Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for spinal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Screening of NSAIDs library identifies Tinoridine as a novel ferroptosis inhibitor for potential intervertebral disc degeneration therapy

Low back pain (LBP) may profoundly impact the quality of life across the globe, and intervertebral disc degeneration (IVDD) is the major cause of LBP; however, targeted pharmaceutical interventions for IVDD are still lacking. Ferroptosis is a novel form of iron-dependent programmed cell death. Studies have showed that ferroptosis may closely associate with IVDD; thus, targeting ferroptosis may have great potential for IVDD therapy. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the first-line medications for LBP, while nuclear factor-erythroid 2-related factor-2 (Nrf2) is a key inhibitory protein for ferroptosis. In the current study, we conducted a molecular docking screening between NSAIDs library and Nrf2 protein. Tinoridine was shown to have a high binding affinity to Nrf2. The in vitro study in nucleus pulposus (NP) cells showed that Tinoridine may promote the expression and activity of Nrf2, it may also rescue RSL3-induced ferroptosis in NP cells. Knockdown of Nrf2 reverses the protective effect of Tinoridine on RSL3-induced ferroptosis in NP cells, suggesting that the inhibitory effect of Tinoridine on ferroptosis is through Nrf2. In vivo study demonstrated that Tinoridine may attenuate the progression of IVDD in rats. As NSAIDs are already clinically used for LBP therapy, the current study supports Tinoridine's application from the view of ferroptosis inhibition.

Description and initial validation of a novel measure of pain intensity: the Numeric Rating Scale of Underlying Pain without concurrent Analgesic use

ABSTRACT

Although many individuals with chronic pain use analgesics, the methods used in many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) do not sufficiently account for confounding by differential post-randomization analgesic use. This may lead to underestimation of average treatment effects and diminished power. We introduce (1) a new measure-the Numeric Rating Scale of Underlying Pain without concurrent Analgesic use (NRS-UP (A) )-which can shift the estimand of interest in an RCT to target effects of a treatment on pain intensity in the hypothetical situation where analgesic use was not occurring at the time of outcome assessment; and (2) a new pain construct-an individuals' perceived effect of analgesic use on pain intensity (E A ). The NRS-UP (A) may be used as a secondary outcome in RCTs of point treatments or nonpharmacologic treatments. Among 662 adults with back pain in primary care, participants' mean value of the NRS-UP (A) among those using analgesics was 1.2 NRS points higher than their value on the conventional pain intensity NRS, reflecting a mean E A value of -1.2 NRS points and a perceived beneficial effect of analgesics. More negative values of E A (ie, greater perceived benefit) were associated with a greater number of analgesics used but not with pain intensity, analgesic type, or opioid dose. The NRS-UP (A) and E A were significantly associated with future analgesic use 6 months later, but the conventional pain NRS was not. Future research is needed to determine whether the NRS-UP (A), used as a secondary outcome may allow pain RCTs to target alternative estimands with clinical relevance.

Amphiphilic NLC-Gel formulation loaded with Sebacoyl dinalbuphine ester and Nalbuphine for localized postoperative pain management

Opioids are powerful analgesics; however, their significant systemic adverse effects and the need for frequent administration restrict their use. Nalbuphine (NA) is a κ-agonist narcotic with limited adverse effects, but needs to be frequently administrated due to its short elimination half-life. Whereas sebacoyl dinalbuphine ester (SDE) is a NA prodrug, which can effectively prolong the analgesic effect, but lacks immediate pain relief. Therefore, in this study, a rapid and sustained local delivery formulation to introduce NA and SDE directly into surgical sites was developed. An amphiphilic nanostructured lipid carrier (NLC) poloxamer 407 (P407) gel (NLC-Gel) was developed to permit concurrent delivery of hydrophobic SDE from the NLC core and hydrophilic NA from P407, offering a dual rapid and prolonged analgesic effect. Benefiting from the thermal-sensitive characteristic of P407, the formulation can be injected in liquid phase and instantly transit into gel at wound site. NLC-Gel properties, including particle size, drug release, rheology, and stability, were assessed. In vivo evaluation using a rat spinal surgery model highlighted the effect of the formulation through pain behavior test and hematology analysis. NLC-Gels demonstrated an analgesic effect comparable with that of commercial intramuscular injected SDE formulation (IM SDE), with only 15 % of the drug dosage. The inclusion of supplemental NA in the exterior gel (PA12-Gel + NA) provided rapid drug onset owing to swift NA dispersion, addressing acute pain within hours along with prolonged analgesic effects. Our findings suggest that this amphiphilic formulation significantly enhanced postoperative pain management in terms of safety and efficacy.

Efficacy of naproxen in patients with sciatica: multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

ABSTRACT

This trial assessed the efficacy of naproxen in patients with sciatica in outpatient clinics across 4 Norwegian hospitals. A total of 123 adults with radiating pain below the knee (≥4 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) and signs consistent with nerve root involvement were included. Participants were randomized to receive either naproxen 500 mg or a placebo twice daily for 10 days. The primary outcome, daily leg pain intensity measured on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale throughout the treatment period, revealed a statistically significant difference in favor of naproxen, with an adjusted mean difference of -0.5 (95% CI -0.8 to -0.1, P = 0.015). In the naproxen group, the treatment effect was significantly related to time, and over the whole 10-day period, the average adjusted difference was -0.6 (95% CI -0.8 to -0.5). Mean numbers needed to treat for 30% and 50% improvement were 9.9 (95% CI 4.7-15.0) and 20.7 (8.7-32.7), respectively. The adjusted mean difference for back pain was -0.4 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.0), and for Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica, it was -1.5 (95% CI -3.0 to 0.0). No differences were found for sciatica bothersomeness or consumption of rescue medication or opioids. Participants in the naproxen group exhibited an adjusted odds ratio of 4.7 (95% CI 1.3-16.2) for improvement by 1 level on the global perceived change scale. In conclusion, naproxen treatment showed small, likely clinically unimportant benefits compared with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe sciatica.

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.

Multi-Level Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Associated With Increased Post-operative Infection Rates and Overall Re-Operation Relative to Anterior Cervical Discectomy With Fusion or Cervical Disc Arthroplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE

Cervical radiculopathy meeting operative criteria has traditionally been managed using anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are also reasonable options. This study aimed to assess differences in postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing multi-level ACDF, CDA, or PCF comparing medical/surgical complications and healthcare utilization parameters.

METHODS

Patients who underwent multi-level ACDF, CDA, or PCF between 2012 and 2019 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database. Patients were stratified based on procedure type and propensity score matched to resolve baseline differences. ANOVA was performed to identify differences in medical complications, surgical complications, and healthcare utilization metrics.

RESULTS

A total of 31 344 patients who underwent an eligible procedure were identified (ACDF: n = 28 089, CDA: n = 1748, PCF: n = 1507), and 684 patients remained in each group following propensity score matching. Patients undergoing multi-level PCF were found to experience longer lengths of hospital stay (PCF: 1.67 ± 1.61 days, ACDF: 1.50 ± 1.32 days, CDA: 1.27 ± 1.05 days, P < .001), higher rates of reoperation (PCF: 3.2%, ACDF: 1.0%, CDA: .4%, P = .020), superficial infection (PCF: 1.3%, ACDF: .3%, CDA: .1%, P = .008) and deep infection (PCF: 1.2%, ACDF: 0%, CDA: 0%, P < .001). There were no outcome differences between multi-level ACDF and CDA.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing multi-level PCF were at increased risk for longer hospital stay, re-operation, and infection relative to those undergoing ACDF and CDA. Future research should aim to uncover the precise mechanisms underlying these complications, as well as analyze long term outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Prevalence of Neck Pain in Patients with Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy and Short-Term Response After Operative Treatment: A Cohort Study of 664 Patients From 26 Global Sites

STUDY DESIGN

Ambispective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

1) To define the prevalence of neck pain in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). 2) To identify associated factors of preoperative neck pain in patients with DCM. 3) To assess the neck pain response to surgical intervention.

