International comparative study of low back pain care pathways and analysis of key interventions

Patient experiences of referral practices and primary care physiotherapy for chronic nonspecific low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines recommend referral for patients with persistent LBP however discordance persists between recommended care and implementation in practice. Understanding patient experiences of referral practices and physiotherapy care could be important for optimizing LBP management in primary care settings.

PURPOSE

This study explored referral experiences of people with nonspecific LBP in Australian primary care and their knowledge and experience of physiotherapy.

METHODS

An interpretive descriptive qualitative framework was used with 17 participants interviewed from community-based physiotherapy practices.

RESULTS

Four themes described the participants' experiences of referrals in primary care settings: 1) Referral practices ranged from formal to informal to non-existent; 2) Fragmented inter-and intra-professional LBP care management; 3) Patient perceived differences in the roles of physiotherapists and specialist physiotherapists; and 4) Patient nominated barriers and facilitators to optimal referral practices.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapists support people with LBP to improve strength and function, whereas the specialist physiotherapist's role was seen as more holistic. Referral pathways that align to clinical guideline recommendations for non-surgical management and treatment remain underdeveloped. Improved referral pathways to clinicians such as physiotherapists with additional credentialed skills and competence in musculoskeletal care could improve people's experiences of care and health outcomes.

Low back pain management in primary healthcare: findings from a scoping review on models of care

INTRODUCTION

Models of care (MoCs) describe evidence-informed healthcare that should be delivered to patients. Several MoCs have been implemented for low back pain (LBP) to reduce evidence-to-practice gaps and increase the effectiveness and sustainability of healthcare services.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise research evidence regarding core characteristics and key common elements of MoCs implemented in primary healthcare for the management of LBP.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Searches on MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature databases were conducted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligible records included MoCs implemented for adult LBP patients in primary healthcare settings.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was carried out independently by two researchers and included a summary of the studies, the identification of the MoCs and respective key elements, concerning levels of care, settings, health professionals involved, type of care delivered and core components of the interventions. Findings were investigated through a descriptive qualitative content analysis using a deductive approach.

RESULTS

29 studies reporting 11 MoCs were included. All MoCs were implemented in high-income countries and had clear objectives. Ten MoCs included a stratified care approach. The assessment of LBP patients typically occurred in primary healthcare while care delivery usually took place in community-based settings or outpatient clinics. Care provided by general practitioners and physiotherapists was reported in all MoCs. Education (n=10) and exercise (n=9) were the most common health interventions. However, intervention content, follow-ups and discharge criteria were not fully reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study examines the features of MoCs for LBP, highlighting that research is in its early stages and stressing the need for better reporting to fill gaps in care delivery and implementation. This knowledge is crucial for researchers, clinicians and decision-makers in assessing the applicability and transferability of MoCs to primary healthcare settings.

Effect of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Self-Management App on Musculoskeletal Health in Patients With Neck and/or Low Back Pain Referred to Specialist Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Self-management is a key element in the care of persistent neck and low back pain. Individually tailored self-management support delivered via a smartphone app in a specialist care setting has not been tested.

Objective

To determine the effect of individually tailored self-management support delivered via an artificial intelligence-based app (SELFBACK) adjunct to usual care vs usual care alone or nontailored web-based self-management support (e-Help) on musculoskeletal health.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial recruited adults 18 years or older with neck and/or low back pain who had been referred to and accepted on a waiting list for specialist care at a multidisciplinary hospital outpatient clinic for back, neck, and shoulder rehabilitation. Participants were enrolled from July 9, 2020, to April 29, 2021. Of 377 patients assessed for eligibility, 76 did not complete the baseline questionnaire, and 7 did not meet the eligibility criteria (ie, did not own a smartphone, were unable to take part in exercise, or had language barriers); the remaining 294 patients were included in the study and randomized to 3 parallel groups, with follow-up of 6 months.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned to receive app-based individually tailored self-management support in addition to usual care (app group), web-based nontailored self-management support in addition to usual care (e-Help group), or usual care alone (usual care group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was change in musculoskeletal health measured by the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included change in musculoskeletal health measured by the MSK-HQ at 6 weeks and 6 months and pain-related disability, pain intensity, pain-related cognition, and health-related quality of life at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months.

Results

Among 294 participants (mean [SD] age, 50.6 [14.9] years; 173 women [58.8%]), 99 were randomized to the app group, 98 to the e-Help group, and 97 to the usual care group. At 3 months, 243 participants (82.7%) had complete data on the primary outcome. In the intention-to-treat analysis at 3 months, the adjusted mean difference in MSK-HQ score between the app and usual care groups was 0.62 points (95% CI, -1.66 to 2.90 points; P = .60). The adjusted mean difference between the app and e-Help groups was 1.08 points (95% CI, -1.24 to 3.41 points; P = .36).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, individually tailored self-management support delivered via an artificial intelligence-based app adjunct to usual care was not significantly more effective in improving musculoskeletal health than usual care alone or web-based nontailored self-management support in patients with neck and/or low back pain referred to specialist care. Further research is needed to investigate the utility of implementing digitally supported self-management interventions in the specialist care setting and to identify instruments that capture changes in self-management behavior.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04463043.

