Supporting self-management of low back pain with an internet intervention in primary care: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial of clinical and cost-effectiveness (SupportBack 2)

Supporting self-management of low back pain with an internet intervention with and without telephone support in primary care (SupportBack 2): a randomised controlled trial of clinical and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is prevalent and a leading cause of disability. We aimed to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an accessible, scalable internet intervention for supporting behavioural self-management (SupportBack).

METHODS

Participants in UK primary care with low back pain without serious spinal pathology were randomly assigned 1:1:1 using computer algorithms stratified by disability level and telephone-support centre to usual care, usual care and SupportBack, or usual care and SupportBack with physiotherapist telephone-support (three brief calls). The primary outcome was low back pain-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMDQ] score) at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months using a repeated measures model, analysed by intention to treat using 97·5% CIs. A parallel economic evaluation from a health services perspective was used to estimate cost-effectiveness. People with lived experience of low back pain were involved in this trial from the outset. This completed trial was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN14736486.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 29, 2018, and Jan 12, 2021, 825 participants were randomly assigned (274 to usual care, 275 to SupportBack only, 276 to SupportBack with telephone-support). Participants had a mean age of 54 (SD 15), 479 (58%) of 821 were women and 342 (42%) were men, and 591 (92%) of 641 were White. Follow-up rates were 687 (83%) at 6 weeks, 598 (73%) at 3 months, 589 (72%) at 6 months, and 652 (79%) at 12 months. For the primary analysis, 736 participants were analysed (249 usual care, 245 SupportBack, and 242 SupportBack with telephone support). At a significance level of 0·025, there was no difference in RMDQ over 12 months with SupportBack versus usual care (adjusted mean difference -0·5 [97·5% CI -1·2 to 0·2]; p=0·085) or SupportBack with telephone-support versus usual care (-0·6 [-1·2 to 0·1]; p=0·048). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. The economic evaluation showed that the SupportBack group dominated usual care, being both more effective and less costly. Both interventions were likely to be cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per quality adjusted life year compared with usual care.

INTERPRETATION

The SupportBack internet interventions did not significantly reduce low back pain-related disability over 12 months compared with usual care. They were likely to be cost-effective and safe. Clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and safety should be considered together when determining whether to apply these interventions in clinical practice.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment (16/111/78).

If You Build It, Will They Come? Patient and Provider Use of a Novel Hybrid Telehealth Care Pathway for Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe the referrals and use of a hybrid care model for low back pain that includes on-site care by physical therapists, physical activity training, and psychologically informed practice (PiP) delivered by telehealth in the Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Low Back Pain (AIM-Back) trial.

METHODS

Data were collected from November 2020 through February 2023 from 5 Veteran Health Administration clinics participating in AIM-Back, a multisite, cluster-randomized embedded pragmatic trial. The authors extracted data from the Veteran Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse to describe referral and enrollment metrics, telehealth use (eg, distribution of physical activity and PiP calls), and treatments used by physical therapists and telehealth providers.

RESULTS

Seven hundred one veterans were referred to the AIM-Back trial with 422 enrolling in the program (consult-to-enrollment rate = 60.2%). After travel restrictions were lifted, site visits resulted in a significant increase in referrals and a number of new referring providers. At initial evaluation by on-site physical therapists, 92.2% of veterans received pain modulation (eg, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, manual therapy). Over 81% of enrollees completed at least 1 telehealth physical activity call, with a mean of 2.8 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of the 167 veterans who screened as medium to high risk of persistent disability, 74.9% completed at least 1 PiP call, with a mean of 2.5 (SD = 2.0) calls out of 6. Of those who completed at least 1 PiP call (n = 125), 100% received communication strategies, 97.6% received pain coping skills training, 89.6% received activity-based treatments, and 99.2% received education in a home program.

CONCLUSION

In implementing a hybrid care pathway for low back pain, the authors observed consistency in the delivery of core components (ie, pain modulation, use of physical activity training, and risk stratification to PiP), notable variability in telehealth calls, high use of PiP components, and increased referrals with tailored provider engagement.

IMPACT

These findings describe variability occurring within a hybrid care pathway and can inform future implementation efforts.

Study protocol for a feasibility study of an online educational programme for people working and living with persistent low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the main cause of activity limitation and work absence across the world, leading to a high social and economic burden for individuals, families, the labour market and society. The overall aim of this multicentre study is to test the usability, acceptability and feasibility of an evidence-based, digital education programme for people living and working with persistent LBP who are in sedentary or physically demanding jobs and need advice on ergonomics, self-management of pain and healthy behavioural strategies.

METHODS

This is the protocol of a multinational, multicentre, prospective uncontrolled feasibility study targeting people with persistent LBP in Lithuania, Northern Ireland, Italy, Sweden and Portugal. Eligible participants will be offered the opportunity to use the MyRelief educational platform as part of their care and will undergo evaluations at baseline (enrollment) and 1-month follow-up. Feasibility will be assessed using measures of recruitment and retention, intervention engagement, outcome measure completion rates and within-group effect sizes in response to the digital education programme.

DISCUSSION

This study will identify the challenges and implications of delivering a digital training programme in advance of potentially delivering the programme via an online educational platform available on mobile devices. The findings will inform the design of a future randomised controlled trial if it proves feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04673773 . Registered 17 December 2020.

In non-specific low back pain, is an exercise program carried out through telerehabilitation as effective as one carried out in a physiotherapy center? A controlled randomized trial

BACKGROUND

s:The effectiveness of telerehabilitation (TLRH) in patients with non-specific low back pain (NLBP) remains unknown. No study till date has investigated the efficacy of a mobile-based TLRH in patients with NLBP.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if a TLRH program is as effective as a clinical exercise programme in improving disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength in patients with NLBP.

DESIGN

Single-blind, two-armed, randomized controlled study.

METHOD

A total of 71 individuals with NLBP were randomly allocated to either the TLRH home group (TLRH) or clinic group (CG). The TLRH followed exercise videos and read information on pain neurophysiology. The CG performed the same exercises and received on-site pain education. Both groups performed the exercises twice weekly for 8 weeks. Disability, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and hip pain and strength were assessed at baseline, at post-treatment, and at three months.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences for time-by-group interaction were detected in the strength of left hip flexors (supine [F = 8.356; p = .005]; sitting [F = 9.828; p = .003]), right hip extensors with extended knee [F = 7.461; p = .008], left hip extensors (extended knee [F = 13.175; p = .001]; flexed knee [F = 13.505; p < .001]), pain during flexion of the right [F = 5.133; p = .027] and left [F = 4.731; p = .033] hips in the supine position, disability [F = 4.557; p = .014], and pain catastrophizing [F = 14.132; p < .001].

CONCLUSION

A TLRH mobile-based is as effective as clinical treatment in improving disability, pain catastrophizing, and pain and strength of the hip structures in patients with NLBP.