication, and the first HCN access.

METHODS

Retrospective study that analysed electronic records of 327 individuals with NSD between 2012 and 2018. Generalized linear models estimated the association between sociodemographic and clinical data and number of drugs prescribed and imaging tests requested. Multinomial logistic regression estimated the association between clinical and demographic variables and setting of first access.

RESULTS

The median age was 57 years, and 75.5% were women. Emergency Department (ED) was the most accessed setting (43.7%), and back pain was the most prevalent condition (84.5%). Most individuals underwent imaging tests (60%) and drug prescriptions (86%). Physical exercises were prescribed to 13%, and 55% were referred to physical therapy. Women were more likely to first access the ED.

CONCLUSION

The ED was the most used setting by people with NSD. Few participants received exercise prescriptions and half were referred to physical therapists. Individuals who used outpatient clinics and primary care received less drug prescriptions, and women were more likely to first access the ED. Increasing age was associated with greater chance of first accessing Outpatient Clinics.

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.

Evaluating musculoskeletal urgent care center triage and transfer of emergency conditions for emergency surgical assessment and intervention

Musculoskeletal urgent care centers (MUCCs) are an alternative to emergency departments (EDs) for patients to seek care for low acuity orthopedic injuries such as ankle sprains or joint pain, but are not equipped to manage orthopedic emergencies that require a higher level of care provided in the ED. This study aims to evaluate telephone and online triage practices as well as ED transfer procedures for MUCCs for patients presenting with an orthopedic condition requiring urgent surgical intervention. We called 595 MUCCs using a standardized script presenting as a critical patient with symptoms of lower extremity compartment syndrome. We compared direct ED referral frequency and triage frequency for MUCCs for patients insured by either Medicaid or by private insurance. We found that patients presenting with an apparent compartment syndrome were directly referred to the ED by < 1 in 5 MUCCs. Additionally, < 5% of patients were asked additional triage questions that would increase clinician suspicion for compartment syndrome and allow MUCCs to appropriately direct patients to the ED. MUCCs provide limited telephone and online triage for patients, which may result in delays of care for life or limb threatening injuries that require ED resources such as sedation, reductions, and emergency surgery. However, when MUCCs did conduct triage, it significantly increased the likelihood that patients were appropriately referred to the ED. Level of Evidence: Level II, prognostic study.

Hospital variation in admissions for low back pain following an emergency department presentation: a retrospective study

Background

One in 6 patients with low back pain (LBP) presenting to emergency departments (EDs) are subsequently admitted to hospital each year, making LBP the ninth most common reason for hospital admission in Australia. No studies have investigated and quantified the extent of clinical variation in hospital admission following an ED presentation for LBP.

Methods

We used routinely collected ED data from public hospitals within the state of New South Wales, Australia, to identify presentations of patients aged between 18 and 111 with a discharge diagnosis of LBP. We fitted a series of random effects multilevel logistic regression models adjusted by case-mix and hospital variables. The main outcome was the hospital-adjusted admission rate (HAAR). Data were presented as funnel plots with 95% and 99.8% confidence limits. Hospitals with a HAAR outside the 95% confidence limit were considered to have a HAAR significantly different to the state average.

Results

We identified 176,729 LBP presentations across 177 public hospital EDs and 44,549 hospital admissions (25.2%). The mean (SD) age was 51.8 (19.5) and 52% were female. Hospital factors explained 10% of the variation (ICC = 0.10), and the median odds ratio (MOR) was 2.03. We identified marked variation across hospitals, with HAAR ranging from 6.9 to 65.9%. After adjusting for hospital variables, there was still marked variation between hospitals with similar characteristics.

Conclusion

We found substantial variation in hospital admissions following a presentation to the ED due to LBP even after controlling by case-mix and hospital characteristics. Given the substantial costs associated with these admissions, our findings indicate the need to investigate sources of variation and to determine instances where the observed variation is warranted or unwarranted.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08134-8.

