[Interdisciplinary multimodal assessment and risk-tailored pathways for patients with back pain : Prospective evaluation of an integrated healthcare delivery project]

Evaluating an early Interdisciplinary Multimodal Assessment for Patients at Risk of Developing Chronic Pain: Results of a Multicentre RCT in Germany

INTRODUCTION

Patients at risk of developing chronic pain are often significantly impaired in their daily, social and work activities. An early interdisciplinary multimodal assessment (IMA) includes a systematically integrated view of medical, psychosocial and functional factors to direct patients to need-based treatment services. This multicentre, randomised, controlled trial examined the effects of an IMA on preventing chronic pain and improving care for adult patients.

METHODS

The intervention group (IG) received an IMA in accordance with standardised guidelines. The control group (CG) was offered a unimodal medical pain assessment (MPA). Data from the Characteristic Pain Intensity (PI) and Disability Score (DS), as primary outcomes, were collected at assessment and 3 and 6 months later together with secondary outcomes (e.g. depression, anxiety, stress, catastrophizing, health-related quality of life).

RESULTS

A total of 620 (68.4%) valid questionnaires were available at the 6-month follow-up. The mean reduction (numerical rating scale, 0-10) in terms of improvement within both groups (IG/CG) was 1.6/1.7 points for PI and 1.9/1.8 points for DS. Most secondary outcomes improved as well. However, the differences between the two groups did not reach statistical significance, although there was a tendency for the IG to have a greater effect on some psychological outcomes. Regarding the recommended treatment approaches, the focus in the IG was more on physical activity and psychological and psychosomatic interventions, whereas in the CG there was also a preference for adjusting the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Both early MPA and IMA seem to have a positive effect on outcomes such as pain intensity, functional limitations and psychological factors for patients at risk of developing chronic pain. We critically reflect on the results of the primary research question by discussing the limitations in detail and conclude that further research should ensure that the control conditions reflect standard care and that the follow-up period is long enough.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00015443).

[How does an intervention work?-German Version. : Development of an effect model for a complex intervention to prevent recurring or persistent pain using the example of PAIN 2.0]

In addition to the usual evaluation approach (usually a clinical randomized trial in the sense of the question: does an intervention work), complex interventions require further systematic investigations to prove their effectiveness. The role of the context in which the intervention is delivered is essential here, as is consideration of the question of why an intervention works (or does not work). Detailed recommendations exist for the planning and implementation of effectiveness studies on complex interventions, to which interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy undoubtedly belongs. In an effectiveness model, concrete, verifiable assumptions are formulated as to how an intervention produces changes that are reflected in the endpoint. This article provides a brief introduction to methodological approaches to effectiveness research on complex interventions and uses the PAIN 2.0 project (01NVF20023) to describe in concrete terms what an effectiveness model for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy for the prevention of chronic pain in an outpatient setting might look like.

How does an intervention work?-English Version : Development of an effect model for a complex intervention to prevent recurring or persistent pain using the example of PAIN 2.0

In addition to the usual evaluation approach (usually a clinical randomized trial in the sense of the question: does an intervention work), complex interventions require further systematic investigations to prove their effectiveness. The role of the context in which the intervention is delivered is essential here, as is consideration of the question of why an intervention works (or does not work). Detailed recommendations exist for the planning and implementation of effectiveness studies on complex interventions, to which interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy undoubtedly belongs. In an effectiveness model, concrete, verifiable assumptions are formulated as to how an intervention produces changes that are reflected in the endpoint. This article provides a brief introduction to methodological approaches to effectiveness research on complex interventions and uses the PAIN 2.0 project (01NVF20023) to describe in concrete terms what an effectiveness model for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy for the prevention of chronic pain in an outpatient setting might look like.

[Second opinion on spine surgery : Indication rarely confirmed and conservative treatment options are worthwhile]

BACKGROUND

Second opinion (SO) on spine surgery was recently implemented as a statutory right in Germany. Prior to this, one health insurer did offer SO to its policy holders including advice on additional conservative treatment options.

OBJECTIVES

Which treatment recommendations did 522 patients receive in an interdisciplinary multimodal assessment (IMA) as part of a SO by 4 teams comprising physician, physio- and psychotherapist and what were the long-term consequences?

METHODS

Second opinions under a selective contract between insurer and back pain centers were evaluated based on patient-related anamnesis and interdisciplinary multimodal clinical findings including treatment recommendations and patient reports after about 2 years.

RESULTS

Initially, spine surgery recommendation was confirmed in 15/522 (2.9%) patients (C-SS) versus 507 recommendations against. C‑SS patients were older, male, and had current high pain intensity more frequently, their well-being and quality of life were more often considerably impaired and from the perspective of the team morphological findings were stronger. Younger and female patients with higher pain grade and less previous surgery, but more visits to medical specialties received more often a recommendation of an interdisciplinary treatment option (ITO) versus standard care (SC). After 2 years, all 15 C-SS patients and 146 randomly selected patients were contacted. Of these 161 patients, 29 (18%) had undergone spine surgery. The long-term outcome was best in ITO patients without surgery, followed by the C‑SS after surgery and SC patients without surgery.

