Initial presentation for acute low back pain: is early physical therapy associated with healthcare utilization and spending? A retrospective review of a National Database

Preliminary Validity and Acceptability of Motion Tape for Measuring Low Back Movement: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a significant public health problem that can result in physical disability and financial burden for the individual and society. Physical therapy is effective for managing LBP and includes evaluation of posture and movement, interventions directed at modifying posture and movement, and prescription of exercises. However, physical therapists have limited tools for objective evaluation of low back posture and movement and monitoring of exercises, and this evaluation is limited to the time frame of a clinical encounter. There is a need for a valid tool that can be used to evaluate low back posture and movement and monitor exercises outside the clinic. To address this need, a fabric-based, wearable sensor, Motion Tape (MT), was developed and adapted for a low back use case. MT is a low-profile, disposable, self-adhesive, skin-strain sensor developed by spray coating piezoresistive graphene nanocomposites directly onto commercial kinesiology tape.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to (1) validate MT for measuring low back posture and movement and (2) assess the acceptability of MT for users.

METHODS

A total of 10 participants without LBP were tested. A 3D optical motion capture system was used as a reference standard to measure low back kinematics. Retroreflective markers and a matrix of MTs were placed on the low back to measure kinematics (motion capture) and strain (MT) simultaneously during low back movements in the sagittal, frontal, and axial planes. Cross-correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the concurrent validity of MT strain in reference motion capture kinematics during each movement. The acceptability of MT was assessed using semistructured interviews conducted with each participant after laboratory testing. Interview data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis to identify themes and subthemes of user acceptability.

RESULTS

Visual inspection of concurrent MT strain and kinematics of the low back indicated that MT can distinguish between different movement directions. Cross-correlation coefficients between MT strain and motion capture kinematics ranged from -0.915 to 0.983, and the strength of the correlations varied across MT placements and low back movement directions. Regarding user acceptability, participants expressed enthusiasm toward MT and believed that it would be helpful for remote interventions for LBP but provided suggestions for improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

MT was able to distinguish between different low back movements, and most MTs demonstrated moderate to high correlation with motion capture kinematics. This preliminary laboratory validation of MT provides a basis for future device improvements, which will also involve testing in a free-living environment. Overall, users found MT acceptable for use in physical therapy for managing LBP.

Epidemiology of back pain visits and medication usage among United States emergency departments from 2016 to 2023

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is a common reason for presentation to the Emergency Department (ED). However, there are limited large-scale, recent data on the epidemiology, disposition, and medication administration for this condition. The objective of this was to assess the incidence, admission rates, medication administrations, and discharge prescriptions among ED visits for low back pain in the United States.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of ED presentations for low back pain from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2023 using the Epic Cosmos database. All ED visits for adults with low back pain identified by ICD-10 codes were included. Outcomes included admission rates, distribution of opioid, benzodiazepine, (non-benzodiazepine) muscle relaxant, acetaminophen, NSAID, and corticosteroid medications administered in the ED, and distribution of opioid, benzodiazepine, muscle relaxant, and corticosteroid medications given upon discharge. Subgroup analyses were performed by specific medication.

RESULTS

Of 207,154,419 ED encounters, 12,241,240 (5.9%) were due to back pain with 1,957,299 of these (16.0%) admitted. The admission rate increased over time from 12.8% to 17.1%. The most common medication given in the ED was opioids (40.7%), followed by acetaminophen (37.8%), NSAIDs (22.6%), muscle relaxants (18.4%) benzodiazepines (12.8%), and corticosteroids (5.5%). The most common medications prescribed upon discharge were muscle relaxants (32.1%), followed by opioids (23.2%), corticosteroids (12.2%), and benzodiazepines (3.0%).

CONCLUSION

Low back pain represents a common reason for presentation to the ED, and admissions have been increasing over time. Opioids remain the most common ED medication, whereas muscle relaxants have arisen as the most common discharge prescription. These findings can help inform health policy decisions, resource allocation, and evidence-based interventions for medication administration.

