Can Primary Care for Back and/or Neck Pain in the Netherlands Benefit From Stratification for Risk Groups According to the STarT Back Tool Classification?

Evaluating the effectiveness of patient-tailored treatment for patients with non-specific (sub)acute neck pain

BACKGROUND

An important issue in the debate about best practice management of non-specific neck pain (NSNP) is the effectiveness of tailored versus generalized interventions.

METHODS

Participants with (sub)acute NSNP were randomly allocated to a patient-tailored treatment (PTT), non-patient-tailored treatment (NPTT) or control group (no intervention). The outcome measures were pain (NPRS), disability (NDI), global perceived effect and satisfaction (GPES), productivity costs, and medical consumption. Patients were assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-intervention. Evolution of the complaints, treatment adherence, and medication intake was registered during the intervention period. Linear mixed models were used to examine interaction effects as well as between- and within-group differences.

RESULTS

Sixty-one participants were included. There was no "Group x Time"-interaction effect for all outcome measures. Nevertheless, all groups showed significant and clinically relevant within-group differences at all time points for pain and disability (p < 0.001). At 6 months follow-up, NPTT was superior to PTT for reductions in pain but not for disability. At 1 year, the number of responders in the NPTT group remained higher (75%) compared to the PTT group (40%).

CONCLUSION

This study found a significant and clinically relevant reduction of pain and disability within all groups. Patient-tailored treatment as well as NPTT can be considered an effective method when aiming for a reduction in pain and disability at short-term (12 weeks). However, NPTT seemed to be more effective at 1-year follow-up and therapists should consider spontaneous recovery. The results should be interpreted with caution and further research is warranted.

Exploring the association between adherence to home-based exercise recommendations and recovery of nonspecific low back pain: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adherence to home-based exercise (HBE) recommendations is critical in physiotherapy for patients with low back pain (LBP). However, limited research has explored its connection with clinical outcomes. This study examined how adherence to HBE relates to changes in physical function, pain intensity, and recovery from LBP in patients undergoing physiotherapy treatment.

METHODS

Data from a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands involving patients with LBP from 58 primary care physiotherapy practices were used. Adherence to HBE was assessed with the Exercise Adherence Scale (EXAS) at each treatment session. Previously identified adherence trajectories served as a longitudinal measure of adherence and included the classes "declining adherence" (12% of participants), "stable adherence" (45%), and "increasing adherence" (43%). The main outcomes included disability (Oswestry Disability Index), pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale), and recovery (pain-free for > 4 weeks), which were measured at baseline and after three months. Linear and binomial logistic regression analyses adjusted for confounders were used to examine adherence-outcome relationships.

RESULTS

In the parent trial, 208 participants were included. EXAS scores were available for 173 participants, collected over a median of 4.0 treatment sessions (IQR 3.0 to 6.0). Forty-five (28.5%) patients considered themselves to have recovered after three months. The median changes in the Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale were - 8 (IQR - 1 to -20) and - 2 (IQR - 0.5 to -4), respectively. The mean EXAS scores varied among patient classes: "declining adherence" (46.0, SD 19.4), "stable adherence" (81.0, SD 12.4), and "increasing adherence" (39.9, SD 25.3), with an overall mean of 59.2 (SD 25.3). No associations between adherence and changes in physical functioning or pain were found in the regression analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

No association between adherence to HBE recommendations and changes in clinical outcomes in patients with LBP was found. These findings suggest that the relationship between adherence to HBE recommendations and treatment outcomes may be more complex than initially assumed. Further research using detailed longitudinal data combined with qualitative methods to investigate patient motivation and beliefs may lead to a deeper understanding of the relationship between adherence and clinical outcomes in patients with LBP.

Are illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement mediators of treatment effect in best practice physiotherapy low back pain care? Secondary mediation analyses in the BetterBack trial

INTRODUCTION

A best practice physiotherapy model of care (BetterBack MoC) for low back pain (LBP) aimed to improve patients' illness perceptions and self-care enablement, according to the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM).

OBJECTIVE

To confirm if illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement, in line with the CSM, are mediators of treatment effects on disability and pain of the BetterBack MoC for patients with LBP compared to routine primary care. A secondary aim was to explore if illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement are mediators of guideline adherent care.