Systematic review of guideline-recommended medications prescribed for treatment of low back pain

OBJECTIVE

To identify and descriptively compare medication recommendations among low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, Index to Chiropractic Literature, AMED, CINAHL, and PEDro to identify CPGs that described the management of mechanical LBP in the prior five years. Two investigators independently screened titles and abstracts and potentially relevant full text were considered for eligibility. Four investigators independently applied the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument for critical appraisal. Data were extracted for pharmaceutical intervention, the strength of recommendation, and appropriateness for the duration of LBP.

RESULTS

316 citations were identified, 50 full-text articles were assessed, and nine guidelines with global representation met the eligibility criteria. These CPGs addressed pharmacological treatments with or without non-pharmacological treatments. All CPGS focused on the management of acute, chronic, or unspecified duration of LBP. The mean overall AGREE II score was 89.3% (SD 3.5%). The lowest domain mean score was for applicability, 80.4% (SD 5.2%), and the highest was Scope and Purpose, 94.0% (SD 2.4%). There were ten classifications of medications described in the included CPGs: acetaminophen, antibiotics, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, benzodiazepines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, oral corticosteroids, skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs), and atypical opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Nine CPGs, included ten medication classes for the management of LBP. NSAIDs were the most frequently recommended medication for the treatment of both acute and chronic LBP as a first line pharmacological therapy. Acetaminophen and SMRs were inconsistently recommended for acute LBP. Meanwhile, with less consensus among CPGs, acetaminophen and antidepressants were proposed as second-choice therapies for chronic LBP. There was significant heterogeneity of recommendations within many medication classes, although oral corticosteroids, benzodiazepines, anticonvulsants, and antibiotics were not recommended by any CPGs for acute or chronic LBP.

Management of acute low back pain in emergency departments in São Paulo, Brazil: a descriptive, cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To describe management strategies used in public emergency departments in a middle-income country for patients with acute non-specific low back pain.

DESIGN

A descriptive, cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a prospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A study with 600 patients with low back pain presenting in four public emergency departments from São Paulo, Brazil was conducted.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Diagnostic tests, pharmacological interventions, and/or referral to other healthcare professionals were collected. Descriptive analyses were used to report all outcomes.

RESULTS

Of all patients, 12.5% (n=75) underwent some diagnostic imaging tests. Medication was administered to 94.7% (n=568) of patients. The most common medications were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (71.3%; n=428), opioids (29%; n=174) and corticosteroids (22.5%; n=135). Only 7.5% (n=45) of patients were referred to another type of care.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for research data on low back pain from middle-income countries. There was an acceptable rate of prescription for diagnostic imaging tests. However, there were high medication prescriptions and small rates of referrals to other healthcare services. Our findings indicate that there is still a need to implement best practices in the management of acute low back pain at public emergency departments in Brazil.

Perspectives of emergency department clinicians on the challenges of addressing low back pain in the emergency setting: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To identify and explore ED clinician perspectives on: (i) why patients with low back pain (LBP) present to the ED and are admitted into hospital from ED; (ii) barriers and enablers they face when providing care to patients with LBP; and (iii) strategies to improve the care of patients with LBP, and associated care processes, in the ED.

METHODS

We undertook a qualitative exploratory study with ED clinicians (medical officers, nurses and physiotherapists) at a tertiary-level public hospital in New South Wales, Australia, using focus groups and individual interviews. We used thematic analysis to synthesise participant responses to answer the predefined research questions.

RESULTS

Twenty-one clinicians participated (two individual interviews, 19 focus groups). Perceptions about better access to the ED and advanced care within ED were thought to drive presentations to the ED for LBP. Barriers and enablers to optimal patient care included patient-, clinician- and service-level factors. The main strategies to improve care included a department LBP pathway, modernised patient and clinician resources, better follow-up options post-discharge and improved communication between ED and primary care.

CONCLUSION

We identified a range of targets to improve LBP management in ED. Clinicians perceived internal and external factors to the ED as influences of ED presentation and hospital admission. Clinicians also reported that patient-, clinician- and service-level barriers and enablers influenced patient management in ED. Strategies suggested by clinicians included improved follow-up options, access to resources and an 'LBP pathway' to support decision making.