On-Site Physiotherapy in Emergency Department Patients Presenting with Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: There is a high incidence of nonspecific Low Back Pain (LBP) in patients visiting Emergency Departments (EDs), but there is a lack of knowledge regarding emergency physiotherapy for LBP. The effect of on-site physiotherapy in these patients was therefore never demonstrated. We assessed short-term outcomes, feasibility and patient satisfaction with physiotherapy in ED patients presenting with nonspecific LBP. Methods: A block-randomized, controlled, open-label trial with a follow-up of 42 days. Patients aged 18 years or older presenting to an ED with nonspecific LBP were prospectively enrolled. Both groups received the same booklet with written information on LBP management and exercises. Patients in the intervention group were given additional instructions by a certified physiotherapist. Results: We included 86 patients in the primary analysis. The median age was 40, and 40.7% were female. At day 7, the median Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was 2 points lower in the intervention group compared to the control group, which was not statistically significant. There was no between-group difference in pain at day 7. Patients who received physiotherapy felt significantly more confident with the exercises they were taught (p = 0.004, effect size = 0.3 [95% CI 0.1 to 0.5]). Conclusions: On-site physiotherapy in ED patients presenting with nonspecific low back pain is associated with higher patient satisfaction, compared to standard of care. The effect of physiotherapy was small, with only minimal improvement in disability, but without a reduction in pain. Despite the very small effect size, physiotherapeutic interventions should be investigated in larger cohorts with an extended intervention including patient education, exercises, and other physiotherapeutic modalities.

Clinician approaches to new spine pain cases in primary care: Balance of opioid prescribing and early linkage to exercise therapy and spinal manipulation

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Spine pain (SP) is common and often disabling. Clinical practice guidelines discourage opioid treatment and outline the value of varied nonpharmacologic therapies (NPTs). This study elucidates the amount of variability in primary-care clinicians' (PCPs') prescribing of opioids and in their cases' receipt of the two most common NPTs (exercise therapy and spinal manipulation).

METHOD

The design was a retrospective cohort study examining variation in the treatment of PCPs' new SP cases, classified by receipt of (a) prescription of an opioid at the initial visit; (b) exercise therapy and/or spinal manipulation within 30 days of initial visit. The study was set in the primary care clinics at military treatment facilities of the US Military Health System in the period between October 2011 and September 2016.

RESULTS

The majority of cases did not receive a study treatment (66.3%); 19.6% of cases received only NPT within 30 days of initial visit; 11.5% were prescribed only an opioid at the initial visit with receipt of both NPT and opioid during early treatment rare (2.6%). Exercise therapy within 30 days exhibited more than a twofold difference in interquartile percentile rates (IQR) (median provision 15.8%, IQR 9.8%-22.1%). The other treatments exhibited even greater variation; specifically, spinal manipulation (median 8.5%, IQR 3.3%-15.8%), and opioid at initial visit (median 10.3%, IQR 4.4%-18.2%). The availability of physical therapists and doctors of chiropractic had significant association with several clinical provision rates.

CONCLUSION

Among providers of spine care for a sample of Army soldiers, there was substantial variation in the early provision of exercise therapy, spinal manipulation, and opioid prescriptions. The magnitude of the case-mix adjusted variation and its association with facility availability of providers suggests that quality of care initiatives may help reduce this variation.

Use of implementation mapping in the planning of a hybrid type 1 pragmatic clinical trial: the BeatPain Utah study

BACKGROUND

Considerable disparities in chronic pain management have been identified. Persons in rural, lower income, and minoritized communities are less likely to receive evidence-based, nonpharmacologic care. Telehealth delivery of nonpharmacologic, evidence-based interventions for persons with chronic pain is a promising strategy to lessen disparities, but implementation comes with many challenges. The BeatPain Utah study is a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation pragmatic clinical trial investigating telehealth strategies to provide nonpharmacologic care from physical therapists to persons with chronic back pain receiving care in ommunity health centers (CHCs). CHCs provide primary care to all persons regardless of ability to pay. This paper outlines the use of implementation mapping to develop a multifaceted implementation plan for the BeatPain study.

METHODS

During a planning year for the BeatPain trial, we developed a comprehensive logic model including the five-step implementation mapping process informed by additional frameworks and theories. The five iterative implementation mapping steps were addressed in the planning year: (1) conduct needs assessments for involved groups; (2) identify implementation outcomes, performance objectives, and determinants; (3) select implementation strategies; (4) produce implementation protocols and materials; and (5) evaluate implementation outcomes.