METHODS

Pre-planned single mediation analyses tested whether hypothesized mediators at 3 months mediated the treatment effect of the MoC (n = 264) compared to routine care (n = 203) on disability and pain at 6 months. Secondary mediation analyses compared guideline adherent care with non-adherent care.

RESULTS

No indirect effects were identified. The BetterBack intervention did not have superior effects over routine care on the hypothesized mediators. Illness perceptions and self-care enablement were significantly associated with disability and pain at 6 months. Secondary analyses showed significant indirect effects of guideline adherent care through tested mediators.

CONCLUSION

Despite no indirect effects, patients' illness perceptions and self-care enablement were associated with disability and back pain intensity outcomes and are potentially relevant treatment targets.

The "future" pain clinician: Competencies needed to provide psychologically informed care

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE

Psychologically informed care has been proposed to improve treatment outcomes for chronic pain and aligns with a person-centered approach. Yet implementation lags behind, and studies suggest that a lack of competency leads to poor results. It is unclear what training clinicians require to deliver this care. We examine how we might improve psychologically informed care guided by the needs of the patient and in congruence with the scientific literature with a particular focus on how competencies might be upgraded and implementation enhanced.

METHODS

We selectively review the literature for psychologically informed care for pain. The patient's view on what is needed is contrasted with the competencies necessary to meet these needs and how treatment should be evaluated.

RESULTS

Patient needs and corresponding competencies are delineated. A number of multi-professional skills and competencies are required to provide psychologically informed care. Single-subject methodologies can determine whether the care has the desired effect for the individual patient and facilitate effectiveness. We argue that becoming a competent "pain clinician" requires a new approach to education that transcends current professional boundaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing person-centered care guided by the needs of the patient and in line with the scientific literature shows great potential but requires multiple competencies. We propose that training the pain clinician of the future should focus on psychologically informed care and the competencies required to meet the individual's needs. Single-subject methodology allows for continual evaluation of this care.

Research designs and instruments to detect physiotherapy overuse of low-value care services in low back pain management: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The provision of low-value physiotherapy services in low back pain management is a known but complex phenomenon. Thus, this scoping review aims to systematically map existing research designs and instruments of the field in order to discuss the current state of research methodologies and contextualize results to domains and perspectives of a referred low-value care typology. Ultimately, results will be illustrated and transferred to conditions of the German health care setting as care delivery conditions of physiotherapy in Germany face unique particularities.

METHODS

The development of this review is guided by the analysis framework of Arksey and O'Malley. A two-stage, audited search strategy was performed in Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, and google scholar. All types of observational studies were included. Identified articles needed to address a pre-determined population, concept, and context framework and had to be published in English or German language. The publication date of included articles was not subject to any limitation. The applied framework to assess the phenomenon of low-value physiotherapy services incorporated three domains (care effectiveness; care efficiency; patient alignment of care) and perspectives (provider; patient; society) of care.

RESULTS

Thirty-three articles met the inclusion criteria. Seventy-nine percent of articles focused on the appropriateness of physiotherapeutic treatments, followed by education and information (30%), the diagnostic process (15%), and goal-setting practice (12%). Study designs were predominantly cross-sectional (58%). Data sources were mainly survey instruments (67%) of which 50% were self-developed. Most studies addressed the effectiveness domain of care (73%) and the provider perspective (88%). The perspective of patient alignment was assessed by 6% of included articles. None of included articles assessed the society perspective. Four methodical approaches of included articles were rated to be transferrable to Germany.

CONCLUSION

Identified research on low-value physiotherapy care in low back pain management was widely unidimensional. Most articles focused on the effectiveness domain of care and investigated the provider perspective. Most measures were indirectly and did not monitor low-value care trends over a set period of time. Research on low-value physiotherapy care in secondary care conditions, such as Germany, was scarce.

REGISTRATION

This review has been registered on open science framework ( https://osf.io/vzq7k https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PMF2G ).