DISCUSSION

Most patients undergoing spine surgery make their decision based on the information that they are provided without requesting a SO. As in comparative studies, most patients with a confirmed surgical indication underwent surgery, while some did not. Some patients underwent surgery inspite of recommendations against-after considering conservative therapy recommendations by the IMA. In retrospect, sound advice and an intensive conservative therapy offer seem necessary and reasonable.

[Presentation of an innovative interdisciplinary and cross-sector therapeutic concept for pain patients as part of a regional selective contract]

Hintergrund

Eine gestufte Versorgung in der Behandlung chronisch schmerzkranker Patient*innen ist in Deutschland nur in Ansätzen vorhanden. Vor dem Hintergrund der aktuellen Pandemiebedingungen hat sich eine Unter- und Fehlversorgung weiter verschärft.

Ziel

Entwicklung und Aufbau eines sektorenübergreifenden Behandlungskonzepts für schmerzkranke Patient*innen im Rahmen eines Selektivvertrags.

Methoden

Eingebettet in bereits vorhandene Versorgungsstrukturen wurden nach vorbezeichneten Kriterien sieben Versorgungspfade (Clinical Pathways, CP) definiert, in die eingeschriebene Patient*innen nach einem interdisziplinären Assessment geleitet werden.

Aufbau

Im CP I verbleiben die Patient*innen in der Regelversorgung. Im CP II wird zusätzlich eine einmalige interprofessionelle Edukation von 3 h zur Prophylaxe weiterer Chronifizierung angeboten. Im CP III gehen die Patient*innen für sechs Monate in eine fachärztlich spezialisierte ambulante Schmerzbehandlung. Das CP IV ist eine teilstationäre multimodale Therapie, bei der viele Präsenztage durch telemedizinische Inhalte mit Unterstützung einer Reha-App ersetzt werden. CP V und VI sind vollstationäre multimodale Behandlungen über acht und 15 Tage. In CP VII kann bei ambulantem psychotherapeutischen Behandlungsbedarf für Patient*innen nach vollstationärer Behandlung zur Überbrückung des Wartezeitraums über sechs Monate eine niederfrequente Psychotherapie erfolgen.

Qualitätssicherung und Evaluation

Die wissenschaftliche Begleitung erfolgt mittels ausgewählter Fragebögen und psychometrischer Testverfahren jeweils drei, sechs und zwölf Monate nach erfolgtem Assessment, um die Inhalte des Vertrags zu evaluieren.

[Evaluation of an early interdisciplinary multimodal assessment for patients with pain : Protocol of a randomized controlled study (PAIN2020)]

Health care provision for patients with pain and risk factors for chronicity is still insufficient and characterized in particular by over-, under- and misuse of existing approaches. The PAIN2020 project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Health Care (Innovationsfonds 01NVF17049) and aims to improve health care delivery for this group of patients by implementing an early ambulatory diagnostic approach by a pain specialist, resulting in an improvement in pain and restored or maintained function. A randomized clinical trial in 31 facilities Germany-wide will identify eligible patients and guide them into early specialized pain diagnostics. The interventional arm provides an interdisciplinary multimodal assessment, delivered by pain medicine specialists, physiotherapists and clinical psychologists. The control arm contains a single assessment by a pain specialist. Patients and caregivers receive detailed recommendations for evidence-based interventions tailored to the needs of the individual patient. Two evaluation approaches will be merged. The first requires a net sample size of 3840 patients, assessed (admission) and followed-up (3 and 6 months) by clinical data (German Pain Questionnaire, additional scales) and analyzed by a multi-level approach. In a second evaluation arm the clinical data of the included patients will be supplemented by secondary data from a statutory health insurance (BARMER) and compared to a sample of policyholders not addressed by the study. Data analyses will be performed by an external evaluation institute. The project started in April 2018.

[Prevention of chronic pain in the German healthcare system : Current state and perspective]

The current healthcare provision in Germany is established, in particular, for the diagnostics and treatment of chronic pain conditions; however, the current aim is to initiate the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches oriented towards the biopsychosocial pain model in the early stages of pain, i.e. before the onset of chronification, for patients with pain and a risk of chronification in order to actively avoid chronification processes. In this context, multiple risk factors play an important role for the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches as well as for the interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy developed for this purpose. The Global Year of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) 2020 addressed the prevention of (chronic) pain, a welcome opportunity to provide a short review of the evidence for and clinical experiences with timely diagnostic and therapeutic options and to summarize the current framework conditions and scientific recommendations for Germany. At the end of this article the implications for future research are summarized, particularly for the treatment of patients with pain and risk of chronification.

Frühes interdisziplinäres Assessment zur Sekundärprävention chronischer Schmerzen

Schmerz ist ein multikausales biopsychosoziales Phänomen. Das bedeutet für eine angemessene Versorgung ein entsprechendes interdisziplinäres Vorgehen in Diagnostik und Therapie. Faktoren, die bei bestehenden Schmerzen zu einer Chronifizierung beitragen können, sollten frühzeitig im Versorgungsalltag berücksichtigt werden. Dafür sind sektorenübergreifende Vernetzungen sowie interdisziplinäre Versorgungsangebote von großer Bedeutung.