METHODS

757 patients with DCM were enrolled at 26 global sites from 2005 to 2011. A total of 664 patients had complete neck pain scores preoperatively (Neck Disability Index, NDI). The prevalence and severity of neck pain preoperatively and at the 6-months follow-up was summarized. Functional assessments of individuals with and without pain were compared. Associations of preoperative neck pain and related factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, 79.2% of patients reported neck pain while 20.8% had no neck pain. Of individuals with neck pain, 20.2% rated their pain as very mild, 27.9% as moderate, 19.6% as fairly severe, 9.6% as very severe and 1.9% as the worst imaginable. Functional status (mJOA), number of stenotic levels, age, and duration of symptoms did not significantly differ in patients with and without pain. Factors associated with the presence of neck pain were female gender, BMI ≥27 kg/m2, rheumatologic and gastrointestinal comorbidities, and age <57 years. Neck pain improved significantly from the preoperative examination to the 6-months postoperative follow-up (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Here, we demonstrate a high prevalence of neck pain in patients with DCM as well as a link between gender, body weight, comorbidity and age. We highlight a significant reduction in neck pain 6 months after surgery.

The Emotion Regulation of Acupuncture in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Neuroimaging Protocol

Introduction

Acupuncture is effective for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), which can relieve pain intensity and regulate negative emotional states such as pain-related anxiety and depression. Previous studies mainly discuss the analgesic mechanism of acupuncture treatment of CLBP, but there are multiple dimensions to pain, including sensation, emotion and cognition. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the central mechanism of acupuncture for CLBP from the perspective of emotional regulation by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

Methods and Analysis

A total of 72 patients with CLBP will be recruited in the study and randomly assigned to the verum acupuncture group or the sham acupuncture group. The trail will last for 18 weeks including a 2-week baseline, a 4-week treatment and a 12-week for follow-up period. The primary outcomes are the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores (JOA) score. The secondary outcomes are the 12-item short form health survey (SF-12), the state trait anxiety inventory (STAI), the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) and self-rating depression scale (SDS). The VAS, JOA, STAI SAS and SDS will be collected at baseline, week 2, week 4, and after follow-up. The SF-12 will be evaluated at baseline, week 2 and week 4. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data will be collected at baseline and the end of treatment. Emotion-related brain regions will be chosen as regions of interest (ROIs). The gray matter volume (GMV), amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF), regional homogeneity (ReHo), functional connectivity (FC), and large-scale functional brain network based on these ROIs will be analyzed within and between the two groups.

Discussion

This study will verify the emotional regulation of acupuncture and explore the mechanism of acupuncture for emotion regulation in patients with CLBP.

Trial Registration Number

https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=195486, identifier: ChiCTR2300070557.

Virtual Reality Therapy for the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) therapy in adults with chronic spinal pain (CSP) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of VR therapy and other therapies in adults with CSP, especially patients with inflammation-related pain.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL databases were searched up to November 11, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adults with CSP receiving VR therapy with those receiving other therapies were included. The trial registration platform as well as the reference lists of included studies and previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses were manually searched. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and evaluation of the quality of the evidence. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was used as the effect size used to synthesize the outcome measure.

RESULTS

In total, 16 RCTs involving 800 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled data from 15 (94%) RCTs including 776 (97%) participants showed that VR therapy was superior in improving pain intensity (WMD=-1.63, 95% CI -2.11 to -1.16, P<.001, I2=90%) and reducing inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (WMD=-0.89, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.70, P<.001, I2=0%), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (WMD=-6.60, 95% CI -8.56 to -4.64, P<.001, I2=98%), and interleukin-6 (WMD=-2.76, 95% CI -2.98 to -2.53, P<.001, I2=0%). However, no significant differences were found in terms of the spinal range of motion (ROM), disability level, or fear of movement. In addition, 10 (63%) of the included RCTs had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

VR therapy may be an effective and safe intervention for reducing symptoms in patients with CSP, as it is shown to exert significant analgesic effects and beneficial improvements in inflammatory factor levels. However, this approach may not have significant effects on the spinal ROM, disability level, or fear of movement. Notably, the quality of the evidence from the RCTs included in this study ranged from moderate to low. Therefore, we recommend that readers interpret the results of this study with caution.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022382331; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=382331.

Understanding general practitioners' prescribing choices to patients with chronic low back pain: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Although NSAIDs are recommended as a first line analgesic treatment, opioids are very commonly prescribed to patients with low back pain (LBP) despite risks of harms.

AIM

This study aimed to determine factors contributing to general practitioners' (GPs') prescribing choices to patients with chronic LBP in a primary care setting.

METHOD

This discrete choice experiment (DCE) presented 210 GPs with hypothetical scenarios of a patient with chronic LBP. Participants chose their preferred treatment for each choice set, either the opioid, NSAID or neither. The scenarios varied by two patient attributes; non-specific LBP or LBP with referred leg pain (sciatica) and number of comorbidities. The three treatment attributes also varied, being: the type of opioid or NSAID, degree of pain reduction and number of adverse events. The significance of each attribute in influencing clinical decisions was the primary outcome and the degree to which GPs preferred the alternative based on the number of adverse events or the amount of pain reduction was the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Overall, GPs preferred NSAIDs (45.2%, 95% CI 38.7-51.7%) over opioids (28.8%, 95% CI 23.0-34.7%), however there was no difference between the type of NSAID or opioid preferred. Additionally, the attributes of pain reduction and adverse events did not influence a GP's choice between NSAIDs or opioids for patients with chronic LBP.

CONCLUSION

GPs prefer prescribing NSAIDs over opioids for a patient with chronic low back pain regardless of patient factors of comorbidities or the presence of leg pain (i.e. sciatica).

How to treat chronic pain in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) - A pharmacological review

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pain is a common symptom of rheumatic diseases that impacts patients' quality of life. While non-pharmacological approaches are often recommended as first-line treatments, pharmacological interventions are important for pain management. However, the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacological treatments for chronic pain in rheumatic diseases are unclear.

METHODS

This review critically synthesizes the current evidence base to guide clinicians in selecting appropriate pharmacological treatments for their patients, considering the expected benefits and potential risks and side effects.

RESULTS

For osteoarthritis, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, opioids, and antidepressants are commonly used, with NSAIDs being the most recommended. In addition, topical agents, such as topical NSAIDs, are recommended for localized pain relief. For fibromyalgia, amitriptyline, serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and gabapentinoids are commonly used, with SNRIs being the most recommended. For back pain, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, opioids are used only for acute of flare-up pain, whereas neuropathic pain drugs are only used for chronic radicular pain. For inflammatory rheumatic diseases, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biological agents are recommended to slow disease progression and manage symptoms.

CONCLUSION

While DMARDs and biological agents are recommended for inflammatory rheumatic diseases, pharmacological treatments for other rheumatic diseases only alleviate symptoms and do not provide a cure for the underlying condition. The use of pharmacological treatments should be based on the expected benefits and evaluation of side effects, with non-pharmacological modalities also being considered, especially for fibromyalgia.

Prevalence of Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs Prescribed for Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

OBJECTIVE

Our systematic review aimed to investigate the proportion of participants with osteoarthritis who were prescribed nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) by their health care provider.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for observational studies reporting NSAID prescribing to participants with diagnosed osteoarthritis of any region. Risk of bias was assessed using a tool designed for observational studies measuring prevalence. Random and fixed-effects meta-analysis was used. Meta-regression investigated study-level factors associated with prescribing. The overall evidence quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies were included, published between 1989 and 2022, with 6,494,509 participants. The mean age of participants was 64.7 years (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 62.4, 67.0; n = 34 studies). Most studies were from Europe and Central Asia (n = 23 studies), and North America (n = 12 studies). Most studies were judged to be at low risk of bias (75%). Heterogeneity was eliminated when removing studies with a high risk of bias, to give a pooled estimate of NSAIDs prescribing to participants with osteoarthritis of 43.8% (95% CI 36.8, 51.1; moderate quality of evidence). Meta-regression determined that prescribing was associated with year (decreased prescribing over time; P = 0.05) and geographic region (P = 0.03; higher in Europe and Central Asia and in South Asia than in North America) but not with clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

Data from over 6.4 million participants with osteoarthritis between 1989 and 2022 indicate that NSAID prescribing has decreased over time and that prescribing differs between geographic locations.