The Effect of a New Payment System on Physiotherapeutic Management of Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate differences regarding the number of treatment sessions, costs, and outcomes (including relapses) between a regular payment-per-session system and the recently introduced product payment system.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Dutch physical therapy practices in primary care over a 2-year period.

PARTICIPANTS

16,103 patients with low back pain (LBP).

INTERVENTION

The new product payment system is compared with the regular payment-per-session system.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain, disability, recovery, number of physical therapy sessions, therapy duration, costs (per episode), and LBP relapse.

RESULTS

At baseline, we found greater pain and disability scores associated with an increased risk profile in both payment systems. With regard to the payment systems, we found greater costs (€283.8 vs €210.8) and a greater percentage of relapse (4.5% vs 2.8%) for the product payment system compared with the payment-per-session system. Comparing the 2 payment systems within each risk strata, we found no significant differences, except for a decrease in pain in the medium-risk stratum. Concerning the therapy characteristics, we found that in the payment-per-session group, the therapy took 6 days longer for low-risk patients (median 27 vs 21 days) and 7 days shorter for high-risk patients (median 42 vs 49 days) compared with the product payment group. Moreover, the mean number of sessions in the payment-per-session group was greater for low-risk patients (5.4 vs 4.8 sessions) and lower for high-risk patients (7.7 vs 8.1 sessions) compared with the payment-per-session group. Finally, the costs were significantly greater in all strata of the product payment group compared with the payment-per-session group.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 payment systems are largely comparable regarding patient outcomes, therapy duration, and treatment sessions. Both the average cost per patient per LBP episode and the number of relapses in the product payment system are statistically significantly greater than in the payment-per-session system.

Perspectives and experiences of physiotherapists and general practitioners in the use of the STarT Back Tool: a review and meta-synthesis

Introduction The STarT Back Tool (SBT) is used to triage people with acute low back pain (LBP) into treatment groups, matched to their risk of chronicity. It was developed in the UK where it has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and reduce time off work. Successful implementation of the SBT outside the UK is dependent on health practitioner's attitudes and the healthcare system in which they work. Gaining health practitioners' perspectives on the SBT is an important step in implementation. Methods A computerised search of qualitative literature was conducted across seven databases in March 2021 using keywords to identify studies investigating the perspectives of physiotherapists and general practitioners on the use of the SBT in primary health care. Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool. Data were coded and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Eight articles met inclusion criteria and included the views of 76 physiotherapists and 65 general practitioners, working in primary health care in four countries. Three themes were created from the data: 'Making it work', identifies factors that influence implementation and continued use of the SBT. The second 'will I do it?', captured potential consequences of adopting the SBT, and the third, 'it's all about the patient' emphasised how the SBT may  affect patients. Discussion Physiotherapists and general practitioners found using the SBT frequently enhanced practice. General practitioners expressed concerns about time constraints and the SBT's potential to undermine clinical experience. Findings from this study will inform modifications to contextualise the tool to each healthcare environment.

The association between patients' illness perceptions and longitudinal clinical outcome in patients with low back pain

Initial perceptions regarding prognosis and treatment effects were prominent perceptions explaining longitudinal outcomes in patients with low back pain, including explaining patients' development of self-management strategies.

Introduction:

Illness perception is suggested to influence outcome in patients with low back pain (LBP). It is unknown if specific illness perceptions are of more importance for longitudinal outcomes, including development of self-management strategies.

Objectives:

This study explores whether patients' initial illness perceptions were associated with disability, pain, health-related quality of life, and self-care enablement outcomes in patients with LBP after 3 and 12 months.

Methods:

Four hundred sixty-seven consecutive patients seeking physiotherapeutic primary care for LBP were eligible to participate in this prospective cohort study, providing data at baseline and after 3 and 12 months (mean age 45 years, 56% women). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore whether patients' illness perceptions at baseline were associated with outcome in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale–LBP (NRS-LBP), EuroQol Five Dimensions, and Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI).

Results:

Stronger beliefs that the back problem will last a long time at baseline were associated with worse outcome in ODI, NRS-LBP, and PEI at 3 and 12 months and in EuroQol Five Dimensions at 12 months. Negative beliefs regarding treatment's ability to improve LBP were associated with worse outcome in NRS-LBP and PEI at 3 and 12 months and in ODI at 12 months.