Relationship between psychosocial and psychiatric risk factors and poor long-term outcome following mild traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) has an estimated worldwide incidence of >60 million per year, and long-term persistent postconcussion symptoms (PPCS) are increasingly recognized as being predicted by psychosocial variables. Patients at risk for PPCS may be amenable to closer follow-up to treat modifiable symptoms and prevent chronicity. In this regard, similarities seem to exist with psychosocial risk factors for chronicity in other health-related conditions. However, as opposed to other conditions, no screening instruments exist for mTBI.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature on psychological and psychiatric predictors of long-term symptoms in mTBI was performed by two independent reviewers using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Fifty papers were included in the systematic analysis. Anxiety, depressive symptoms, and emotional distress early after injury predict PPCS burden and functional outcome up to 1 year after injury. In addition, coping styles and preinjury psychiatric disorders and mental health also correlate with PPCS burden and functional outcome. Associations between PPCS and personality and beliefs were reported, but either these effects were small or evidence was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Early psychological and psychiatric factors may negatively interact with recovery potential to increase the risk of chronicity of PPCS burden after mTBI. This opens opportunities for research on screening tools and early intervention in patients at risk.

Clinical pathways for the management of low back pain from primary to specialised care: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Clinical pathways for low back pain (LBP) have potential to improve clinical outcomes and health service efficiency. This systematic review aimed to synthesise the evidence for clinical pathways for LBP and/or radicular leg pain from primary to specialised care and to describe key pathway components.

METHODS

Electronic database searches (CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE) from 2006 onwards were conducted with further manual and citation searching. Two independent reviewers conducted eligibility assessment, data extraction and quality appraisal. A narrative synthesis of findings is presented.

RESULTS

From 18,443 identified studies, 28 papers met inclusion criteria. Pathways were developed primarily to address over-burdened secondary care services in high-income countries and almost universally used interface services with a triage remit at the primary-secondary care boundary. Accordingly, evaluation of healthcare resource use and patient flow predominated, with interface services associated with enhanced service efficiency through decreased wait times and appropriate use of consultant appointments. Low quality study designs, heterogeneous outcomes and insufficient comparative data precluded definitive conclusions regarding clinical- and cost-effectiveness. Pathways demonstrated basic levels of care integration across the primary-secondary care boundary.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited volume of research evaluating clinical pathways for LBP/radicular leg pain and spanning primary and specialised care predominantly used interface services to ensure appropriate specialised care referrals with associated increased efficiency of care delivery. Pathways demonstrated basic levels of care integration across healthcare boundaries. Well-designed randomised controlled trials to explore the potential of clinical pathways to improve clinical outcomes, deliver cost-effective, guideline-concordant care and enhance care integration are required.

Needs assessment for health service design for people with back pain in a hospital setting: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

There is a need for effective health service solutions to provide greater structure and support for implementing evidence-based practice in back pain care. Patient involvement in developing these solutions is crucial to increase relevance, acceptability and uptake.

OBJECTIVES

To determine patients' perceived needs and barriers to best-practice back pain care, and potential solutions to better address care needs. The study is the third in a series of needs assessment studies feeding into the 'idea generation' for service design in a large teaching hospital in a culturally and linguistically diverse community in metropolitan Sydney, Australia.

DESIGN

We conducted a combination of focus groups and in-depth interviews using an interpretive description approach. We used inductive thematic analysis to identify the main themes.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We purposively sampled patients with diverse characteristics from the neurosurgery and physiotherapy outpatient clinics, in particular those whose primary language was English, Arabic, Persian or Mandarin. Non-English audio recordings were translated and transcribed by bilingual researchers.

RESULTS

There were 24 participants (focus groups = 9; individual interviews = 15) when data saturation was reached. The analysis identified three key themes with several subthemes around what service designers needed to understand in helping people with back pain in this setting: (1) This is who I am; (2) It's not working for me; and (3) What I think I need.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study highlights that perceived unmet needs of patients are underpinned by unhelpful beliefs about the causes of and solutions for back pain, misaligned care expectations, unclear expectations of the hospital role and fragmentations in the health system. To design and implement a service that can deliver better back pain care, several solutions need to be integrated around: developing new resources that challenge unhelpful beliefs and set realistic expectations; improving access to education and self-management resources; focusing on individualized care; using a collaborative multidisciplinary approach within the hospital; and better connecting with and directing primary health care services.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A consumer representative of the Western Sydney Local Health District provided input during study conceptualisation and is duly recognized in the Acknowledgements section.

The primary spine practitioner as a new role in healthcare systems in North America

Background

In an article published in 2011, we discussed the need for a new role in health care systems, referred to as the Primary Spine Practitioner (PSP). The PSP model was proposed to help bring order to the chaotic nature of spine care. Over the past decade, several efforts have applied the concepts presented in that article. The purpose of the present article is to discuss the ongoing need for the PSP role in health care systems, present persistent barriers, report several examples of the model in action, and propose future strategies.

Main body

The management of spine related disorders, defined here as various disorders related to the spine that produce axial pain, radiculopathy and other related symptoms, has received significant international attention due to the high costs and relatively poor outcomes in spine care. The PSP model seeks to bring increased efficiency, effectiveness and value. The barriers to the implementation of this model have been significant, and responses to these barriers are discussed. Several examples of PSP integration are presented, including clinic systems in primary care and hospital environments, underserved areas around the world and a program designed to reduce surgical waiting lists. Future strategies are proposed for overcoming the continuing barriers to PSP implementation in health care systems more broadly.

Conclusion

Significant progress has been made toward integrating the PSP role into health care systems over the past 10 years. However, much work remains. This requires substantial effort on the part of those involved in the development and implementation of the PSP model, in addition to support from various stakeholders who will benefit from the proposed improvements in spine care.