Reductions in kinesiophobia and distress after pain neuroscience education and exercise lead to favourable outcomes: a secondary mediation analysis of a randomized controlled trial in primary care

ABSTRACT

Pain neuroscience education combined with exercise (PNE + exercise) is an effective treatment for patients with chronic spinal pain. Yet, however, little is known about its underlying therapeutic mechanisms. Thus, this study aimed to provide the first insights by performing a novel mediation analysis approach in a published randomized controlled trial in primary care where PNE + exercise was compared with standard physiotherapy. Four mediators (catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, central sensitization-related distress, and pain intensity) measured at postintervention and 3 outcomes (disability, health-related quality of life, and pain medication intake) measured at 6-month follow-up were included into the analysis. The postintervention measure of each outcome was also introduced as a competing candidate mediator in each respective model. In addition, we repeated the analysis by including all pairwise mediator-mediator interactions to allow the effect of each mediator to differ based on the other mediators' values. Postintervention improvements in disability, medication intake, and health-related quality of life strongly mediated PNE + exercise effects on each of these outcomes at 6-month follow-up, respectively. Reductions in disability and medication intake were also mediated by reductions in kinesiophobia and central sensitization-related distress. Reductions in kinesiophobia also mediated gains in the quality of life. Changes in catastrophizing and pain intensity did not mediate improvements in any outcome. The mediation analyses with mediator-mediator interactions suggested a potential effect modification rather than causal independence among the mediators. The current results, therefore, support the PNE framework to some extent as well as highlight the need for implementing the recent approaches for mediation analysis to accommodate dependencies among the mediators.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to 20 February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials of analgesic medicines (eg, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, opioids, anti-convulsant drugs, skeletal muscle relaxants, or corticosteroids) compared with another analgesic medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Adults (≥18 years) who reported acute non-specific low back pain (for less than six weeks).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity (0-100 scale) at end of treatment and safety (number of participants who reported any adverse event during treatment). Secondary outcomes were low back specific function, serious adverse events, and discontinuation from treatment. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was done and confidence was evaluated by the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis method.

RESULTS

98 randomised controlled trials (15 134 participants, 49% women) included 69 different medicines or combinations. Low or very low confidence was noted in evidence for reduced pain intensity after treatment with tolperisone (mean difference -26.1 (95% confidence intervals -34.0 to -18.2)), aceclofenac plus tizanidine (-26.1 (-38.5 to -13.6)), pregabalin (-24.7 (-34.6 to -14.7)), and 14 other medicines compared with placebo. Low or very low confidence was noted for no difference between the effects of several of these medicines. Increased adverse events had moderate to very low confidence with tramadol (risk ratio 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.5)), paracetamol plus sustained release tramadol (2.4 (1.5 to 3.8)), baclofen (2.3 (1.5 to 3.4)), and paracetamol plus tramadol (2.1 (1.3 to 3.4)) compared with placebo. These medicines could increase the risk of adverse events compared with other medicines with moderate to low confidence. Moderate to low confidence was also noted for secondary outcomes and secondary analysis of medicine classes.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain are uncertain. Until higher quality randomised controlled trials of head-to-head comparisons are published, clinicians and patients are recommended to take a cautious approach to manage acute non-specific low back pain with analgesic medicines.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019145257.

No long-term effects after a 3-week open-label placebo treatment for chronic low back pain: a 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT

Chronic low back pain is prevalent, highly disabling, and a relevant socioeconomic health concern. Although allocated to placebo groups, patients in randomized controlled trials show significant pain relief, pointing to the relevance of placebo effects. Overcoming ethical and legal concerns related to deceptive placebos, recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of short-term treatments for chronic low back pain with open-label (ie, nondeceptive) placebos. However, data on long-term efficacy of open-label placebos are sparse. Here, we report a 3-year follow-up of our previously published randomized controlled trial demonstrating pain reduction, improvement in disability, and depressive symptoms after a 3-week treatment with open-label placebos. Including records from 89 previously enrolled patients, we investigated changes between the groups with and without previous open-label placebo treatment in pain intensity (primary outcome), disability and mood (secondary outcomes), biopsychosocial factors and lifestyle (exploratory outcomes) from parent baseline to follow-up. Over the 3-year period, there were no differences in any outcome between groups with and without open-label placebo treatment. Therefore, our follow-up data do not support the previously suggested assumption that a 3-week open-label placebo treatment has long-term effects. This study was preregistered on April 14, 2020, in the German Clinical Trials Register (registration number DRKS00021405).

Improving Power and Accuracy in Randomized Controlled Trials of Pain Treatments by Accounting for Concurrent Analgesic Use

The 0 to 10 numeric rating scale of pain intensity is a standard outcome in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pain treatments. For individuals taking analgesics, there may be a disparity between "observed" pain intensity (pain intensity with concurrent analgesic use) and pain intensity without concurrent analgesic use (what the numeric rating scale would be had analgesics not been taken). Using a contemporary causal inference framework, we compare analytic methods that can potentially account for concurrent analgesic use, first in statistical simulations, and second in analyses of real (non-simulated) data from an RCT of lumbar epidural steroid injections. The default analytic method was ignoring analgesic use, which is the most common approach in pain RCTs. Compared to ignoring analgesic use and other analytic methods, simulations showed that a quantitative pain and analgesia composite outcome based on adding 1.5 points to pain intensity for those who were taking an analgesic (the QPAC1.5) optimized power and minimized bias. Analyses of real RCT data supported the results of the simulations, showing greater power with analysis of the QPAC1.5 as compared to ignoring analgesic use and most other methods examined. We propose alternative methods that should be considered in the analysis of pain RCTs. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the conceptual framework behind a new quantitative pain and analgesia composite outcome, the QPAC1.5, and the results of statistical simulations and analyses of trial data supporting improvements in power and bias using the QPAC1.5. Methods of this type should be considered in the analysis of pain RCTs.

[The use of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine in the treatment of acute pain syndrome in patients with discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy and lumboischialgia]

Acute pain syndromes caused by discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy and lumboischialgia are not uncommon in clinical practice and characterized by a high risk of becoming chronic. The pathogenetic aspects, features of the clinical picture, existing approaches to conservative treatment of these conditions are analyzed in this paper. Data on the efficacy and safety of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine (Neodolpasse) use in the treatment of vertebrogenic pain syndromes based on the NEODOLEX study results are presented, and the authors' own clinical observations are given. Possible reasons for the high efficacy of Neodolpasse in patients with discogenic radiculopathies and nonspecific back and neck pain are discussed.

Effectiveness of Tuina Therapy Combined With Yijinjing Exercise in the Treatment of Nonspecific Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Both tuina therapy and yijinjing exercise were beneficial to patients with nonspecific chronic neck pain, but the evidence for this combination is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of tuina therapy combined with yijinjing exercise compared with tuina therapy alone for patients with nonspecific chronic neck pain.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A 12-week, open-label, analyst-blinded randomized clinical trial (8-week intervention plus 4-week observational follow-up) was conducted from September 7, 2020, to October 25, 2021. A total of 102 participants with nonspecific chronic neck pain were recruited, and data were analyzed from December 10, 2021, to March 26, 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants in the tuina group or tuina combined with yijinjing group received 3 sessions of tuina therapy per week for 8 weeks, for a total of 24 sessions. Participants in the tuina combined with yijinjing group practiced yijinjing 3 times a week for 8 weeks, including an instructor-guided exercise at the hospital and 2 self-practice exercises at home.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in visual analog scale (VAS) score from baseline to week 8. Secondary outcomes included Neck Disability Index scores, Self-rating Anxiety Scale scores, tissue hardness, and active range of motion.