Do patients with acute low back pain in emergency departments have more severe symptoms than those in general practice? A systematic review with meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is a common belief that patients presenting to emergency departments have more severe pain levels and functional limitations than those in general practice. The aim of this systematic review was to compare pain and disability levels of patients with acute low back pain presenting to general practice versus those presenting to emergency departments.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from inception to February 2019. Observational studies including patients with acute non-specific low back pain presenting to emergency departments and/or general practice were eligible. Pain and/or disability scores expressed on a 0-100 scale were the primary outcomes. Risk of bias was evaluated using a validated tool for observational studies and the overall quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Meta-analysis using random effects and meta-regression were used to test for differences between the two settings.

RESULTS

We included 12 records reporting results for 10 unique studies with a total of 6,999 participants from general practice (n = 6) and emergency departments (n = 4). There was low quality evidence (downgraded for indirectness and inconsistency) that patients presenting to emergency departments had higher pain scores than those in general practice with a mean difference of 17.3 points (95%CI: 8.8 to 25.9 on a 0-100 scale). Similarly, there was low quality evidence (downgraded for indirectness and inconsistency) that patients presenting to emergency departments had higher disability scores than those in general practice (mean difference: 21.7, 95%CI: 4.6 to 38.7 on a 0-100 scale).

CONCLUSION

Patients with acute non-specific low back pain presenting to emergency departments may report higher levels of pain and disability than those seen in general practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017076806.

Healthcare costs due to low back pain in the emergency department and inpatient setting in Sydney, Australia

Background

Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide and a common presentation to emergency departments, often resulting in subsequent admissions to hospital. There have been several studies investigating the cost of low back pain to society, but few specific to the emergency department and inpatient setting, especially in Australia. The aim was to describe the cost of low back pain in Australian public hospital emergency departments, and inpatient settings, and explore healthcare costs associated with different care pathways.

Methods

In this retrospective observational study, we explored the costs associated with an episode of care for low back pain in adults that attended three emergency departments in Sydney between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2019. Systematised Nomenclature of Medicine—Clinical Terms (SNOMED) diagnosis codes were used to identify episodes of care where the patients had been diagnosed with non-specific low back pain or lumbosacral radicular syndromes. Serious spinal pathologies were excluded. We determined the costs for different treatment pathways involving the ambulance service, emergency department and inpatient ward care. Hospital costs were adjusted for inflation to 2019 Australian dollars (AUD).

Findings

There were 12,399 non-serious low back pain episodes of care during the study period. 4006 (32%) arrived by ambulance and 2067 (17%) were admitted for inpatient care. The total costs of inpatient and emergency department care across the 5-year period were AUD$36.7 million, with a mean of AUD$2959 per episode of care. The mean cost for a patient who had a non-ambulance presentation to the emergency department and was discharged was AUD$584. Patients presenting to the emergency department via ambulance and were discharged had a mean cost of AUD$1022. Patients who presented without the need of an ambulance and were admitted had a mean cost of $13,137. The most expensive care pathway was for patients arriving by ambulance with subsequent admission, with a mean cost of AUD$14,949.

Interpretation

The common practice of admitting patients with non-serious low back pain for inpatient care comes at great cost to the healthcare system. In a resource constrained environment, our data highlights the economic need to implement innovative, evidence-based strategies to reduce the inpatient management of these patients.

Funding

Nil.

The therapeutic management of back pain with and without sciatica in the emergency department: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

An increasing number of patients are attending the Emergency Department (ED) with back pain with or without sciatica. There is evidence to suggest that medical management is varied and inconsistent.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to review the literature to determine the evidence base for the therapeutic management of adults presenting with back pain with or without sciatica in the ED.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature included the therapeutic management of patients presenting in the ED. Articles published in peer review journals in English language up to August 2018 were searched for in the following data-bases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, ZETOC, PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), Web of Science, Open Grey and ETHOS. A narrative synthesis approach was followed.

RESULTS

Twenty two studies, including 17 randomised control trials, one randomised control pilot study, two cohort studies, one cohort pilot study and one retrospective audit were included. The Downs and Black methodological quality scores ranged from 16 to 31 with a mean score of 24 out of a possible 32.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests that Naproxen alone should be considered as first line management in cases of back pain without sciatica. Intra-venous corticosteroids should be considered in the management of cases of severe sciatica. More high quality trials are needed to determine an evidence-based management protocol for the treatment of acute low back pain in the ED, specifically focusing on non-pharmacological management and the first line management of patients presenting with LBP with sciatica. Systematic Review Registration Number PROSPERO CRD42016042087.

