Safety, efficacy, and cost effectiveness of evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute low back pain in primary care

Adherence to recommended guidelines for low back pain presentations to an Australian emergency department: Barriers and enablers

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to evaluate the adherence to guidelines for the management of mechanical Low Back Pain within a single tertiary metropolitan Emergency Department setting. Our objectives were: METHODS: A two-stage multi-methods study design was undertaken. Stage 1 involved a retrospective chart audit of patients presenting with a diagnosis of mechanical Low Back Pain to establish documented adherence to clinical guidelines. Stage 2 explored clinicians' perspectives towards factors influencing adherence to the guidelines via a study-specific survey and follow up focus groups.

RESULTS

The audit demonstrated low adherence to the following guidelines: (i) appropriate prescription of analgesia, (ii) targeted education and advice, and (iii) attempts to mobilise. Three major themes were identified as factors influencing adherence to the guidelines: (1) clinician driven influences and factors, (2) workflow processes, and (3) patient expectations and behaviours.

CONCLUSION

There was low adherence to some published guidelines and factors influencing adherence to the guidelines were multi-factorial. Understanding the factors that influence care decisions and developing strategies to address these can improve Emergency Department management of mechanical Low Back Pain.

Characteristics and health care costs in patients with a diagnostic imaging for low back pain in Switzerland

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders worldwide and a frequent cause for health care utilization with a high economic burden. A large proportion of diagnostic imaging in patients with LBP is inappropriate and can cause more harm than good, which in turn can lead to higher health care costs. The aim of this study was to determine characteristics and health care costs for patients with a diagnostic imaging for LBP in Switzerland. Groupe Mutuel, one of the biggest health care insurance companies in Switzerland and covering approximately 12% of the population, provided data for this analysis. Patients were identified by diagnostic imaging for the lumbar spine in 2016 or 2017. The study period was 2015-2019, that is one year before and two years after the year of imaging. Regression analysis models were used to identify patient variables associated with higher health care costs. A total of 75,296 patients (57% female, mean age: 54.5 years) were included into the study. Magnetic resonance imaging was the most commonly used diagnostic method (44.3%). Patients generated annual mean health care costs of 518,488,470 CHF (466,639,621 Euro) in the whole observation period; 640 million CHF (576 million Euro) in the index year. Overall, costs for LBP patients were 72% higher compared with the costs of no LBP patients. Our findings confirm the economic burden of LBP and highlight the importance of ongoing efforts to improve prevention, diagnostics and patient care in patients with LBP.

Improving adherence to acute low back pain guideline recommendations with chiropractors and physiotherapists: the ALIGN cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

Acute low back pain is a common condition, has high burden, and there are evidence-to-practice gaps in the chiropractic and physiotherapy setting for imaging and giving advice to stay active. The aim of this cluster randomised trial was to estimate the effects of a theory- and evidence-based implementation intervention to increase chiropractors’ and physiotherapists’ adherence to a guideline for acute low back pain compared with the comparator (passive dissemination of the guideline). In particular, the primary aim of the intervention was to reduce inappropriate imaging referral and improve patient low back pain outcomes, and to determine whether this intervention was cost-effective.

Methods

Physiotherapy and chiropractic practices in the state of Victoria, Australia, comprising at least one practising clinician who provided care to patients with acute low back pain, were invited to participate. Patients attending these practices were included if they had acute non-specific low back pain (duration less than 3 months), were 18 years of age or older, and were able to understand and read English. Practices were randomly assigned either to a tailored, multi-faceted intervention based on the guideline (interactive educational symposium plus academic detailing) or passive dissemination of the guideline (comparator). A statistician independent of the study team undertook stratified randomisation using computer-generated random numbers; four strata were defined by professional group and the rural or metropolitan location of the practice. Investigators not involved in intervention delivery were blinded to allocation. Primary outcomes were X-ray referral self-reported by clinicians using a checklist and patient low back pain-specific disability (at 3 months).