RESULTS

This randomized clinical trial recruited 102 patients (mean [SD] age, 36.5 [4.9] years; 69 [67.6%] female) who were randomized to 2 groups. All 102 patients (100%) completed all the outcome measurements. The mean difference in VAS scores from baseline at week 8 for the tuina combined with yijinjing group was -5.4 (95% CI, -5.8 to -5.1). At week 8, the difference in VAS score was -1.2 (95% CI, -1.6 to -0.8; P < .001) between the tuina group and the tuina combined with yijinjing group. The effectiveness of tuina combined with yijinjing in treating nonspecific chronic neck pain remained at the 12-week follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, for patients with nonspecific chronic neck pain, tuina combined with yijinjing was more effective than tuina therapy alone in terms of pain, functional recovery, and anxiety at week 8, and effectiveness remained at week 12. A combination of tuina and yijinjing should be considered in the management of nonspecific chronic neck pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000036805.

Rescaling pain intensity measures for meta-analyses of analgesic medicines for low back pain appears justified: an empirical examination from randomised trials

Objective

Meta-analyses of analgesic medicines for low back pain often rescale measures of pain intensity to use mean difference (MD) instead of standardised mean difference for pooled estimates. Although this improves clinical interpretability, it is not clear whether this method is justified. Our study evaluated the justification for this method.

Methods

We identified randomised clinical trials of analgesic medicines for adults with low back pain that used two scales with different ranges to measure the same construct of pain intensity. We transformed all data to a 0–100 scale, then compared between-group estimates across pairs of scales with different ranges.

Results

Twelve trials were included. Overall, differences in means between pain intensity measures that were rescaled to a common 0–100 scale appeared to be small and randomly distributed. For one study that measured pain intensity on a 0–100 scale and a 0–10 scale; when rescaled to 0–100, the difference in MD between the scales was 0.8 points out of 100. For three studies that measured pain intensity on a 0–10 scale and 0–3 scale; when rescaled to 0–100, the average difference in MD between the scales was 0.2 points out of 100 (range 5.5 points lower to 2.7 points higher). For two studies that measured pain intensity on a 0–100 scale and a 0–3 scale; when rescaled to 0–100, the average difference in MD between the scales was 0.7 points out of 100 (range 6.2 points lower to 12.1 points higher). Finally, for six studies that measured pain intensity on a 0–100 scale and a 0–4 scale; when rescaled to 0–100, the average difference in MD between the scales was 0.7 points (range 5.4 points lower to 8.3 points higher).

Conclusion

Rescaling pain intensity measures may be justified in meta-analyses of analgesic medicines for low back pain. Systematic reviewers may consider this method to improve clinical interpretability and enable more data to be included.

Study registration/data availability

Open Science Framework (osf.io/8rq7f).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01763-x.

Systemic corticosteroids for radicular and non-radicular low back pain

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids are medications with anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant properties. Systemic corticosteroids administered through the oral, intravenous, or intramuscular routes have been used to treat various types of low back pain, including radicular back pain (not due to spinal stenosis), non-radicular back pain, and spinal stenosis. However, there is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid for radicular low back pain, non-radicular low back pain, and symptomatic spinal stenosis in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was September 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials in adults of systematic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The major outcomes were pain, function, need for surgery, serious adverse effect, and presence of hyperglycemia. The minor outcomes were quality of life, successful outcomes, non-serious adverse events, and withdrawal due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials (1047 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Nine trials included participants with radicular low back pain, two trial with low back pain, and two trials with spinal stenosis. All trials blinded participants to receipt of systemic corticosteroids. Seven trials were at low risk of bias, five at unclear risk, and one at high risk of selection bias. Two trials were at high risk of attrition bias. Doses and duration of systemic corticosteroid therapy varied. Radicular low back pain For radicular low back pain, moderate-certainty evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids probably slightly decrease pain versus placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) 0.56 points better, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 0.04 on a 0 to 10 scale) and may slightly increase the likelihood of experiencing improvement in pain at short-term follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.66; absolute effect 5% better (95% CI 5% worse to 15% better). Systemic corticosteroids may not improve function at short-term follow-up (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.14 better; range 0.49 better to 0.21 worse) and probably increase the likelihood of improvement in function at short-term follow-up (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; absolute effect 19% better, 95% CI 8% better to 30% better). Systemic corticosteroids were associated with greater improvement in function versus placebo at long-term follow-up (MD -7.40, 95% CI -12.55 to -2.25 on the 0 to 100 Oswestry Disability Index) and greater likelihood of functional improvement (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.56), based on a single trial. There was no difference in likelihood of surgery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47). Evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids (administered as a single dose or as a short course of therapy) are not associated with increased risk of any adverse event, serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, or hyperglycemia, but estimates were imprecise as some trials did not report harms, and harms reporting was suboptimal in trials that did provide data. Limitations included variability across trials in interventions (e.g. corticosteroid used, dose and duration of treatment), clinical settings, and participants (e.g. duration of symptoms, methods for diagnosis); limited utility of subgroup analyses due to small numbers of trials; methodologic limitations or suboptimal reporting of methods by some trials; and too few trials to formally assess for publication bias using graphical or statistical tests for small sample effects. Non-radicular low back pain Evidence on systemic corticosteroids versus placebo for non-radicular pain was limited and suggested that systemic corticosteroids may be associated with slightly worse short-term pain but slightly better function. Spinal stenosis For spinal stenosis, limited evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids are probably no more effective than placebo for short-term pain or function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Systemic corticosteroids appear to be slightly effective at improving short-term pain and function in people with radicular low back pain not due to spinal stenosis, and might slightly improve long-term function. The effects of systemic corticosteroids in people with non-radicular low back pain are unclear and systemic corticosteroids are probably ineffective for spinal stenosis. A single dose or short course of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain does not appear to cause serious harms, but evidence is limited.

Some conservative interventions are more effective than others for people with chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

QUESTION

Which is the most effective conservative intervention for patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNSNP)?

DESIGN

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with CNSNP of at least 3 months duration.

INTERVENTIONS

All available pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcome was adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, 119 RCTs (12,496 patients; 32 interventions) were included. Risk of bias was low in 50.4% of trials, unclear in 22.7% and high in 26.9%. Compared with inert treatment, a combination of active and/or passive multimodal non-pharmacological inventions (eg, exercise and manual therapy) were effective for pain on a 0-to-10 scale at 1 month (MD range 0.84 to 3.74) and at 3 to 6 months (MD range 1.06 to 1.49), and effective on disability on a 0-to-100 scale at 1 month (MD range 10.26 to 14.09) and 3 to 6 months (MD range 5.60 to 16.46). These effects ranged from possible to definite clinical relevance. Compared with inert treatment, anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with another non-pharmacological treatment did not reduce pain at 1 month or 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, no superiority was found over inert treatment on both outcomes. Most mild adverse events were experienced following acupuncture/dry needling intervention. On average, the evidence varied from low to very low certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

While multimodal non-pharmacological interventions may reduce pain and disability for up to 3 to 6 months of follow-up when compared with inert treatment, the evidence was very uncertain about their effects. Better quality and larger trials are needed to improve the certainty of evidence.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019124501.

Factors Associated With Pain Medication Use and the Relationship to Chiropractic Treatment Outcomes for Patients With Low Back and Neck Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

The study objectives were to identify baseline factors associated with pain medication use and determine any differences in chiropractic treatment outcomes in patients with low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) depending on their use of pain medication.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, prospective outcomes study included 1077 adults with acute or chronic LBP and 845 adults with acute or chronic NP recruited from Swiss chiropractors in their offices within 4 years. Demographic data and the responses to the Patient's Global Impression of Change scale collected at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year were analyzed with the χ2 test. Baseline pain and disability levels were measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS), Oswestry questionnaire for LBP, and Bournemouth questionnaire for patients with NP and analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test between the 2 groups. To detect significant predictors of medication use at baseline, logistic regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Patients with acute LBP and NP were more likely than those with chronic pain to take pain medication (P < .001 LBP; P = .003 NP). Medication use was more likely with patients with radiculopathy (P < .001 LBP; P = .05 NP) who were smokers (P = .008 LBP; P = .024 NP) and those reporting below-average general health (P < .001 LBP and NP). Pain medication users had higher baseline pain (P < .001 LBP and NP) and disability (P < .001 LBP and NP) scores.