RESULTS

CHC leadership/providers, patients, and physical therapists were identified as involved groups. Barriers and assets were identified across groups which informed identification of performance objectives necessary to implement two key processes: (1) electronic referral of patients with back pain in CHC clinics to the BeatPain team and (2) connecting patients with physical therapists providing telehealth. Determinants of the performance objectives for each group informed our choice of implementation strategies which focused on training, education, clinician support, and tailoring physical therapy interventions for telehealth delivery and cultural competency. We selected implementation outcomes for the BeatPain trial to evaluate the success of our implementation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation mapping provided a comprehensive and systematic approach to develop an implementation plan during the planning phase for our ongoing hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial. We will be able to evaluate the implementation strategies used in the BeatPain Utah study to inform future efforts to implement telehealth delivery of evidence-based pain care in CHCs and other settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04923334 . Registered June 11, 2021.

Use of implementation mapping in the planning of a hybrid type 1 pragmatic clinical trial: the BeatPain Utah study

Background

Considerable disparities in chronic pain management have been identified. Persons in rural, lower income and minoritized communities are less likely to receive evidence-based, nonpharmacologic care. Telehealth delivery of nonpharmacologic, evidence-based interventions for persons with chronic pain is a promising strategy to lessen disparities, but implementation comes with many challenges. The BeatPain Utah study is a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation pragmatic clinical trial investigating telehealth strategies to provide nonpharmacologic care from physical therapists to persons with chronic back pain receiving care in Community Health Centers (CHCs). CHCs provide primary care to all persons regardless of ability to pay. This paper outlines the use of implementation mapping to develop a multifaceted implementation plan for the BeatPain study.

Methods

During a planning year for the BeatPain trial we developed a comprehensive logic model including the 5-step implementation mapping process informed by additional frameworks and theories. The five iterative implementation mapping steps were addressed in the planning year; 1) conduct needs assessments for involved groups; 2) identify implementation outcomes, performance objectives and determinants; 3) select implementation strategies; 4) produce implementation protocols and materials; and 5) evaluate implementation outcomes.

Results

CHC leadership/providers, patients and physical therapists were identified as involved groups. Barriers and assets were identified across groups which informed identification of performance objectives necessary to implement two key processes; 1) electronic referral of patients with back pain in CHC clinics to the BeatPain team; and 2) connecting patients with physical therapists providing telehealth. Determinants of the performance objectives for each group informed our choice of implementation strategies which focused on training, education, clinician support and tailoring physical therapy interventions for telehealth delivery and cultural competency. We selected implementation outcomes for the BeatPain trial to evaluate the success of our implementation strategies.

Conclusions

Implementation mapping provided a comprehensive and systematic approach to develop an implementation plan during the planning phase for our ongoing hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial. We will be able to evaluate the implementation strategies used in the BeatPain Utah study to inform future efforts to implement telehealth delivery of evidence-based pain care in CHCs and other settings.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04923334. Registered June 11, 2021 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04923334.

Characteristics of Chiropractic Patients in the Veterans Health Administration During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether patient characteristics were associated with face-to-face (F2F) and telehealth visits for those receiving chiropractic care for musculoskeletal conditions in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of all patients (veterans, dependents, and spouses) who received chiropractic care nationwide at the VHA from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, was performed. Patients were allocated into 1 of the following 3 groups: only telehealth visits, only F2F visits, and combined F2F and telehealth visits. Patient characteristics included age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Multinomial logistic regression estimated associations of these variables with visit type.

RESULTS

The total number of unique patients seen by chiropractors between March 2020 and February 2021 was 62 658. Key findings were that patients of non-White race and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity were more likely to attend telehealth-only visits (Black [odds ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval {1.10-1.31}], other races [1.36 {1.16-1.59}], and Hispanic or Latino [1.35 {1.20-1.52}]) and combination telehealth and F2F care (Black [1.32 {1.25-1.40}], other races [1.37 {1.23-1.52}], and Hispanic or Latino [1.63 {1.51-1.76}]). Patients younger than 40 years of age were more likely to choose telehealth visits ([1.13 {1.02-1.26}], 66-75 years [1.17 {1.01-1.35}], and >75 years [1.26 {1.06-1.51}] vs those 40-55 years of age). Sex, visit frequency, and Charlson Comorbidity Index showed significant relationships as well, while marital status did not.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, VHA patients with musculoskeletal complaints using chiropractic telehealth were more ethnically and racially diverse than those using F2F care alone.