Conclusions:

Illness perceptions regarding prognosis and treatment's ability to improve symptoms were the most prominent perceptions explaining several longitudinal clinical outcomes. These expectations should be addressed in an early stage in the delivery of interventions for LBP. These expectations were also important for patients' development of coping and self-management strategies.

Improved adherence to clinical guidelines for low back pain after implementation of the BetterBack model of care: A stepped cluster randomized controlled trial within a hybrid type 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The BetterBack model of care (MoC) for low back pain (LBP) was recently developed in Swedish physiotherapy (PT) primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if PTs' adherence to LBP clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) improves after implementation of the BetterBack MoC (intervention).

METHODS

This was a stepped, single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial. Patients nested in the three clusters were allocated to routine care (n = 222) or intervention (n = 278). The primary outcome was referral to specialist consultation. This was among five best practice recommendations divided into an assessment quality index (no referral to specialist consultation and no medical imaging) and a treatment quality index (use of educational interventions; use of exercise interventions; no use of non-evidence-based physiotherapy). For overall adherence, patients had to be treated with all five recommendations fulfilled. Logistic regression was used for between-group comparisons.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients receiving referral to specialist consultation during the PT treatment period was low in both groups with no between-group differences. However, patients in the intervention group showed significantly higher assessment quality index, treatment quality index and overall adherence compared to routine care. Adherence to the separate recommendations showed improved stratified number of visits, use of exercise was maintained high, patient educational intervention increased and use of non-evidence-based physiotherapy decreased. A reduction of medical imaging during the physiotherapy treatment period was also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of CPGs could be substantially improved by introducing a MoC through PT training and supportive materials.

The 3-Month Effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Physiotherapy Intervention in Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Patient education, home-based exercise therapy, and advice on returning to normal activities are established physiotherapeutic treatment options for patients with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). However, the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions on health-related outcomes largely depends on patient self-management and adherence to exercise and physical activity recommendations. e-Exercise LBP is a recently developed stratified blended care intervention comprising a smartphone app integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy treatment. Following the promising effects of web-based applications on patients’ self-management skills and adherence to exercise and physical activity recommendations, it is hypothesized that e-Exercise LBP will improve patients’ physical functioning.

Objective

This study aims to investigate the short-term (3 months) effectiveness of stratified blended physiotherapy (e-Exercise LBP) on physical functioning in comparison with face-to-face physiotherapy in patients with nonspecific LBP.

Methods

The study design was a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. Patients with nonspecific LBP aged ≥18 years were asked to participate in the study. The patients were treated with either stratified blended physiotherapy or face-to-face physiotherapy. Both interventions were conducted according to the Dutch physiotherapy guidelines for nonspecific LBP. Blended physiotherapy was stratified according to the patients’ risk of developing persistent LBP using the Keele STarT Back Screening Tool. The primary outcome was physical functioning (Oswestry Disability Index, range 0-100). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, fear-avoidance beliefs, and self-reported adherence. Measurements were taken at baseline and at the 3-month follow-up.

Results

Both the stratified blended physiotherapy group (104/208, 50%) and the face-to-face physiotherapy group (104/208, 50%) had improved clinically relevant and statistically significant physical functioning; however, there was no statistically significant or clinically relevant between-group difference (mean difference −1.96, 95% CI −4.47 to 0.55). For the secondary outcomes, stratified blended physiotherapy showed statistically significant between-group differences in fear-avoidance beliefs and self-reported adherence. In patients with a high risk of developing persistent LBP (13/208, 6.3%), stratified blended physiotherapy showed statistically significant between-group differences in physical functioning (mean difference −16.39, 95% CI −27.98 to −4.79) and several secondary outcomes.