CONCLUSION

Patients with LBP and NP had significantly higher pain and disability levels at baseline, tended to have radiculopathy and poor health, were smokers, and presented during the acute phase. However, for this sample of patients, there were no differences in subjective improvement between users and non-users of pain medication for any data collection time point, which has management implications.

Medications for Treating Low Back Pain in Adults. Evidence for the Use of Paracetamol, Opioids, Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatories, Muscle Relaxants, Antibiotics, and Antidepressants: An Overview for Musculoskeletal Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Because pharmacological therapies may play an important role in managing musculoskeletal pain, the appropriate use of medicines for common conditions like low back pain (LBP) is critical. New evidence on the effects and safety of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioid analgesics, muscle relaxants, antibiotics, and antidepressants for LBP warrants an updated overview for musculoskeletal clinicians on this topic.

CLINICAL QUESTION

How effective and safe are paracetamol, NSAIDs, opioid analgesics, muscle relaxants, antibiotics, and antidepressants compared with placebo for treating LBP?

KEY RESULTS

For acute LBP (<12 weeks), muscle relaxants and NSAIDs may be superior to placebo for reducing pain, but the effects of opioids, antibiotics, and antidepressants are unknown. Paracetamol provides no additional benefit for acute LBP. For chronic LBP (>12 weeks), NSAIDs, antidepressants, and opioids may be superior to placebo for reducing pain, but opioids have an established profile of harms. Antibiotics may also reduce pain for people with chronic LBP with Modic type 1 changes, although the risks may outweigh their benefits. The effects of paracetamol and muscle relaxants for chronic LBP were unclear.

CLINICAL APPLICATION

NSAIDs may have a role in managing acute and chronic LBP, with cautious use in people who may be at greater risk of experiencing adverse events. Paracetamol, opioid analgesics, antibiotics, muscle relaxants, and antidepressants should only be prescribed following a discussion between the treating clinician and the patient, considering the risks and possible benefits, and after or in conjunction with recommended nonpharmacological strategies for improving LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(7):425-431. Epub: 18 May 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10788.

'Adequacy between medical prescription and intake of analgesics for acute low back and neck pain after presentation at the emergency department - do we prescribe too many tablets?'

OBJECTIVES

Acute low back and neck pain account for 3% to 6% of emergency room consultations. In Europe, analgesic prescriptions are issued in boxes. This study, therefore, aims to assess whether this type of packaging is adapted to the real needs of patients.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational multicenter study. Out of a total of 101 eligible patients who consulted the emergency department with acute low back or neck pain of muscular origin, 60 patients were included for statistical analysis. Follow-up was conducted by phone 10 to 14 days after admission. Different parameters were evaluated: the recovery, the amount of remaining tablets, and the demographic characteristics of patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-five percent of the evaluated patients were asymptomatic at follow-up and no longer taking the prescribed treatment. For all types of prescribed analgesics, a significant number of tablets remained in the drug boxes (P < 0.0001). After the resolution of symptoms, 90% of the studied patients reported a drug surplus. No significant difference was found in terms of patient demographic characteristics. The results were similar for both neck and low back pain subgroups.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that in case of acute low back and neck pain, a significant number of patients who return home after an emergency department consultation have a surplus of analgesics after recovery. These drugs could induce misuse. Moreover, this surplus gives rise to economic and environmental questions. One solution could be to prescribe a number of tablets depending on patients' pathology instead of entire boxes.

Ameliorative Potential of Hot Compress on Sciatic Nerve Pain in Chronic Constriction Injury-Induced Rat Model

Hot compress modalities are used to ameliorate pain despite prevalent confusion about which modality should be used and when. Most recommendations for hot compresses are based on empirical experience, with limited evidence to support its efficacy. To obtain insight into the nerve transmission mechanism of hot compresses and to identify the nerve injury marker proteins specifically associated with sciatic nerve pain, we established a rat model of chronic constriction injury (CCI) and performed mechanical allodynia, electrophysiology, and histopathological analysis. All CCI rats exhibited geometric representation of the affected hind paw, which indicated a hyper-impact on both mechanical gait and asymmetry of gait on day 28. The CCI model after 28 days of surgery significantly reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude, but also significantly reduced latency. Administration of hot compress for 3 weeks (heated at 40–42°C, cycle of 40 min, and rest for 20 min, three cycles each time, three times per week) significantly increased the paw withdrawal thresholds in response to stimulation by Von Frey fibers and reversed the CCI-induced reduced sciatic functional index (SFI) scores. Hot compress treatment in the CCI model improved CMAP amplitude and latency. The S100 protein expression level in the CCI+Hot compression group was 1.5-fold higher than in the CCI group; it dramatically reduced inflammation, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha and CD68 expression in nerve injury sites. Synaptophysin (Syn) expression in the CCI+Hot compression group was less than threefold in the CCI group at both nerve injury sites and brain (somatosensory cortex and hippocampus). This finding indicates that local nerve damage and inflammation cause significant alterations in the sensorimotor strip, and hot compress treatment could significantly ameliorate sciatic nerve pain by attenuating Syn and inflammatory factors from local pathological nerves to the brain. This study determines the potential efficacy and safety of hot compress, and may have important implications for its widespread use in sciatic nerve pain treatment.

Risk factors for low back pain outcome: Does it matter when they are measured?

BACKGROUND

The early identification of factors that increase risk of poor recovery from acute low back pain (LBP) is critical to prevent the transition to chronicity. Although most studies of risk factors for poor outcome in LBP tend to investigate the condition once it is already persistent, there is evidence to suggest that this differs from risk factors measured during the early-acute stage. This study aimed to identify early risk factors for poor outcome in the short- and long-term in individuals with acute LBP, and to compare this with factors identified at 3 months in the same cohort.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-three individuals were recruited within 2 weeks of an acute LBP episode and completed questionnaires related to their sociodemographic, psychological, clinical and history/treatment status at baseline and 3 months later, and their pain-level fortnightly for 12 months.

RESULTS

Of the 133 participants recruited, follow-up data was provided by 120 at 3 months, 97 at 6 months, 85 at 9 months and 94 at 12 months. Linear regression identified various factors at baseline (acute phase) and 3 months later that predicted short- and long-term outcome (pain level, change in pain). Key findings were that: (1) depressive symptoms at baseline most consistently predicted worse outcome; (2) psychological factors in general at 3 months were more predictive of outcome than when measured at baseline; (3) early health care utilisation predicted better outcome, whereas use of pain medication later (3 months) predicted worse outcome; and (4) sex and BMI predicted outcome inconsistently over 12-months.

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight the multidimensional nature of risk factors for poor outcome in LBP and the need to consider time variation in these factors.

[Analgesic and opioid-sparing effects of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine in the early postoperative period in cardiac surgery patients]

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of the effectiveness of a multimodal scheme of postoperative analgesia based on a fixed combination of orphenadrine and diclofenac against the background of patient-controlled analgesia with morphine in the early postoperative period in cardiac surgery patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective, randomized, comparative study evaluated two analgesic regimens. In 20 patients (group 1), «Neodolpasse» (a fixed combination of 30 mg Orphenadrine and 75 mg Diclofenac) was administered immediately after trachea extubation. The second injection was performed at VAS>50 mm not earlier than 12 hours after the first one. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine was started 2 hours after extubation, 20 patients of group 2 who were used PCA with Morphine as monotherapy. The intensity of pain taking into account the motor activity of patients was assessed a 100 mm visual-analog scale (VAS), as an additional objective criterion for the effectiveness of analgesia, the method of incentive spirometry was used.