Results

A total of 104 practices (43 chiropractors, 85 physiotherapists; 755 patients) were assigned to the intervention and 106 practices (45 chiropractors, 97 physiotherapists; 603 patients) to the comparator; 449 patients were available for the patient-level primary outcome. There was no important difference in the odds of patients being referred for X-ray (adjusted (Adj) OR: 1.40; 95% CI 0.51, 3.87; Adj risk difference (RD): 0.01; 95% CI − 0.02, 0.04) or patient low back pain-specific disability (Adj mean difference: 0.37; 95% CI − 0.48, 1.21, scale 0–24). The intervention did lead to improvement for some key secondary outcomes, including giving advice to stay active (Adj OR: 1.96; 95% CI 1.20, 3.22; Adj RD: 0.10; 95% CI 0.01, 0.19) and intending to adhere to the guideline recommendations (e.g. intention to refer for X-ray: Adj OR: 0.27; 95% CI 0.17, 0.44; intention to give advice to stay active: Adj OR: 2.37; 95% CI 1.51, 3.74).

Conclusions

Intervention group clinicians were more likely to give advice to stay active and to intend to adhere to the guideline recommendations about X-ray referral. The intervention did not change the primary study outcomes, with no important differences in X-ray referral and patient disability between groups, implying that hypothesised reductions in health service utilisation and/or productivity gains are unlikely to offset the direct costs of the intervention. We report these results with the caveat that we enrolled less patients into the trial than our determined sample size. We cannot recommend this intervention as a cost-effective use of resources.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609001022257. Retrospectively registered on 25 November 2009

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06053-x.

Strategies for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in public health: an overview of systematic reviews

Background

As a source of readily available evidence, rigorously synthesized and interpreted by expert clinicians and methodologists, clinical guidelines are part of an evidence-based practice toolkit, which, transformed into practice recommendations, have the potential to improve both the process of care and patient outcomes. In Brazil, the process of development and updating of the clinical guidelines for the Brazilian Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde, SUS) is already well systematized by the Ministry of Health. However, the implementation process of those guidelines has not yet been discussed and well structured. Therefore, the first step of this project and the primary objective of this study was to summarize the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies used to promote clinical practice guideline implementation and dissemination.

Methods

This overview used systematic review methodology to locate and evaluate published systematic reviews regarding strategies for clinical practice guideline implementation and adhered to the PRISMA guidelines for systematic review (PRISMA).

Results

This overview identified 36 systematic reviews regarding 30 strategies targeting healthcare organizations, healthcare providers and patients to promote guideline implementation. The most reported interventions were educational materials, educational meetings, reminders, academic detailing and audit and feedback. Care pathways—single intervention, educational meeting—single intervention, organizational culture, and audit and feedback—both strategies implemented in combination with others—were strategies categorized as generally effective from the systematic reviews. In the meta-analyses, when used alone, organizational culture, educational intervention and reminders proved to be effective in promoting physicians' adherence to the guidelines. When used in conjunction with other strategies, organizational culture also proved to be effective. For patient-related outcomes, education intervention showed effective results for disease target results at a short and long term.

Conclusion

This overview provides a broad summary of the best evidence on guideline implementation. Even if the included literature highlights the various limitations related to the lack of standardization, the methodological quality of the studies, and especially the lack of conclusion about the superiority of one strategy over another, the summary of the results provided by this study provides information on strategies that have been most widely studied in the last few years and their effectiveness in the context in which they were applied. Therefore, this panorama can support strategy decision-making adequate for SUS and other health systems, seeking to positively impact on the appropriate use of guidelines, healthcare outcomes and the sustainability of the SUS.

Clinical guidelines and care pathway for management of low back pain with or without radicular pain

OBJECTIVE

To develop guidelines for low back pain management according to previous international guidelines and the updated literature.

