Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review

Postural and Lumbopelvic Control: Crucial Factors in the Functionality of Patients with Low Back Pain-A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders in adults worldwide. Alterations in postural and lumbopelvic control and functionality appear to be determining factors in its resolution. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed. Patients with LBP were enrolled. Lumbar pain; postural control (PC), total area of the center of pressure (TACOP), and the velocity of the center of pressure (VCOP); lumbopelvic control (LPC); and functionality were evaluated. Statistical tests were implemented to determine differences between sex and age and correlation models among the variables. Results: Thirty adult patients with LBP were analyzed. A strong relationship was found between pain and functionality [r = 0.64; p < 0.001]. A moderate relationship was found between pain and TACOP [r = 0.395; p = 0.031]. A moderate relationship was observed between TACOP and functionality [0.413; p = 0.023] and between LPC and TACOP [r = 0.416; p = 0.001]. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the significant impact of LBP on postural control, lumbopelvic control, and functionality. These results highlight the importance of addressing postural and lumbopelvic control in LBP treatment. No significant differences based on gender and age were found, but all clinical variables differed significantly between the LBP and control groups, underscoring the unique impairments associated with LBP.

A Secondary Analysis of Gender Respiratory Features for Ultrasonography Bilateral Diaphragm Thickness, Respiratory Pressures, and Pulmonary Function in Low Back Pain

The aim of the present study was to determine the gender respiratory differences of bilateral diaphragm thickness, respiratory pressures, and pulmonary function in patients with low back pain (LBP). A sample of 90 participants with nonspecific LBP was recruited and matched paired by sex (45 women and 45 men). Respiratory outcomes included bilateral diaphragm thickness by ultrasonography, respiratory muscle strength by maximum inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory (MEP) pressures, and pulmonary function by forced expiratory volume during 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and FEV1/FVC spirometry parameters. The comparison of respiratory outcomes presented significant differences (p < 0.001), with a large effect size (d = 1.26-1.58) showing means differences (95% CI) for MIP of -32.26 (-42.99, -21.53) cm H2O, MEP of -50.66 (-64.08, -37.25) cm H2O, FEV1 of -0.92 (-1.18, -0.65) L, and FVC of -1.00 (-1.32, -0.69) L, with lower values for females versus males. Gender-based respiratory differences were presented for maximum respiratory pressures and pulmonary function in patients with nonspecific LBP. Women presented greater inspiratory and expiratory muscle weakness as well as worse lung function, although these differences were not linked to diaphragm thickness during normal breathing.

Consideration of sex and gender in European clinical practice guidelines in internal medicine: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are a powerful instrument to ensure evidence-based practice in clinical diagnostics and disease management. As knowledge about the impact of sex and gender on health and disease is emerging, the need for its transfer into clinical practice is becoming more urgent. However, a systematic evaluation of the incorporation of sex-related and gender-related knowledge into CPGs in Europe is currently not available. This systematic review will fill this gap. We will analyse the operationalisation of sex and gender in internal medicine CPGs in Europe and the translation of this information into tailored recommendations. The results will offer a baseline assessment to inform prospective sex-sensitive and gender-sensitive guideline development.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

CPGs published by European internal medicine guidelines will be analysed according to a pre-established analysis framework. CPGs will be identified by a two-step approach, that is, through direct contact with the organisations and by a PubMed search, to ensure capture of all relevant guidelines. Prespecified keywords will be employed to identify the representation of sex-related and gender-related content throughout the CPGs. Structured data will be collected through machine-assisted text mining. Identified texts will then be manually reviewed by two independent coders using a specifically developed checklist.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require approval by an ethics board. It will provide an overview of sex and gender considerations in European CPGs in the field of internal medicine regarding the time frame 2012-2022.

More than one third of clinical practice guidelines on low back pain overlap in AGREE II appraisals. Research wasted?

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews can apply the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool to critically appraise clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treating low back pain (LBP); however, when appraisals differ in CPG quality rating, stakeholders, clinicians, and policy-makers will find it difficult to discern a unique judgement of CPG quality. We wanted to determine the proportion of overlapping CPGs for LBP in appraisals that applied AGREE II. We also compared inter-rater reliability and variability across appraisals.

METHODS

For this meta-epidemiological study we searched six databases for appraisals of CPGs for LBP. The general characteristics of the appraisals were collected; the unit of analysis was the CPG evaluated in each appraisal. The inter-rater reliability and the variability of AGREE II domain scores for overall assessment were measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient and descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Overall, 43 CPGs out of 106 (40.6%) overlapped in seventeen appraisals. Half of the appraisals (53%) reported a protocol registration. Reporting of AGREE II assessment was heterogeneous and generally of poor quality: overall assessment 1 (overall CPG quality) was rated in 11 appraisals (64.7%) and overall assessment 2 (recommendation for use) in four (23.5%). Inter-rater reliability was substantial/perfect in 78.3% of overlapping CPGs. The domains with most variability were Domain 6 (mean interquartile range [IQR] 38.6), Domain 5 (mean IQR 28.9), and Domain 2 (mean IQR 27.7).