RESULTS

A decrease in the severity of pain according to VAS from an average of 41 to 19 mm (p=0.036) was achieved already by the 1st hour from the start of Neodolpasse infusion, and in 80% of patients this effect persisted for 24 hours. 2 patients (10%) needed the administration of the 2nd dose after 12 hours. The infusion of Morphine was started 2 hours after extubation, a significant decrease in pain intensity was noted only at 4th hour, a significant decrease in pain intensity was noted only by 4 hours, and significant differences in the severity of pain in the comparison groups persisted at almost all stages of the study. The analgesic effect of the combination of orphenadrine and diclofenac had a positive effect on the function of respiration system with an increase in MILC by 1.5 times from the beginning of the study. In group 2, the observed adverse effects were associated with the use of Morphine and depended on its dose. No adverse effects of Neodolpasse were noted. The total 24 hour consumption of Morphine at PCA averaged 22.6 mg, and in the Neodolpasse group - 9.35 mg (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

There were demonstrated high analgesic efficacy, safety and significant opioid-sparing effect of a fixed combination of orphenadrine and diclofenac in the early postoperative period of cardiac surgery patients.

Cost-effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine versus placebo for hand osteoarthritis: economic evaluation of the HERO trial

Background: An economic evaluation alongside the Hydroxychloroquine Effectiveness in Reducing symptoms of hand Osteoarthritis (HERO) trial was undertaken to assess the cost-effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine compared with placebo for symptomatic treatment of hand osteoarthritis for patients with at least moderate hand pain and inadequate response to current therapies.

Methods: A trial-based cost–utility analysis was undertaken from the perspective of the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services over a 12-month time horizon, using evidence from 248 participants included in the HERO trial, conducted in England. Patient-level data were collected prospectively over a 12-month period, using participant-completed questionnaires and investigator forms, to collect healthcare utilisation, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ-5D-5L. The base-case analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat basis and used multiple imputation methods to deal with missing data. Results were presented in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (incremental cost per QALY) and net health benefit, with uncertainty surrounding the findings explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Results: The base-case analysis estimated slightly lower costs on average (−£11.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) −£15.60 to −£8.00) and marginally fewer QALYs (−0.0052; 95% CI −0.0057 to −0.0047) for participants in the hydroxychloroquine group versus placebo group at 12 months. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,267 per QALY lost indicated that although costs were saved, health-related quality of life was lost. Even assuming symmetrical preferences regarding losses and gains for health benefits, the findings do not fall within the cost-effective region. Similar findings arose for analyses conducted from the societal perspective and using complete cases only.

Conclusions: This economic evaluation indicates that hydroxychloroquine is unlikely to provide a cost-effective pain relief option for improving health-related quality of life in adult patients with moderate-to-severe hand osteoarthritis.

Sex-Specific Pharmacotherapy for Back Pain: A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Preventing transition to chronic back pain (CBP) is a long-sought strategy that could rescue patients from prolonged suffering. Recent rodent and human brain imaging studies suggest involvement of sexually dimorphic, dopaminergic-motivational, mesolimbic circuits in the transition to chronic pain (tCBP), and hint that the combination of carbidopa/levodopa and naproxen (LDP + NPX) may block tCBP. Here we evaluated, in people with recent-onset back pain, whether a 3-month treatment with LDP + NPX is safe, blocks tCBP, and whether its efficacy is sex-dependent.

METHODS

A total of 72 participants were enrolled and stratified by risk for tCBP using brain-imaging biomarkers. Low-risk participants entered a no-treatment arm. Others were randomized to placebo + naproxen or LDP + NPX for 3 months.

RESULTS

Both treatments resulted in more than 50% pain relief for approximately 75% of participants. A strong sex by treatment interaction was observed for daily pain intensity (phone NRS, P = 0.007), replicated on 4-week average pain (Pain/4w, P = 0.00001), and in intent-to-treat analysis (Pain/4w, P = 0.000004). Nucleus accumbens functional connectivity with medial prefrontal cortex, a predefined objective biomarker, showed sex dependence at baseline (P = 0.03) and sex-by-treatment interaction effect 3 months after treatment cessation (P = 0.031). Treatment modified the psychological profile of participants, and disrupted brain modeling-based predicted back pain intensity trajectories. Forty participants were queried 3.3 years from trial start; back pain ratings were similar between end of treatment and at 3.3 years (P = 0.62), indicating persistence of relief for this duration.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide the first evidence for preventing transition to chronic back pain using sex-specific pharmacotherapy. These provocative observations require confirmation in a larger study. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01951105.

Photodegradation of Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Stability Tests and Lipid Nanocarriers for Their Photoprotection

The present paper provides an updated overview of the methodologies applied in photodegradation studies of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Photostability tests, performed according to international standards, have clearly demonstrated the photolability of many drugs belonging to this class, observed during the preparation of commercial forms, administration or when dispersed in the environment. The photodegradation profile of these drugs is usually monitored by spectrophotometric or chromatographic techniques and in many studies the analytical data are processed by chemometric procedures. The application of multivariate analysis in the resolution of often-complex data sets makes it possible to estimate the pure spectra of the species involved in the degradation process and their concentration profiles. Given the wide use of these drugs, several pharmaceutical formulations have been investigated to improve their photostability in solution or gel, as well as the pharmacokinetic profile. The use of lipid nanocarriers as liposomes, niosomes or solid lipid nanoparticles has demonstrated to both minimize photodegradation and improve the controlled release of the entrapped drugs.

Can Acupuncture Improve Chronic Spinal Pain? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect and safety of acupuncture for the treatment of chronic spinal pain.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, the WHO Clinical Trial Registry, and the US National Library of Medicine clinical trial registry were searched from January 1, 2000, to November 1, 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with chronic spinal pain treated by acupuncture versus sham acupuncture, no treatment, or another treatment were included.

RESULTS

Data was extracted from 22 RCTs including 2588 patients. Pooled analysis revealed that acupuncture can reduce chronic spinal pain compared to sham acupuncture (weighted mean difference [WMD] -12.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] -15.86 to -8.24), mediation control (WMD -18.27, 95% CI -28.18 to -8.37), usual care control (WMD -9.57, 95% CI -13.48 to -9.44), and no treatment control (WMD -17.10, 95% CI -24.83 to -9.37). In terms of functional disability, acupuncture can improve physical function at immediate-term follow-up (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.74, 95% CI -2.04 to -1.44), short-term follow-up (SMD -0.89, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.62), and long-term follow-up (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -1.48 to -1.03).

CONCLUSION

In summary, compared to no treatment, sham acupuncture, or conventional therapy such as medication, massage, and physical exercise, acupuncture has a significantly superior effect on the reduction in chronic spinal pain and function improvement. Acupuncture might be an effective treatment for patients with chronic spinal pain and it is a safe therapy.

Copper-Catalyzed Intermolecular Functionalization of Unactivated C(sp3)-H Bonds and Aliphatic Carboxylic Acids

Intermolecular functionalization of C(sp³)-H bonds and aliphatic carboxylic acids enables the efficient synthesis of high value-added organic compounds from readily available starting materials. Although methods involving hydrogen atom transfer have been developed for such functionalization, these methods either work for only activated C(sp³)-H bonds or bring in a narrow set of functional groups. Here we describe a Cu-catalyzed process for the diverse functionalization of both unactivated C(sp³)-H bonds and aliphatic carboxylic acids. The process is enabled by the trapping of alkyl radicals generated through hydrogen atom abstraction by arylsulfonyl-based SOMO-philes, which introduces a large array of C, N, S, Se, and halide-based functional groups. The chemoselectivity can be switched from C-H functionalization to decarboxylative functionalization by matching the bond dissociation energy of the hydrogen atom transfer reagent with that of the target C-H or O-H bond.

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.

