Move to health-a holistic approach to the management of chronic low back pain: an intervention and implementation protocol developed for a pragmatic clinical trial

Intervention Fidelity in Pain Pragmatic Trials for Nonpharmacologic Pain Management: Nuanced Considerations for Determining PRECIS-2 Flexibility in Delivery and Adherence

Nonpharmacological treatments are considered first-line pain management strategies, but they remain clinically underused. For years, pain-focused pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) have generated evidence for the enhanced use of nonpharmacological interventions in routine clinical settings to help overcome implementation barriers. The Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS-2) framework describes the degree of pragmatism across 9 key domains. Among these, "flexibility in delivery" and "flexibility in adherence," address a key goal of pragmatic research by tailoring approaches to settings in which people receive routine care. However, to maintain scientific and ethical rigor, PCTs must ensure that flexibility features do not compromise delivery of interventions as designed, such that the results are ethically and scientifically sound. Key principles of achieving this balance include clear definitions of intervention core components, intervention monitoring and documentation that is sufficient but not overly burdensome, provider training that meets the demands of delivering an intervention in real-world settings, and use of an ethical lens to recognize and avoid potential trial futility when necessary and appropriate. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents nuances to be considered when applying the PRECIS-2 framework to describe pragmatic clinical trials. Trials must ensure that patient-centered treatment flexibility does not compromise delivery of interventions as designed, such that measurement and analysis of treatment effects is reliable.

Different Dosage Regimens of Tanezumab for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of different dosage regimens of tanezumab among individuals living with chronic low back pain (CLBP).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other databases were searched from inception until August 2021. Randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy and safety of tanezumab in individuals with CLBP were included. Data were extracted independently by 2 investigators and assessed the study quality by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The measurements include low back pain intensity and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. The incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events was set to assess the safety of tanezumab for CLBP.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Three high-quality randomized controlled trials with 3414 patients were finally included in our analysis. Tanezumab, respectively, led to a notable decrease compared with placebo in low back pain intensity (mean difference, -0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.77 to -0.46; P < 0.01) and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (mean difference, -0.64; 95% CI, -0.80 to -0.47; P = 0.01). In addition, no significant difference existed between tanezumab and placebo groups (risk ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81-1.49; P = 0.55) in the adverse events and (risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.34-3.27; P = 0.93) serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous and subcutaneous tanezumab injections as treatment for improving CLBP have promising clinical application as its great improvement on all efficacy and its controllable safety issues. Furthermore, intravenous and subcutaneous tanezumab injections were proved to achieve excellent and long-term curative effect on CLBP through our subgroup analysis and comparison.

Multidimensional Effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin in Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Although botulinum toxin (BoNT) has been suggested as a treatment to counter neuropathic pain, no previous systematic reviews investigated the multidimensional effects of BoNT on pain relief and Health-Related Quality of Life (HR-QoL). The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current evidence on the effectiveness of BoNT treatment for neuropathic pain, and to characterize its multidimensional effectiveness in order to guide physicians in clinical practice. Five databases were systematically searched up to 4 April 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials satisfying the following criteria: adults suffering from neuropathic pain, BoNT administration, any comparator, multidimensional assessment of pain as primary outcome, HR-QoL, physical function, anxiety and depression, and sleep quality as secondary outcomes. Twelve studies were included. The multidimensional pain scales used were short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Neuropathic pain scale, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, International SCI Pain Basic Data Set, West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory, Brief Pain Inventory, and Douleur Neuropathique 4. These scales highlighted the positive effects of BoNT administration. According to the Jadad scale, all the RCTs included were high-quality studies. BoNT administration might be effectively introduced in the comprehensive management of neuropathic pain. Further research should focus on optimal and cost-effective therapeutic protocols.

Misbeliefs about non-specific low back pain and attitudes towards treatment by primary care providers in Spain: a qualitative study

AIM

To identify misbeliefs about the origin and meaning of non-specific chronic low back pain and to examine attitudes towards treatment by primary health care providers.

DESIGN

Generic qualitative study.

METHODS

Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted between October and November 2016 with physicians and nurses from primary health care centres in Lleida. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis via Atlas.ti-8 software.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: i. beliefs about the origin and meaning of chronic low back pain, ii. psychosocial aspects of pain modulators, iii. Therapeutic exercise as a treatment for chronic low back pain, iv. biomedical attitudes of primary health care providers, and v. difficulties in the clinical approach to chronic low back pain.

CONCLUSION

Primary health care providers have a unifactorial view of chronic low back pain and base their approach on the biomedical model. Professionals attribute chronic low back pain to structural alterations in the lumbar spine while psychosocial factors are only recognized as pain modulators. For professionals, therapeutic exercise represents a possible solution to chronic low back pain; however, they still do not prescribe it and continue to educate on postural hygiene and recommend limiting physical and/or occupational activities, as opposed to clinical practice guidelines. These findings suggest that to improve the adherence of primary health care providers to the biopsychosocial model, it may be necessary first to modify their misbeliefs about non-specific chronic low back pain by increasing their knowledge on pain neurophysiology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02962817 . Date of registration: 11/11/2016.