CONCLUSIONS

More than one third of CPGs for LBP have been re-appraised in the last six years with CPGs quality confirmed in most assessments. Our findings suggest that before conducting a new appraisal, researchers should check systematic review registers for existing appraisals. Clinicians need to rely on updated CPGs of high quality and confirmed by perfect agreement in multiple appraisals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Protocol Registration OSF: https://osf.io/rz7nh/.

Allied health professionals: A promising ally in the work against health inequalities- A rapid review

Objectives

Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) have a crucial role in reducing health inequalities. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding the ways they can fulfil this role. This rapid review explores the ways in which AHPs can decrease health care or health outcome inequalities; address inequalities in the social determinants of health; and support disadvantaged groups at an individual, organisational and system level.

Study design

Rapid review following Cochrane criteria and narrative synthesis.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and AMED were searched combined with grey literature, to identify quantitative or qualitative review articles published between January 2010 and February 2021.

Results

From 8727 references, 36 met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed with the AMSTAR tool and was generally low. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the studies, and a narrative synthesis was produced. Three themes emerged at patient and organisational level: 1) access to AHP services; 2) quality of care; and 3) social determinants of health. Two themes emerged at system level: 1) unequal workforce distribution and 2) lack of inclusive clinical guidelines.

Conclusions

This rapid review offers a broad range of evidence on the ways AHPs can contribute to the reduction of inequalities in health care, both in terms of access and quality of care and in health outcomes. More research is needed to further understand the impact of AHPs on inequalities affecting specific groups and their contribution to equitable distribution of social determinants of health.

How Decompression Surgery Improves the Lower Back Pain in Patient with Lumbar Degenerative Stenosis: A Propensity-score-matched Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective case series of patients treated surgically for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

OBJECTIVE

We investigated how laminectomy improves lower back pain (LBP) and the factors associated with poor improvement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar laminectomy is effective for alleviating neurological symptoms caused by LSS, whereas its effect on LBP is still controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from 436 patients (age 72 yrs, 69% males) who underwent laminectomy for LSS with 2 years of follow-up. We analyzed the following risk factors for residual LBP by uni- and multivariate analyses: age, sex, smoking, occupation, comorbidities, frailty, joint replacement, vertebral fracture, DISH, HRQOL, complications, and the presence of spinal instability. The LBP of male and female patients was analyzed after propensity score matching of known confounders. Patient-reported outcomes (JOABPEQ and VAS scores) were obtained at baseline and the 2-year postoperative follow-up.

RESULTS

LBP was significantly improved at 2 years post operation (VAS change 2.3 [95% CI 2.0-2.6], P < 0.01). Fifty-five percent of the patients achieved an MCID, with 67% having no or mild LBP. In the multivariate analysis, sex and baseline LBP were independent risk factors (female: OR 1.9 [1.2-3.0], baseline LBP [VAS≥7.5]: OR 1.9 [1.2-3.1]). Furthermore, the independent risk factors for severe baseline LBP were sex and mental status (female: OR 1.7 [1.1-2.7], P = 0.03, mental status: OR 3.8 [2.4-6.0], P < 0.01). However, an analysis of 102 pairs of propensity-score-matched male and female patients showed no difference in the improvement of LBP (male vs. female: VAS 3.8 ± 2.8 vs. 4.0 ± 2.9, P = 0.61, VAS change 3.1 ± 2.9 vs. 2.7 ± 3.0, P = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Decompression surgery for LSS significantly improved LBP. Sex and baseline LBP were risk factors for residual LBP. However, when males and females were matched by confounders, no difference was found in the LBP after surgery. Patients with severe baseline LBP may need further evaluation for their mental status because these patients are likely to have mental problems that potentially contribute to persistent LBP.Level of Evidence: 4.

Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review

Objective

The purpose of this scoping review is to determine if and how sex and gender have been incorporated into low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG), and if sex and gender terms have been used properly.

Methods

CPGs were searched on MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, TRIP and PEDro from 2010 to 2020. The inclusion criteria were English language, CGPs within physiotherapy scope of practice and for adult population with LBP of any type or duration. Three pairs of independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Guidelines were searched for sex/gender-related terms and recommendations were extracted. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) was used to evaluate the quality of the CPGs.

Results

Thirty-six CPGs were included, of which 15 were test-positive for sex or gender terms. Only 33% (n=5) of CPGs incorporated sex or gender into diagnostic or management recommendations. Sixty percent of guidelines (n=9) only referenced sex or gender in relation to epidemiology, risk factors or prognostic data, and made no specific recommendations. Overall, there was no observable relationship between guideline quality and likeliness of integrating sex or gender terms. The majority of guidelines used sex and gender terms interchangeably, and no guidelines defined sex or gender.

Conclusion

CPGs did not consistently consider sex and gender differences in assessment, diagnosis or treatment of LBP. When it was considered, sex and gender terms were used interchangeably, and considerations were primarily regarding pregnancy. Researchers should consider the importance of including sex-based and/or gender-based recommendations into future LBP CPGs.