Development and Feasibility Testing of an Animated Cartoon-Based Self-Care Application for Low-Back Pain – a Pilot Study

Objectives: Use of animated cartoon for pain management is an emerging area, however, no study have explored it as a digital platform for rehabilitation of low-back pain (LBP). This study was aimed to develop and evaluate the feasibility of an animated cartoon-based self-care (ACBSC) app for LBP, and to examine the correlation between the app rating parameters and patients’ pain. Methods: This two-phase study comprised a development and feasibility testing components. Development of the ACBSC app was based on Mckenzie’s Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) extension protocolplus back hygiene following standard iteration and prototyping process. Twenty-eight consecutive patients with chronic non-specific LBP with 'direction Preference’ for extension based on the MDT screening algorithm participated in the feasibility phase. The participants utilized the cartoon-based app thrice weekly for two weeks. Outcomes were assessed in terms of usability, satisfaction and user’s experience using the system usability scale and mobile application rating scale. Quadruple visual analogue scale was used to assess pain intensity of the participants. Results: On a unified scale of 20, functionality (15.4 ± 2.41) and aesthetics 14 ± 2.00 had highest and least objective quality rating on the app parameters. Total objective and subjective quality rating of the app was 16.9 ± 1.97 and 15.6 ± 2.42 respectively. Total impact and usability score was 24.1 ± 3.39 (out of 30) and 27.8 ± 3.09 (out of 50). Participants reported that back care cartoon app mostly affect mindfulness/meditation/relaxation (42.9%), increases happiness/well-being (46.4%), leads to behavioural change (60.7%) and targets physical health (100%). There was no significant correlation between participants’ pain characteristics and app rating parameters (p>0.05). Conclusion: The animated cartoon-based self-care LBP app has moderate to high usability, functionality, aesthetics and quality rating, and may serve as an effective mobile-app for self-management of long-term LBP.

Non-Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Leading To Neurogenic Claudication: A Clinical Practice Guideline

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is increasingly common with an aging population and can be associated with significant symptoms and functional limitations. We developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on nonsurgical management of patients with LSS causing NC. Using the GRADE approach, a multidisciplinary guidelines panel based recommendations on evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published through June 2019, or expert consensus. The literature monitored up to October 2020. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, disability, quality of life, and walking capacity. The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with LSS (congenital and/or acquired, lateral recess or central canal, with or without low back pain, with or without spondylolisthesis) causing NC. The guidelines panel developed 6 recommendations based on randomized controlled trials and 5 others based on professional consensus, summarized in 3 overarching recommendations: (Grade: statements are all conditional/weak recommendations) Recommendation 1. For patients with LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may initially select multimodal care nonpharmacological therapies with education, advice and lifestyle changes, behavioral change techniques in conjunction with home exercise, manual therapy, and/or rehabilitation (moderate-quality evidence), traditional acupuncture on a trial basis (very low-quality evidence), and postoperative rehabilitation (supervised program of exercises and/or educational materials encouraging activity) with cognitive-behavioral therapy 12 weeks postsurgery (low-quality evidence). Recommendation 2. In patients LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may consider a trial of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. (very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 3. For patients LSS causing NC, we recommend against the use of the following pharmacological therapies: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, methylcobalamin, calcitonin, paracetamol, opioids, muscle relaxants, pregabalin (consensus-based), gabapentin (very low-quality), and epidural steroidal injections (high-quality evidence). PERSPECTIVE: This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on the nonsurgical management of lumbar spine stenosis, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective non-surgical management of lumbar spine stenosis should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the type of treatment involved, and multimodal care is recommended in most situations.

In vivo anti-inflammatory activity of Fabaceae species extracts screened by a new ex vivo assay using human whole blood

INTRODUCTION

Plants have been considered a promising source for discovering new compounds with pharmacological activities. The Fabaceae family comprises a large variety of species that produce substances with diverse therapeutic potential, including anti-inflammatory activity. The limitations of current anti-inflammatories generate the need to research new anti-inflammatory structures with higher efficacy as well as develop methods for screening multiple samples, reliably and ethically, to assess such therapeutic properties.

OBJECTIVE

Validate and apply a quantification method for prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂ ) production from an ex vivo assay in human blood in order to screen anti-inflammatory activity present in many Fabaceae species extracts.

METHODS

Human blood was incubated with extracts from 47 Fabaceae species. After lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced inflammation, PGE₂ was quantified in the plasma by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The extracts that presented PGE₂ production inhibition were further assessed through in vivo assay and then chemically characterised through an analysis of ultra-performance liquid chromatography electrospray ionisation quadrupole time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS² ) data.

RESULTS

The new ex vivo anti-inflammatory assay showed that five out of the 47 Fabaceae species inhibited PGE₂ production. Results from an in vivo assay and the metabolic profile of the active extracts supported the anti-inflammatory potential of four species.

CONCLUSION

The quantification method for PGE₂ demonstrated fast, sensitive, precise, and accurate results. The new ex vivo anti-inflammatory assay comprised a great, reliable, and ethical approach for the screening of a large number of samples before an in vivo bioassay. Additionally, the four active extracts in both ex vivo and in vivo assays may be useful for the development of more efficient anti-inflammatory drugs.

Responses after spinal interventions in a clinical pain practice - a pragmatic observational study

Introduction There is limited evidence for effect of interventional treatment, and pragmatic studies are needed to assess these interventions within a clinical setting. The aim of this study was to describe patients referred to an interventional pain clinic and investigate responses after spinal intervention in general and for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transforaminal epidural corticosteroid administration (TECA), specifically. Methods This is a prospective, non-controlled study of patients with chronic spinal pain. The procedures were performed in accordance with the Spine Intervention Society recommendations. Outcome data after a median of 4.5 months are presented, and for those treated with RFA also after 6 and 12 months. Results Among 815 patients, 190 patients underwent diagnostic blocks only and 625 interventional treatment, of these 94 RFA and 246 TECA. Of the whole sample 70% reported pain reduction, for 49% ≥ 50%, while 9% were pain free (p < 0.001). Highest pain intensity decreased from 7.1 to 5.4 [95% Confidence Interval of the Difference (95%-CI): 1.4-1.9] (p < 0.001), while Euroqual - visual analogue scale for general health (EQ-VAS) improved from 48 to 58 (95%-CI: 7.6-11.9) (p < 0.001), and Euroqual-5 Dimensions-5 Levels Index for health related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L Index) from 0.489 to 0.628 (95%-CI: 0.123-0.157) (p < 0.001). The proportions, not taking analgesics, increased from 16% to 30%, and proportion taking strong opioids decreased from 14% to 9% (p < 0.001). We found no significant change in proportion receiving physiotherapy/other treatment nor occupational status. No complications were reported. Among patients treated with RFA, 77% reported pain reduction, for 56% ≥ 50%, while 9% were pain free (p < 0.001). Highest pain intensity decreased from 6.9 to 4.6 (95%-CI: 1.6-3.0) (p < 0.001), while EQ-VAS improved from 47 to 57 (95%-CI: 4.8-13.6 (p < 0.001), and EQ-5D-5L Index from 0.489 to 0.643 (95%-CI: 0.117-0.191) (p < 0.001). The proportion not taking analgesics, increased from 7% to 23% and proportion taking strong opioids decreased from 16% to 10%. Among patients who responded at 6- and 12-month follow up, the proportions reporting pain reduction, EQ-VAS, and EQ-5D-5L Index remained significantly improved from baseline, and the change in proportions taking analgesic and opioids achieved statistical significance. We found no significant change in proportion receiving physiotherapy/other treatment nor occupational status. Among patients treated with TECA, 58% reported pain reduction, for 36% ≥ 50%, while 5% were pain free (p < 0.001). Highest pain intensity decreased from 7.2 to 6.2 (95%-CI 0.5-1.4) (p < 0.001), while EQ-VAS improved from 46 to 52 (95%-CI: 2.0-3.6) (p < 0.001), and EQ-5D-5L Index from 0.456 to 0.571 (95%-CI: 0.077-0.138) (p < 0.001). The proportions, not taking analgesics, increased from 17% to 27% and proportion taking strong opioids decreased from 15% to 10%, but the changes did not reach statistical significance. We found no significant changes in the proportion who recieved physiotherapy/other treatment nor occupational status. Conclusion The study demonstrates substantial short-term responses after spinal intervention and long-lasting improvement for a subsample of the RFA treated patients. We observed larger proportions reporting pain reduction among those treated with cervical RFA. Implementation Quality assessment should be implemented in interventional pain clinics to improve treatment quality.