METHODS

A report was compiled from a review of systematic reviews of guidelines published between 2013 and 2018 and meta-analysis of the management of low back pain published between 2015 and 2018. This report summarized the state-of-the-art scientific knowledge for each predefined area of the guidelines from a critical review of selected literature. A multidisciplinary panel of experts including 17 health professionals involved in low back pain management and 2 patient representatives formulated preliminary guidelines based on the compilation report and a care pathway. The compilation report and preliminary guidelines were submitted to 25 academic institutions and stakeholders for the consultation phase. From responses of academic institutions and stakeholders, the final guidelines were developed. For each area of the guidelines, agreement between experts was assessed by the RAND/UCLA method.

RESULTS

The expert panel drafted 32 preliminary recommendations including a care pathway, which was amended after academic institution and stakeholder consultation. The consensus of the multidisciplinary expert panel was assessed for each final guideline: 32 recommendations were assessed as appropriate; none was assessed as uncertain or inappropriate. Strong approval was obtained for 27 recommendations and weak for 5.

CONCLUSION

These new guidelines introduce several concepts, including the need to early identify low back pain at risk of chronicity to provide quicker intensive and multidisciplinary management if necessary.

Defining and measuring imaging appropriateness in low back pain studies: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Patients with low back pain (LBP) rarely have serious underlying pathology but frequently undergo inappropriate imaging. A range of guidelines and red flag features are utilised to characterise appropriate imaging. This scoping review explores how LBP imaging appropriateness is determined and calculated in studies of primary care practice.

METHODS

This scoping review builds upon a previous meta-analysis, incorporating articles identified that were published since 2014, with an updated search to capture articles published since the original search. Electronic databases were searched, and citation lists of included papers were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were studies assessing adult LBP imaging appropriateness in a primary care setting. Twenty-three eligible studies were identified.

RESULTS

A range of red flag features were utilised to determine imaging appropriateness. Most studies considered appropriateness in a binary manner, by the presence of any red flag feature. Ten guidelines were referenced, with 7/23 (30%) included studies amending or not referencing any guideline. The method for calculating the proportion of inappropriate imaging varied. Ten per cent of the studies used the total number of patients presenting with LBP as the denominator, suggesting most studies overestimated the rate of inappropriate imaging, and did not capture where imaging is not performed for clinically suspicious LBP.

CONCLUSION

Greater clarity is needed on how we define and measure imaging appropriateness for LBP, which also accounts for the problem of failing to image when indicated. An internationally agreed methodology for imaging appropriateness studies would ultimately lead to an improvement in the care delivered to patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Assessment of Construct Validity of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Scoliosis Research Society-30 Questionnaire (SRS-30) in Patients With Degenerative Spinal Disease

STUDY DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To measure and compare the structural validity of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Scoliosis Research Society-30 (SRS-30) questionnaire in an adult population with prolonged degenerative thoracolumbar disease.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The ODI and the SRS-30 are commonly used patient-reported outcome instruments to assess back-specific disability and symptoms related to scoliosis. Still, these instruments have not been validated for degenerative spinal disease with different stages of deformity.

METHODS

Altogether, 637 consecutive adult patients with degenerative spinal pathologies were included. The patients completed the ODI (version 2.0), the 23 preoperative items of the SRS-30, a general health survey, the Kasari Frequency Intensity Time (FIT) index, the Depression Scale (DEPS), the RAND-36, and visual analog scales for leg and back pain instruments. Psychometric statistical and illustrative analyses were conducted. Deformity groups were analyzed to assess how well the two instruments reflect deformity-related back problems.