Emergency department care for low back pain: Should we adopt recommendations from primary care guidelines?

ED visits for low back pain are increasing, but the lack of specific guidance for emergency physicians impedes evidence-based care, and adopting primary care recommendations may not be appropriate. The ED sees a different spectrum of low back pain presentations, where physicians are likely to encounter a larger proportion of patients with an underlying serious pathology or non-spinal diseases than in primary care. Current low back pain guidelines do not adequately cover screening for these conditions, but making a differential diagnosis is crucial in emergency patients with low back pain. In this article, we also discuss the challenges in developing specific ED guidelines for low back pain, the limited evidence on the profile of these patients and the surprising dearth of randomised trials.

Investigation of Whole Spine MRI in the Emergency Department at Two Large Tertiary Care Academic Medical Centers in the United States

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The impact of emergent whole spine magnetic resonance imaging (WS-MRI) on patient management has not been extensively studied to date. Here, we explore indications, results, and outcomes associated with WS-MRI performed through the emergency departments (EDs) of 2 large tertiary care, academic medical centers in the Northeastern United States. We hypothesize that given a relatively low barrier to entry, coupled with lack of appropriateness guidelines, a sizeable proportion of WS-MRI studies performed emergently do not result in spine findings necessitating inpatient admission for immediate treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied 335 adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent WS-MRI through the ED between 2016 and 2019. The demographic data collected included, age, sex, chief complaint, history of spine disease, and date and type of last spine imaging prior to ED presentation. Data compiled from the time of ED visit included WS-MRI result and patient disposition, including reason for hospital admission, by which patients were categorized into groups to allow for ease of comparisons. Hypergeometric tests were used to determine statistically significant associations between random discrete variables.

RESULTS

Trauma was the most frequent chief complaint, comprising 35% (n = 117) of all presentations, followed by pain (25%, n = 84), motor deficit (16%, n = 55), sensory disturbance (12%, n = 41), bowel, and/or bladder dysfunction (9%, n = 30), and subjective or objective fevers with suspicion for spine infection (2%, n = 8). The largest proportion of WS-MRI studies revealed degenerative disc disease (DDD) as the principal result (41%, n = 139). 52% of all patients were either discharged directly from the ED (41%) or admitted for a non-spine issue after WS-MRI (11%); of these numbers, 61% underwent WS-MRI and no other imaging study in the ED. In patients who presented with a chief complaint of pain, DDD was often the principal WS-MRI finding (54%), albeit this association was not statistically significant. DDD, nonetheless, was positively associated with a discharge from the ED (P <0.001). Trauma was positively associated with fracture or ligamentous/soft tissue injury (P <0.001) on WS-MRI and hospital admission for a spine issue (P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

That just under half of patients in our study were admitted for spine-related pathology suggests that WS-MRI is valuable in the emergent setting. At the same time, however, that over half of patients were not subsequently admitted for a spine-related issue points to the possibility of further refining which patients would benefit most from WS-MRI. WS-MRI may be less helpful in patients presenting with pain, though may be higher-yield in those with trauma, motor deficits, and bowel/bladder complaints. Although MRI is highly sensitive in ruling out emergent central nervous system pathology, given the resource-intensive nature of the test, it is prudent to carefully select which patients should undergo emergent WS-MRI, especially in instances when more cost-effective, alternative diagnostic approaches, including detailed neurological exam, computed tomography, or localized/targeted MRI, are possible.

Management of patients with low back pain in the emergency department: Is it feasible to follow evidence-based recommendations?

OBJECTIVE

Low back pain is frequently seen in patients visiting the ED, but many patients receive medical care with no demonstrable benefits. We studied the clinical characteristics of patients visiting two EDs in Santiago, Chile, and their management to evaluate how it adheres to evidence-based recommendations.

METHODS

We studied 519 patients and retrieved their demographic and clinical data, imaging testing and treatments. We determined the effect of sex, age, time from initial symptoms, pain measured with the visual analogue scale, presence of nerve radiation and the presence of red flags and neurological impairment on image testing and the management received.