Conclusions

The stratified blended physiotherapy intervention e-Exercise LBP is not more effective than face-to-face physiotherapy in patients with nonspecific LBP in improving physical functioning in the short term. For both stratified blended physiotherapy and face-to-face physiotherapy, within-group improvements were clinically relevant. To be able to decide whether e-Exercise LBP should be implemented in daily physiotherapy practice, future research should focus on the long-term cost-effectiveness and determine which patients benefit most from stratified blended physiotherapy.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN Registry 94074203; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN94074203

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-3174-z

Exposure in Vivo as a Treatment Approach to Target Pain-Related Fear: Theory and New Insights From Research and Clinical Practice

Pain-related fear (PRF) can be a significant factor contributing to the development and maintenance of pain-related disability in individuals with persistent pain. One treatment approach to target PRF and related avoidance behavior is exposure in vivo (EXP). EXP has a long history in the field of anxiety, a field that is constantly evolving. This Perspective outlines recent theoretical advancements and how they apply to EXP for PRF, including suggestions for how to optimize inhibitory learning during EXP; reviews mechanistic work from neuroimaging supporting the targeting of PRF in people with chronic pain; and focuses on clinical applications of EXP for PRF, as EXP is moving into new directions regarding who is receiving EXP (eg, EXP in chronic secondary pain) and how treatment is provided (EXP in primary care with a crucial role for physical therapists). Considerations are provided regarding challenges, remaining questions, and promising future perspectives.

IMPACT

For patients with chronic pain who have elevated pain-related fear (PRF), exposure is the treatment of choice. This Perspective highlights the inhibitory learning approach, summarizes mechanistic work from experimental psychology and neuroimaging regarding PRF in chronic pain, and describes possible clinical applications of EXP in chronic secondary pain as well as in primary care.

Evaluating the effectiveness of patient tailored treatment for patients with non-specific low back pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review summarizes the relevant literature on the effectiveness of tailored interventions in non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).

METHODS

The search strategy has been executed in December 2019 in the electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science and Embase. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were done independently by two authors.

RESULTS

A total six eligible studies were identified. Five out of six articles used a classification system to subgroup patients. All active patient tailored interventions had similar or better results than the non-patient tailored interventions, most importantly on pain (short- and mid-term, not for long term follow-up). Two motor control interventions revealed sustained or increased effects at 12 months follow-up for disability. For cost-effectiveness, medication use and work absenteeism, results were inconclusive. Global rating of change evaluation confirmed significant between-group results at 10 weeks to 4 months follow-up, but results were not maintained at 12-month evaluation. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Our findings support the preliminary evidence for the use of patient tailored treatment for reductions in pain and disability. However, our results are of very low to moderate quality evidence and the observed effects strongly depend on the subgroups and the chosen interventions. More high-quality RCT's with homogenous designs and larger sample sizes are needed.

Psychological assessments by manual physiotherapists in the Netherlands in patients with nonspecific low back pain

Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines for low back pain emphasize implementing assessment and addressing of psychosocial context. It is unknown to what extent manual physiotherapists incorporate psychological factors in their diagnostic management of patients with nonspecific low back pain.Methods: An online survey among Dutch manual physiotherapists was conducted exploring the use of 10 psychological constructs. Frequencies of attention to psychological factors during history-taking and use of questionnaires were calculated. Associations between therapists characteristics and use of psychological questionnaires were analyzed using Spearmans rank correlation coefficient (r s) and logistic regression. In addition, a retrospective patient record review was conducted.Results: One hundred and twelve manual physiotherapists returned completed surveys. Although respondents indicated psychological factors were assessed, they rarely used psychological questionnaires. Significant but negligible associations were found for age and working hours and the use of specific questionnaires. From 95 patient records reviewed, seven were identified that mentioned one psychological factor each during history taking.Conclusions: Dutch MPTs, regardless of their age and work characteristics, rarely use psychological questionnaires in patients with LBP, although they report addressing these constructs implicitly during history taking. Educational and implementation strategies are needed to warrant the use of psychological constructs and validated psychological questionnaires at all phases of the clinical reasoning process.