RESULTS

Both instruments reflected good coverage and targeting. Correlation between the ODI and the SRS-30 was high (r = 0.70; p < .001). Both measures could distinguish between different general health states. The SRS-30 strongly reflected mental state and social well-being. The SRS-30 was less sensitive for pain and function. Furthermore, the principal component of pain/function explained more variance in the SRS-30 compared with the ODI score. The ODI was more sensitive for variance of disability among different age and deformity groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the ODI and the the SRS-30 provide valid scores in evaluating health-related quality of life and/or level of disability among patients with prolonged degenerative thoracolumbar disease. The ODI has slightly higher correlation with physical functioning. The SRS-30 seems to be better when evaluating the emotional and psychological functions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Clinical guidelines and patient related outcomes: summary of evidence and recommendations

Purpose

Good medical practice, evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been recurring subjects in the scientific literature. EBM advocates argue that good medical practice should be guided by evidence-based CPG. On the other hand, critical authors of EBM methodology argue that various interests undermine the quality of evidence and reliability of CPG recommendations. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate patient related outcomes of CPG implementation, in light of EBM critics.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors opted for a rapid literature review.

Findings

There are few studies evaluating the effectiveness of CPG in patient-related outcomes. The systematic reviews found are not conclusive, although they suggest a positive impact of CPGs in relevant outcomes.

Research limitations/implications

This work was not a systematic review of literature, which is its main limitation. On the other hand, arguments from EBM and CPG critics were considered, and thus it can enlighten health institutions to recognize the caveats and to establish policies toward care improvement.

Originality/value

The paper is the first of its kind to discuss, based on the published literature, next steps toward better health practice, while acknowledging the caveats of this process.

From acute to persistent low back pain: a longitudinal investigation of somatosensory changes using quantitative sensory testing-an exploratory study

Introduction

Chronic low back pain (LBP) is commonly associated with generalised pain hypersensitivity. It is suggested that such somatosensory alterations are important determinants for the transition to persistent pain from an acute episode of LBP. Although cross-sectional research investigating somatosensory function in the acute stage is developing, no longitudinal studies designed to evaluate temporal changes have been published.

Objectives

This exploratory study aimed to investigate the temporal development of somatosensory changes from the acute stage of LBP to up to 4 months from onset.

Methods

Twenty-five people with acute LBP (<3 weeks' duration) and 48 pain-free controls were prospectively assessed at baseline using quantitative sensory testing with the assessor blinded to group allocation, and again at 2 and 4 months. Psychological variables were concurrently assessed. People with acute LBP were classified based on their average pain severity over the previous week at 4 months as recovered (≤1/10 numeric rating scale) or persistent (≥2/10 numeric rating scale) LBP.

Results

In the persistent LBP group, (1) there was a significant decrease in pressure pain threshold between 2 and 4 months (P < 0.013), and at 4 months, pressure pain threshold was significantly different from the recovered LBP group (P < 0.001); (2) a trend towards increased temporal summation was found at 2 months and 4 months, at which point it exceeded 2 SDs beyond the pain-free control reference value. Pain-related psychological variables were significantly higher in those with persistent LBP compared with the recovered LBP group at all time points (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Changes in mechanical pain sensitivity occurring in the subacute stage warrant further longitudinal evaluation to better understand the role of somatosensory changes in the development of persistent LBP. Pain-related cognitions at baseline distinguished persistent from the recovered LBP groups, emphasizing the importance of concurrent evaluation of psychological contributors in acute LBP.

Developing implementation science to improve the translation of research to address low back pain: A critical review

The evidence base regarding treatment for back pain does not align with clinical practice. Currently there is relatively little evidence to guide health decision-makers on how to improve the use, uptake or adoption of evidence-based recommended practice for low back pain. Improving the design, conduct and reporting of strategies to improve the implementation of back pain care will help address this important evidence-practice gap. In this paper, we.

Patient Nonadherence to Guideline-Recommended Care in Acute Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

To describe the magnitude of patient-reported nonadherence with guideline-recommended care for acute low back pain.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of data from participants enrolled in the Paracetamol for Acute Low Back Pain study trial, a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of paracetamol for acute low back pain.

SETTING

Primary care, general practitioner.

PARTICIPANTS

Data from participants with acute low back pain (N=1643).