RESULTS

Mean age was 43.8 years; 57.8% were females. Females presented more often red flags (7.3 vs 3%, P = 0.04) and worse pain (visual analogue scale = 7 vs 6, P = 0.04) than males. Imagings were performed in 18.9% of patients; they were more frequently performed in patients with neurological impairment (P = 0.03) and red flags (P = 0.01). Intravenous non-opioids were administered in 25.6%; opioids were administered in 40.1%. Median time in the ED was 91 min (range 18-591); 16 (3.08%) patients were admitted. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.04 [1.03-1.05], P < 0.01) and red flags (OR 4.9 [1.60-20.08], P < 0.01) influenced imaging testing; pain intensity influenced opioid use (OR 1.6 [1.29-1.95], P < 0.01), hospital admissions (1.95 [1.14-3.33], P < 0.01) and time in the ED (β = 0.5, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Older age, the presence of red flags and pain intensity influenced the management of patients with low back pain in the ED. Future strategies should emphasise avoiding costly and ineffective management in these patients.

Healthcare utilization and costs for spinal conditions in Ontario, Canada - opportunities for funding high-value care: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

An important step in improving spinal care is understanding how current health-care resources and associated cost are being utilized and distributed across a health-care system.

PURPOSE

Our objective was to examine the magnitude and distribution of direct health care costs for spinal conditions across physician type and hospital setting.

DESIGN/SETTING

Cross-sectional analysis of administrative health data for the fiscal year 2013-2014 from the province of Ontario, Canada.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Adult population aged 18+ years (N=10,841,302).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Person visit rates and total number of people and visits by specific care settings were calculated for all spinal conditions as well as stratified by nontrauma and trauma-related conditions. Variation in rates by age and sex was examined. The proportion of patients seeing physicians of different specialties was calculated for each condition grouping. Direct medical costs were estimated and their percentage distribution by care setting calculated for nontrauma and trauma-related conditions. Additionally, costs for spinal imaging overall and stratified by type of scan were determined.

METHODS

Administrative health databases were analyzed, including data on physician services, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. ICD-9 and -10 diagnostic codes were used to identify nontraumatic (degenerative or inflammatory) and traumatic spinal disorders. A validated algorithm was used to estimate direct medical costs.

RESULTS

Overall, 822,000 adult Ontarians (7.6%) made 1.6 million outpatient physician visits for spinal conditions; the majority (1.1 million) of these visits were for nontrauma conditions. Approximately, 86% of outpatient visits were in primary care. Emergency Department (ED) visits for nontrauma spinal conditions (130,000 out of 156,000 ED visits) accounted for 2.8% of all ED visits in the province. Total costs for spine-related care were $264 million (CDN) with 64% of costs due to nontrauma conditions. For these nontrauma conditions, ED visits cost $28 million for 130,000 visits ($215 per visit). For $32 million spent in primary care, 890,000 visits were made ($36 per visit). Spine imaging costs were $66.5 million, yielding a combined total of $330 million in health care spending for spinal conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal conditions place a large and costly burden on the health-care system. The disproportionate annual cost associated with ED visits represents a potential opportunity to redirect costs to fund more clinically and cost-effective models of care for nontraumatic spinal conditions.

Musculoskeletal injury quality outcome indicators for the emergency department

High standards of care for musculoskeletal injuries presenting to emergency departments (ED) must be maintained despite financial constraints, the model of care in place, or the pressure to reach time-based performance measures. Outcome quality indicators (QIs) provide a tangible way of assessing and improving the outcomes of health-care delivery. This study aimed to develop a set of outcome QIs for musculoskeletal injuries in the ED that are meaningful, valid, feasible to collect, simple to use for clinical quality improvement and chosen by experts in the field. The study used a multi-phase mixed methods design, commencing with a systematic review of available outcome QIs. An expert panel then developed a set of preliminary QIs based on the available scientific evidence. Prospective observational data collection was undertaken across eight EDs with subsequent retrospective chart audits, follow-up phone calls and audit of administrative databases. After statistical analysis, validated results were presented to the expert panel who discussed, refined and formally voted on a final outcome QI set. A total of 41 preliminary outcome QIs were field tested in EDs, with data collected on 633 patients. Using the field study results, the expert panel voted 11 outcome QIs into the final set. These covered effectiveness of pain management, timeliness to discharge, re-presentations to the ED and unplanned visits to health professionals in the community, missed injuries, opioids side effects and the patient experience. An evidence-based set of outcome quality indicators is now available to support clinical quality improvement of musculoskeletal injury care in the ED setting.