Effectiveness and Quality of Implementing a Best Practice Model of Care for Low Back Pain (BetterBack) Compared with Routine Care in Physiotherapy: A Hybrid Type 2 Trial

Low back pain (LBP) occurs in all ages and first-line treatment by physiotherapists is common. The main aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a best practice model of care for LBP (intervention group—BetterBack☺ MoC) compared to routine physiotherapy care (control group) regarding longitudinal patient reported outcomes. The BetterBack☺ MoC contains clinical guideline recommendations and support tools to facilitate clinician adherence to guidelines. A secondary exploratory aim was to compare patient outcomes based on the fidelity of fulfilling a clinical practice quality index regarding physiotherapist care. A stepped cluster randomized design nested patients with LBP in the three clusters which were allocated to control (n = 203) or intervention (n = 264). Patient reported measures were collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months and analyzed with mixed model regression. The primary outcome was between-group changes from baseline to 3 months for pain intensity and disability. Implementation of the BetterBack☺ MoC did not show any between-group differences in the primary outcomes compared with routine care. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher satisfaction at 3 months and clinically meaningful greater improvement in LBP illness perception at 3 months and quality of life at 3 and 6 months but not in patient enablement and global impression of change compared with the control group. Physiotherapists’ care that adhered to all clinical practice quality indices resulted in an improvement of most patient reported outcomes with a clinically meaningful greater improved LBP illness perception at 3 months and quality of life at 3 and 6 months, significantly greater improvement in LBP illness perception, pain and satisfaction at 3 and 6 months and significantly better enablement at all time points as well as better global improvement outcomes at 3 months compared with non-adherent care. This highlights the importance of clinical guideline based primary care for improving patient reported LBP outcomes.

Patients' Views on the Implementation Potential of a Stratified Treatment Approach for Low Back Pain in Germany: A Qualitative Study

Stratified care for low back pain (LBP) has been shown to be clinically- and cost-effective in the UK, but its transferability to the German healthcare system is unknown. This study explores LBP patients’ perspectives regarding future implementation of stratified care, through in-depth interviews (n = 12). The STarT-Back-Tool was completed by participants prior to interviews. Interview data were analysed using Grounded Theory. The overarching theme identified from the data was ‘treatment-success’, with subthemes of ‘assessment and treatment planning’, ‘acceptance of the questionnaire’ and ‘contextual factors’. Patients identified the underlying cause of pain as being of great importance (whereas STarT-Back allocates treatment based on prognosis). The integration of the STarT-Back-Tool in consultations was considered helpful as long as it does not disrupt the therapeutic relationship, and was acceptable if tool results are handled confidentially. Results indicate that for patients to find STarT-Back acceptable, the shift from a focus on identifying a cause of pain and subsequent diagnosis, to prediction-orientated treatment planning, must be made clear. Patient ‘buy in’ is important for successful uptake of clinical interventions, and findings can help to inform future strategies for implementing STarT-Back in the Germany, as well as having potential implications for transferability to other similar healthcare systems.

Treatment based classification systems for patients with non-specific neck pain. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify published classification systems with a targeted treatment approach (treatment-based classification systems (TBCSs)) for patients with non-specific neck pain, and assess their quality and effectiveness.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro and the grey literature were systematically searched from inception to December 2019.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

The main selection criterium was a TBCS for patients with non-specific neck pain with physiotherapeutic interventions. For data extraction of descriptive data and quality assessment we used the framework developed by Buchbinder et al. We considered as score of ≤3 as low quality, a score between 3 and 5 as moderate quality and a score ≥5 as good quality. To assess the risk of bias of studies concerning the effectiveness of TBCSs (only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included) we used the PEDro scale. We considered a score of ≥ six points on this scale as low risk of bias.

RESULTS

Out of 7664 initial references we included 13 studies. The overall quality of the TBCSs ranged from low to moderate. We found two RCTs, both with low risk of bias, evaluating the effectiveness of two TBCSs compared to alternative treatments. The results showed that both TBCSs were not superior to alternative treatments.

CONCLUSION

Existing TBCSs are, at best, of moderate quality. In addition, TBCSs were not shown to be more effective than alternatives. Therefore using these TBCSs in daily practice is not recommended.

Feasibility of a stratified blended physiotherapy intervention for patients with non-specific low back pain: a mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

Integrating web-based or mobile components and face-to-face components within a treatment process is called blended care. As part of the participatory development of a blended physiotherapeutic intervention for patients with low back pain (e-Exercise LBP), a proof of concept study was carried out and showed promising results.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility of the e-Exercise LBP prototype for patients and physiotherapists to improve the intervention.