INTERVENTIONS

Guideline-recommended care, including reassurance, simple analgesia, and the advice to stay active and avoid bed rest. Also, advice against additional treatments and referral for imaging.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of nonadherence with guideline-recommended care. Nonadherence was defined as (1) failure to consume the advised paracetamol dose, or (2) receipt of additional health care, tests, or medication during the trial treatment period (4wk). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with nonadherence.

RESULTS

In the first week of treatment, 39.7% of participants were classified as nonadherent. Over the 4-week treatment period, 70.0% were nonadherent, and 57.5% did not complete the advised paracetamol regimen. Higher perceived risk of persistent pain, lower level of disability, and not claiming workers' compensation were associated with nonadherence, with odds ratios ranging from .46 to 1.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to guideline-recommended care for acute low back pain was poor. Most participants do not complete the advised paracetamol regimen. Higher perceived risk of persistence of complaints, lower baseline disability, and participants not claiming workers' compensation were independently associated with nonadherence.

CareTrack: Toward Appropriate Care for Low Back Pain

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective medical record review to assess compliance with low back pain (LBP) care indicators.

OBJECTIVE

To establish baseline estimates of the appropriateness of LBP care in the general Australian population provided by a range of healthcare providers in various real-world settings.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

LBP is a costly condition and accounts for the greatest burden of disease worldwide, yet the care provided is often at variance with guidelines. No baseline estimates of performance are currently available in Australia across various aspects of LBP care, practitioners, and settings.

METHODS

A population-based sample of patients with 22 common conditions was recruited by telephone; consents were obtained to review their medical records against indicators ("CareTrack"). Care for LBP was reviewed against 10 indicators used in a previous study and ratified by experts as representing appropriate LBP care in Australia during 2009 and 2010.

RESULTS

Of the 22 CareTrack conditions, LBP had the highest number of eligible healthcare encounters (6588 of 35,573, 19%), 125 to 884 per indicator among 164 LBP patients. Overall compliance with LBP indicators was 72% (range 42%-98%). Allied health practitioners and hospitals were the most compliant (82%-83% respectively), followed by general practitioners (54%). Some aspects of care were poor, such as documenting a thorough neurological examination, screening for serious diseases such as infection and inappropriate use of drugs such as steroids and treatments such as traction.

CONCLUSION

Over a quarter of LBP care was not appropriate despite the availability of guidelines. There is a need for national and, potentially, international agreement on clinical standards, indicators and tools to guide, document and monitor the appropriateness of care for LBP, and for measures to increase their uptake, particularly where deficiencies have been identified.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N /A.

Implementation interventions to improve the management of non-specific low back pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) are not necessarily translated into practice. Multiple studies have investigated different interventions to implement best evidence into clinical practice yet no synthesis of these studies has been carried out to date. The aim of this study was to systematically review available studies to determine whether implementation interventions in this field have been effective and to identify which strategies have been most successful in changing healthcare practitioner behaviours and improving patient outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken, searching electronic databases until end of December 2012 plus hand searching, writing to key authors and using prior knowledge of the field to identify papers. Included studies evaluated an implementation intervention to improve the management of NSLBP in clinical practice, measured key outcomes regarding change in practitioner behaviour and/or patient outcomes and subjected their data to statistical analysis. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) recommendations about systematic review conduct were followed. Study inclusion, data extraction and study risk of bias assessments were conducted independently by two review authors.

RESULTS

Of 7654 potentially eligible citations, 17 papers reporting on 14 studies were included. Risk of bias of included studies was highly variable with 7 of 17 papers rated at high risk. Single intervention or one-off implementation efforts were consistently ineffective in changing clinical practice. Increasing the frequency and duration of implementation interventions led to greater success with those continuously ongoing over time the most successful in improving clinical practice in line with best evidence recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Single intervention or one-off implementation interventions may seem attractive but are largely unsuccessful in effecting meaningful change in clinical practice for NSLBP. Increasing frequency and duration of implementation interventions seems to lead to greater success and the most successful implementation interventions used consistently sustained strategies.