Comparison of intradermal mesotherapy with systemic therapy in the treatment of low back pain: A prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Musculoskeletal pain such as low back pain (LBP) are routinely encountered in the ED and contribute to ED overcrowding. The aim of our study was to compare the efficiency of mesotherapy with systemic therapy in pain control in patients with lumbar disk herniation.

METHODS

We conducted this prospective parallel randomized controlled trial with the patients admitted to the emergency department with low back pain related to herniated lumbar disk. Mesotherapy was performed to one group, while intravenous dexketoprofen was administered to the control group. Changes in pain intensity at 15th minute, 30th minute, 60th minute and 24th hours after treatment using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), need to use analgesic drug within 24 h after treatment, and adverse effect of the treatment methods were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The decreases in pain intensity were statistically significantly higher in mesotherapy group for all time intervals. The need to use analgesics was statistically significantly three fold higher in the systemic therapy group. There was no statistically significant difference in having any adverse effect between study groups during one-week follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in medical practices, from the systemic administration of NSAIDs to the minimally invasive techniques such as mesotherapy with potent efficacy and minimal side effects, may enhance the ability of EDs to meet the waiting time targets and improve patient's satisfaction.

Process quality indicators for musculoskeletal injuries in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

Measuring quality of care for musculoskeletal injuries presenting to the ED is important given their prevalence, variations in care, the associated morbidity and financial impacts and pressure to achieve time-based performance measures. Process quality indicators (QIs) provide a quantitative method to measure the actions taken during healthcare delivery. This study aimed to develop a set of process QIs to measure the quality of care for musculoskeletal injuries in the ED.

METHODS

A multiphase mixed-methods study was undertaken from 2015 to 2018, commencing with a systematic review to identify existing musculoskeletal QIs. This review, along with current evidence regarding musculoskeletal injury management in the ED, informed an expert panel who developed a preliminary set of process QIs. The preliminary set was field tested at eight EDs in Queensland, Australia, to determine the validity, reliability, feasibility and usefulness of each QI. Prospective observational data collection and retrospective chart audits were used to score the process QIs. These results were presented to the expert panel who determined a final QI set.

RESULTS

A total of 633 patients were recruited and 36 process QIs included in the final set. The QIs covered important domains of pain assessment and management, history taking and physical examination, appropriateness and timeliness of imaging, fracture management, mobility, patient information and discharge considerations including safety and referrals. The best performing QIs included the use of opioid sparing analgesics and avoiding prescription of 'just in case' opioids at discharge. The poorest performing QIs included the completion of spinal red flag questioning and referrals for fragility fractures.

CONCLUSION

An evidence and best practice-based set of QIs has been developed to allow EDs to assess and quantify the quality of care for musculoskeletal presentations. This will allow EDs to compare and benchmark, leading to the optimisation of care for patients.

What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To identify common recommendations for high-quality care for the most common musculoskeletal (MSK) pain sites encountered by clinicians in emergency and primary care (spinal (lumbar, thoracic and cervical), hip/knee (including osteoarthritis [OA] and shoulder) from contemporary, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).

DESIGN

Systematic review, critical appraisal and narrative synthesis of MSK pain CPG recommendations.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Included MSK pain CPGs were written in English, rated as high quality, published from 2011, focused on adults and described development processes. Excluded CPGs were for: traumatic MSK pain, single modalities (eg, surgery), traditional healing/medicine, specific disease processes (eg, inflammatory arthropathies) or those that required payment.

DATA SOURCES

Four scientific databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Physiotherapy Evidence Database) and four guideline repositories.