METHODS

A mixed methods study was executed, embedded in the development phase of e-Exercise LBP. 21 physiotherapists treated 41 patients with e-Exercise LBP. Quantitative data consisted of: patients' satisfaction on a five-point Likert Scale; patients' and physiotherapists' experienced usability of the web-based application (System Usability Scale) and; patients' experiences with e-Exercise LBP (closed-ended questions and statements related to the elements and goals of e-Exercise LBP). Semi-structured interviews about experiences with e-Exercise LBP were conducted with seven patients and seven physiotherapists. Qualitative data were analyzed by a phenomenological approach. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Patients were satisfied with e-Exercise LBP (mean: 4.0; SD:0.8; range: extreme dissatisfaction (1)-extreme satisfaction (5)). Usability of the web-based application was acceptable (patients: mean: 73.2 (SD:16.3); physiotherapists: mean: 63.3 (SD:12.0); range: 0-100). Interviews revealed that physiotherapists' training is essential to successfully integrate the web-based application and face-to-face sessions within physiotherapy treatment. Also, patients addressed the need of reminder messages to support long-term (exercise) adherence.

CONCLUSION

e-Exercise LBP appeared to be feasible. However, various prerequisites and points of improvement were mentioned to improve physiotherapists' training and the prototype.

STarT back tool retained its predicting abilities in patients with acute and sub-acute low back pain after a transcultural adaptation and validation to Hebrew

BACKGROUND

The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) distributes low back pain (LBP) patients into three prognostic groups for stratified care. This approach has demonstrated beneficial clinical and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To translate and validate the SBT by investigating its psychometric properties among Israelis with acute and sub-acute LBP, and to evaluate its ability to predict disability after three months.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

METHOD

The SBT was transcultural adapted into Hebrew using published guidelines. A total of 150 patients receiving physical therapy for acute or subacute LBP were administered the SBT. Clinical outcomes included the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and a numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), collected by an independent interviewer by phone at the start of the physical therapy treatment and after three months.

RESULTS

The test-retest reliability of the SBT total score and psychosocial subscale were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.89 and 0.82). Spearman's correlation coefficient between SBT total score and RMDQ was 0.82, HADS (Anxiety 0.66, Depression 0.76), FABQ (exercise 0.53), NPRS (severe pain 0.48, average pain 0.53). The SBT baseline score showed excellent predictive abilities in discriminating poor disability after three months (ROC curve = 0.825, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.756-0.894).

CONCLUSION

The Israeli translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the SBT is a valid and reliable instrument. The SBT discriminated low, medium and high-risk groups, and predicts disability after three months.

Pragmatic cluster randomised double-blind pilot and feasibility trial of an active behavioural physiotherapy intervention for acute non-specific neck pain: a mixed-methods protocol

INTRODUCTION

Non-specific neck pain causes pain and disability and contributes substantial socioeconomic burden internationally. Up to 50% of adults experience neck pain annually, leading to reduced the quality of life. An active behavioural physiotherapy intervention (ABPI) may be feasible to manage patients with acute non-specific neck pain to prevent transition to chronicity. A recent pilot and feasibility trial investigating an acute whiplash-associated disorder population found potential value of the ABPI with 95% of participants fully recovered (Neck Disability Index: NDI ≤4, compared with 17% in the standard physiotherapy arm); supporting a definitive trial. Qualitative findings from the physiotherapists supported the potential of the ABPI in a non-specific neck pain population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two phases: (1) Pragmatic cluster randomised double-blind, parallel 2-arm (ABPI vs standard physiotherapy intervention) pilot and feasibility trial to evaluate the procedures and feasibility of the ABPI for the management of acute non-specific neck pain. Six physiotherapy departments from six public hospitals in Thailand will be recruited and cluster randomised by a computer-generated randomisation sequence with block sampling. Sixty participants (30 each arm, 10 per hospital) will be assessed at baseline and 3 months following baseline for NDI, Numerical Rating Scale for pain intensity, cervical range of motion, fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire and EuroQol-5 dimensions 5 levels outcomes, and (2) Embedded qualitative study using semistructured interviews to explore acceptability of the ABPI to participants (n=12) and physiotherapists (n=3). Descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and interpretative phenomenological analysis to code and analyse qualitative data (deductive and inductive) will inform feasibility for a future definitive trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by the Naresuan University Institutional Review Board (NUIRB_0380/61).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND STATUS

TCTR20180607001; Recruiting commenced 1 February 2019.