"Lovely Pie in the Sky Plans": A Qualitative Study of Clinicians' Perspectives on Guidelines for Managing Low Back Pain in Primary Care in England

STUDY DESIGN

A qualitative study in south-west England primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the decision-making processes that result in the delivery of particular treatments to patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care and to examine clinicians' perspectives on the English National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines for managing LBP in primary care.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Merely publishing clinical guidelines is known to be insufficient to ensure their implementation. Gaining an in-depth understanding of clinicians' perspectives on specific clinical guidelines can suggest ways to improve the relevance of guidelines for clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 53 purposively sampled clinicians. Participants were 16 general practitioners (GPs), 10 chiropractors, 8 acupuncturists, 8 physiotherapists, 7 osteopaths, and 4 nurses, from the public sector (20), private sector (21), or both (12). We used thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Official guidelines comprised just 1 of many inputs to clinical decision-making. Clinicians drew on personal experience and inter-professional networks and were constrained by organizational factors when deciding which treatment to prescribe, refer for, or deliver to an individual patient with LBP. Some found the guideline terminology-"non-specific LBP"-unfamiliar and of limited relevance to practice. They were frustrated by disparities between recommendations in the guidelines and the real-world situation of short consultation times, difficult-to-access specialist services, and sparse commissioning of guideline-recommended treatments.

CONCLUSION

The NICE guidelines for managing LBP in primary care are one, relatively peripheral, influence on clinical decision-making among GPs, chiropractors, acupuncturists, physiotherapists, osteopaths, and nurses. When revised, these guidelines could be made more clinically relevant by: ensuring that guideline terminology reflects clinical practice terminology; dispelling the image of guidelines as rigid and prohibiting patient-centered care; providing opportunities for clinicians to engage in experiential learning about guideline-recommended complementary therapies; and commissioning guideline-recommended treatments for public sector patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Development of Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plans (SCAMPs) in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Background:

With rising cost of healthcare, there is an urgent need for developing effective and economical streamlined care. In clinical situations with limited data or conflicting evidence-based data, there is significant institutional and individual practice variation. Quality improvement with the use of Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plans (SCAMPs) might be beneficial in such scenarios. The SCAMPs method has never before been reported to be utilized in plastic surgery.

Methods:

The topic of immediate breast reconstruction was identified as a possible SCAMPs project. The initial stages of SCAMPs development, including planning and implementation, were entered. The SCAMP Champion, along with the SCAMPs support team, developed targeted data statements. The SCAMP was then written and a decision-tree algorithm was built. Buy-in was obtained from the Division of Plastic Surgery and a SCAMPs data form was generated to collect data.

Results:

Decisions pertaining to “immediate implant-based breast reconstruction” were approved as an acceptable topic for SCAMPs development. Nine targeted data statements were made based on the clinical decision points within the SCAMP. The SCAMP algorithm, and the SDF, required multiple revisions. Ultimately, the SCAMP was effectively implemented with multiple iterations in data collection.

Conclusions:

Full execution of the SCAMP may allow better-defined selection criteria for this complex patient population. Deviations from the SCAMP may allow for improvement of the SCAMP and facilitate consensus within the Division. Iterative and adaptive quality improvement utilizing SCAMPs creates an opportunity to reduce cost by improving knowledge about best practice.

Barriers to primary care clinician adherence to clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain: protocol of a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is the highest ranked condition contributing to years lived with disability, and is a significant economic and societal burden. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are designed to improve quality of care and reduce practice variation by providing graded recommendations based on the best available evidence. Studies of low back pain guideline implementation have shown no or modest effects at changing clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To identify enablers and barriers to adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies that will be conducted and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement guidelines. Eight databases will be searched using a priori inclusion/exclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers will conduct a structured review and meta-synthesis, and a third reviewer will arbitrate where there is disagreement. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO 2014.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The review will also be disseminated electronically, in print and at conferences. Updates of the review will be conducted to inform and guide healthcare translation into practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014012961. Available from http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42014012961.