RESULTS

6232 records were identified, 44 CPGs were appraised and 11 were rated as high quality (low back pain: 4, OA: 4, neck: 2 and shoulder: 1). We identified 11 recommendations for MSK pain care: ensure care is patient centred, screen for red flag conditions, assess psychosocial factors, use imaging selectively, undertake a physical examination, monitor patient progress, provide education/information, address physical activity/exercise, use manual therapy only as an adjunct to other treatments, offer high-quality non-surgical care prior to surgery and try to keep patients at work.

CONCLUSION

These 11 recommendations guide healthcare consumers, clinicians, researchers and policy makers to manage MSK pain. This should improve the quality of care of MSK pain.

A New Neuropathologic Mechanism of Blood pH Irregularities After Neck Trauma: Importance of Carotid Body-Glossopharyngeal Nerve Network Degeneration

OBJECTIVE

We created a neck trauma model by injecting blood into the sheath of rabbits' carotid bodies (CBs). Then we determined the relationship between neuronal degeneration of the CB due to hemorrhage of this organ and its clinical effects such as blood pH and heart rhythm.

METHODS

The present study included 24 adult male New Zealand rabbits. The animals were divided into 3 groups: control (n = 5); sham (0.5 mL saline injected into CBs; n = 5); and study (CB trauma model; n = 14). pH values and heart rhythms were recorded before the experiment to determine the values under normal conditions, and measurements were repeated thrice in the days following the experiment. The number of normal and degenerated neuron density of CBs was counted. The relationship between the blood pH values, heart rhythms, and degenerated neuron densities was analyzed.

RESULTS

Heart rhythms were 218 ± 20 in the control group, 197 ± 16 in the sham group (P = 0.09), and 167 ± 13 in the study group (P < 0.0005). pH values were 7.40 ± 0.041 in the control group, 7.321 ± 0.062 in the sham group (P = 0.203), and 7.23 ± 0.02 in study group (P < 0.0005). Degenerated neuron densities were 12 ± 4/mm³ in the control group, 430 ± 74/mm³ in the sham group (P < 0.005), and 7434 ± 810/mm³ in the study group (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A high degenerate neuron density in the CB can decrease blood pH and hearth rhythm after neck trauma, and there might be a close relationship between the number of degenerated neurons and clinical findings (such as heart rhythm and blood pH). This relationship suggests that injury to the glossopharyngeal nerve-CB network can cause acidosis by disturbing the breathing-circulating reflex and results in respiratory acidosis.

A review of emerging bone tissue engineering via PEG conjugated biodegradable amphiphilic copolymers

Defects in bones can be caused by a plethora of reasons, such as trauma or illness, and in many cases, it poses challenges to the current treatment approaches for bone repair. With increasing demand of bone bioengineering in tissue transplant, there is a need to source for sustainable solutions to induce bone regeneration. Polymeric biomaterials have been identified as a promising approach due to its excellent biocompatibility and controllable biodegradability. Specifically, poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) is one of the most commonly investigated polymer for use in bio-related application due to its bioinertness and versatility. Furthermore, the hydrophilic nature enables it to be incorporated with hydrophobic but biodegradable polymers like, polylactide (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL), to create an amphiphilic polymer. This article reviews the recent synthetic strategies available for the construction of PEG conjugated polymeric system, analysis of PEG influence on the material properties, and provides an overview of its application in bone engineering.

Physical Therapy Approaches in the Treatment of Low Back Pain

Globally, in 2016, low back pain (LBP) contributed 57.6 million of total years lived with disability. Low Back Pain Guidelines regularly recommend the use of physical exercise for non-specific LBP. Early non-pharmacological treatment is endorsed. This includes education and self-management, and the recommencement of normal activities and exercise, with the addition of psychological programs in those whose symptoms persist. The aim of physical treatments is to improve function and prevent disability from getting worse. There is no evidence available to show that one type of exercise is superior to another, and participation can be in a group or in an individual exercise program. Active strategies such as exercise are related to decreased disability. Passive methods (rest, medications) are associated with worsening disability, and are not recommended. The Danish, United States of America, and the United Kingdom Guidelines recommend the use of exercise on its own, or in combination with other non-pharmacological therapies. These include tai chi, yoga, massage, and spinal manipulation. Public health programs should educate the public on the prevention of low back pain. In chronic low back pain, the physical therapy exercise approach remains a first-line treatment, and should routinely be used.