Back and neck pain: in support of routine delivery of non-pharmacologic treatments as a way to improve individual and population health

Chronic back and neck pain are highly prevalent conditions that are among the largest drivers of physical disability and cost in the world. Recent clinical practice guidelines recommend use of non-pharmacologic treatments to decrease pain and improve physical function for individuals with back and neck pain. However, delivery of these treatments remains a challenge because common care delivery models for back and neck pain incentivize treatments that are not in the best interests of patients, the overall health system, or society. This narrative review focuses on the need to increase use of non-pharmacologic treatment as part of routine care for back and neck pain. First, we present the evidence base and summarize recommendations from clinical practice guidelines regarding non-pharmacologic treatments. Second, we characterize current use patterns for non-pharmacologic treatments and identify potential barriers to their delivery. Addressing these barriers will require coordinated efforts from multiple stakeholders to prioritize evidence-based non-pharmacologic treatment approaches over low value care for back and neck pain. These stakeholders include patients, health care providers, health care organizations, administrators, payers, policymakers and researchers.

Low Back Pain

Low back pain is a common problem that is the leading cause of disability and is associated with high costs. Evaluation focuses on identification of risk factors indicating a serious underlying condition and increased risk for persistent disabling symptoms in order to guide selective use of diagnostic testing (including imaging) and treatments. Nonpharmacologic therapies, including exercise and psychosocial management, are preferred for most patients with low back pain and may be supplemented with adjunctive drug therapies. Surgery and interventional procedures are options in a minority of patients who do not respond to standard treatments.

Efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for adults with non-specific low back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for low back pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and WHO ICTRP from inception to 23 February 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials of muscle relaxants compared with placebo, usual care, waiting list, or no treatment in adults (≥18 years) reporting non-specific low back pain.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations, respectively. Random effects meta-analytical models through restricted maximum likelihood estimation were used to estimate pooled effects and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Outcomes included pain intensity (measured on a 0-100 point scale), disability (0-100 point scale), acceptability (discontinuation of the drug for any reason during treatment), and safety (adverse events, serious adverse events, and number of participants who withdrew from the trial because of an adverse event).

RESULTS

49 trials were included in the review, of which 31, sampling 6505 participants, were quantitatively analysed. For acute low back pain, very low certainty evidence showed that at two weeks or less non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics were associated with a reduction in pain intensity compared with control (mean difference -7.7, 95% confidence interval-12.1 to-3.3) but not a reduction in disability (-3.3, -7.3 to 0.7). Low and very low certainty evidence showed that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might increase the risk of an adverse event (relative risk 1.6, 1.2 to 2.0) and might have little to no effect on acceptability (0.8, 0.6 to 1.1) compared with control for acute low back pain, respectively. The number of trials investigating other muscle relaxants and different durations of low back pain were small and the certainty of evidence was reduced because most trials were at high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable uncertainty exists about the clinical efficacy and safety of muscle relaxants. Very low and low certainty evidence shows that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might provide small but not clinically important reductions in pain intensity at or before two weeks and might increase the risk of an adverse event in acute low back pain, respectively. Large, high quality, placebo controlled trials are urgently needed to resolve uncertainty.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019126820 and Open Science Framework https://osf.io/mu2f5/.

The Role of Organic Small Molecules in Pain Management

In this review, a timeline starting at the willow bark and ending in the latest discoveries of analgesic and anti-inflammatory drugs will be discussed. Furthermore, the chemical features of the different small organic molecules that have been used in pain management will be studied. Then, the mechanism of different types of pain will be assessed, including neuropathic pain, inflammatory pain, and the relationship found between oxidative stress and pain. This will include obtaining insights into the cyclooxygenase action mechanism of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) such as ibuprofen and etoricoxib and the structural difference between the two cyclooxygenase isoforms leading to a selective inhibition, the action mechanism of pregabalin and its use in chronic neuropathic pain, new theories and studies on the analgesic action mechanism of paracetamol and how changes in its structure can lead to better characteristics of this drug, and cannabinoid action mechanism in managing pain through a cannabinoid receptor mechanism. Finally, an overview of the different approaches science is taking to develop more efficient molecules for pain treatment will be presented.

Factors associated with care-seeking for low back pain when genetics and the familial environment are considered

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Care-seekers for LBP cause substantial economic burden to governments and the healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate lifestyle and health-related factors associated with care-seeking (including pain medication use) in individuals experiencing LBP, after controlling for important genetic and early environmental confounders through the use of a within-twin pair case-control design.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of observational longitudinal data, derived from the Australian Twin low BACK pain (AUTBACK) study, was performed on 66 twin pairs that presented with similar symptoms of LBP at baseline but became discordant for care-seeking behaviour over one month.

METHODS

Subjective and objective assessment of pain intensity, disability, depression, sleep quality, physical activity and body mass index were performed. Data was analysed using stepwise conditional logistic regression in two stages: within-pair case-control for monozygotic and dizygotic twins together; and within-pair case-control analysis of monozygotic twins only. Results were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Higher LBP intensity (OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.3-6.8) and poorer sleep quality (OR 10.9; 95% CI 1.5-77.7) were the main factors that increased the likelihood of care-seeking for LBP. These associations remained significant and increased in magnitude after adjusting for genetic confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with higher LBP intensity and worse sleep quality are more likely to seek care for LBP, and this relationship is likely to be causal after adjustment of familial and genetic confounding.

Comparative safety review of current treatment options for chronic low back pain and unmet needs: a narrative review

Introduction: The healthcare expenditures in the United States are substantial for the management of refractory, chronic low back pain (CLBP). The objective of this review is to summarize and evaluate the safety profiles of different pharmacological treatment options used in the management of CLBP.Areas covered: The authors conducted a search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the safety profiles of different pharmacological agents used in the management of CLBP. This narrative review covered corticosteroids, opioids, antidepressants, gabapentinoids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, muscle relaxants, anti-nerve growth factor antibodies and topical agents, as monotherapy or in combination.Expert opinion: The risk-benefit ratio of a particular treatment is a subject driving the ongoing development of pharmaceuticals. The most commonly reported AEs across all drug classes are of gastrointestinal nature, followed by neurological and skin-related. These AEs include nausea, dizziness, constipation, arthralgia, headache, dry mouth, pruritus, etc. The majority of the AEs reported are not life-threatening, although they may lower patients' quality of life, thus, affecting their compliance. One of the biggest limitations of our review stems from the paucity of safety assessments in published RCTs. Advances in our understanding of the neurobiology of pain will promote development of new therapeutic strategies.

Low back pain management - What Australian community pharmacists recommend and how this compares to current clinical guidelines

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a serious and debilitating condition that necessitates proper assessment and management. Community pharmacists are ideally positioned to interact with these patients and provide therapeutic recommendations in line with LBP clinical guidelines, which have changed in recent years. Understanding what therapeutic strategies pharmacists recommend and why, can provide insights into whether these recommendations are in line with current clinical resources.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to examine community pharmacists' views, knowledge and practices in LBP management compared to current clinical guidelines; and investigate their views regarding the accessibility and use of clinical LBP resources.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of Australian community pharmacists was conducted using a structured, self-administered, anonymous online survey. Primary outcomes assessed were pharmacists' views, practices and recommendations in low back pain of different severities, as well as views on the use and accessibility of clinical guidelines.

KEY FINDINGS

A total of 176 pharmacists completed the survey. Most recommended non-pharmacological strategies to manage mild symptoms for both adult and teenage groups, escalating to pharmacological with increasing symptom severity. Approximately 75% reported they would recommend ibuprofen over paracetamol for low back pain. Approximately 40% agreed there is difficulty in finding and accessing clinical resources and more than 40% reported being unaware that there are specific guidelines available for the management of LBP symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Results from this study highlight an important need to further improve the knowledge and awareness of pharmacists in low back pain management, including locating and accessing clinical resources.