The Evolving Case Supporting Individualised Physiotherapy for Low Back Pain

Low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most burdensome health problems in the world. Guidelines recommend simple treatments such as advice that may result in suboptimal outcomes, particularly when applied to people with complex biopsychosocial barriers to recovery. Individualised physiotherapy has the potential of being more effective for people with LBP; however, there is limited evidence supporting this approach. A series of studies supporting the mechanisms underpinning and effectiveness of the Specific Treatment of Problems of the Spine (STOPS) approach to individualised physiotherapy have been published. The clinical and research implications of these findings are presented and discussed. Treatment based on the STOPS approach should also be considered as an approach to individualised physiotherapy in people with LBP.

The effectiveness of a simplified core stabilization program (TRICCS-Trivandrum Community-based Core Stabilisation) for community-based intervention in chronic non-specific low back pain

BACKGROUND

Chronic low back pain is a common public health problem all over the world. Conservative therapy is prescribed as the initial treatment strategy in chronic low back pain. The cornerstone of conservatism in back care is core muscle strengthening. However, exercises prescribed for the purpose are manifold and some are not easily done by patients in Asian countries. We developed an easy to adhere exercise protocol for core stabilization and tested its effectiveness in south Indian population.

METHODS

Prospective study of 73 patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) who were subjected to Trivandrum Community-based Core Stabilisation protocol of treatment. The enrolled patients underwent initial Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) evaluation and Keele Start Back (KSB) questionnaire before starting the protocol. Back education was given, and the patient started on stratified exercise protocol. ODI assessment was done weekly. The trend in ODI changes and the factors determining them were assessed using ANOVA. The correlation of quantitative variables like age, initial ODI score, and KSB score with the rate of reduction of ODI was assessed using Pearson's correlation. Cross-tabulations were done using the chi-square test. Parametric tests were used throughout the analysis as the quantitative study variables found to be linear. Multiple linear regression (for the quantitative outcome) and binary logistic regression (for the dichotomous outcome) were performed.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) of ODI score has reduced significantly from 43.4 (16.6) to 24.6 (17.1) over the period of 6 weeks (p value < 0.001). The trend in reduction of ODI scores was significantly more in KSB score less than or equal to 3 compared to KSB more than 3 even after adjusting for the general trend of decreasing ODI score over time. The reduction in ODI scores appeared to be low for advancing age (p = 0.468) and higher KSB scores (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The TRICCS protocol is effective in a community-based approach in achieving satisfactory outcomes in CLBP in a period of 6 weeks. Patients with high KSB scores may require cognitive intervention also.

Review article: Best practice management of neck pain in the emergency department (part 6 of the musculoskeletal injuries rapid review series)

Neck pain and whiplash injuries are a common presentation to the ED, and a frequent cause of disability globally. This rapid review investigated best practice for the assessment and management of musculoskeletal neck pain in the ED. PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, TRIP and the grey literature, including relevant organisational websites, were searched in 2017. Primary studies, systematic reviews and guidelines were considered for inclusion. English-language articles published in the past 12 years addressing acute neck pain assessment, management or prognosis in the ED were included. Data extraction was conducted, followed by quality appraisal to rate levels of evidence where possible. The search revealed 2080 articles, of which 51 were included (n = 22 primary articles, n = 13 systematic reviews and n = 16 guidelines). Consistent evidence was found to support the use of 'red flags' to screen for serious pathologies, judicious use of imaging through clinical decision rule application and promotion of functional exercise coupled with advice and reassurance. Clinicians may also consider applying risk-stratification methods, such as using a clinical prediction rule, to guide patient discharge and referral plans; however, the evidence is still emerging in this population. This rapid review provides clinicians managing neck pain in the ED a summary of the best available evidence to enhance quality of care and optimise patient outcomes.