Acute low back pain management in general practice: uncertainty and conflicting certainties

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a significant health problem and common reason to visit the GP. Evidence suggests GPs experience difficulty applying evidence-based guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

Explore GPs' underlying beliefs about acute LBP and how these influence their clinical management of patients.

METHODS

Eleven GPs from one geographical region within New Zealand were recruited by purposive sampling. Audio recordings of semi-structured qualitative interviews were transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed with an Interpretive Description framework.

RESULTS

Four key themes emerged related to the causes of acute LBP, GP confidence, communicating diagnostic uncertainty and encouraging movement and activity. Acute LBP was seen as a direct representation of tissue injury, consequently the assessment and management of patients' attitudes and beliefs was not a priority. Participants' confidence was decreased due to a perceived inability to diagnose or influence the tissue injury. Despite this, diagnoses were provided to patients to provide reassurance and meet expectations. Guideline recommendations regarding activity conflicted with a perceived need to protect damaged tissue, resulting in reported provision of mixed messages about the need to be both active and careful.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs' initial focus upon tissue injury during acute care, and providing a diagnostic label, may influence patients' subsequent alignment with a biomedical perspective and contribute to consultation conflict and patients' perception of blame when discussion of psychosocial influences is introduced. Demonstrating the relevance of the biopsychosocial model to acute LBP may improve GPs' alignment with guidelines, improve their confidence to manage these patients and ultimately improve outcomes.

Metastatic cancer mimicking mechanical low back pain: a case report

OBJECTIVE AND IMPORTANCE

The purpose of this report is to describe the clinical course of a patient referred to physiotherapy (PT) for the treatment of low back pain who was subsequently diagnosed with metastatic non-small cell carcinoma of the lung.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

A 48-year old woman was referred to PT for the evaluation and treatment of an insidious onset of low back pain of 2 month duration. The patient did not have a history of cancer, recent weight changes, or general health concerns. The patient's history and physical examination were consistent with a mechanical neuromusculoskeletal dysfunction and no red flag findings were present that warranted immediate medical referral.

INTERVENTION

Short-term symptomatic improvements were achieved using the treatment-based classification approach. However, despite five PT sessions over the course of 5 weeks, the patient did not experience long-term symptomatic improvement. On the sixth session, the patient reported a 2-day history of left hand weakness and headaches. This prompted the physiotherapist to refer the patient to the emergency department where she was diagnosed with lung cancer.

CONCLUSION

Differential diagnosis is a key component of PT practice. The ability to reproduce symptoms or achieve short-term symptomatic gains is not sufficient to rule out sinister pathology. This case demonstrates how extra caution should be taken in patients who are smokers with thoracolumbar region pain of unknown origin. The need for caution is magnified when one can achieve no more than short-term improvements in the patient's symptoms.

The development and exploratory analysis of the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ)

OBJECTIVES

To develop an instrument to assess attitudes and underlying beliefs about back pain, and subsequently investigate its internal consistency and underlying structures.

DESIGN

The instrument was developed by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians and researchers based on analysis of qualitative interviews with people experiencing acute and chronic back pain. Exploratory analysis was conducted using data from a population-based cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Qualitative interviews with community-based participants and subsequent postal survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Instrument development informed by interviews with 12 participants with acute back pain and 11 participants with chronic back pain. Data for exploratory analysis collected from New Zealand residents and citizens aged 18 years and above. 1000 participants were randomly selected from the New Zealand Electoral Roll. 602 valid responses were received.

MEASURES

The 34-item Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ) was developed. Internal consistency was evaluated by the Cronbach α coefficient. Exploratory analysis investigated the structure of the data using Principal Component Analysis.

RESULTS

The 34-item long form of the scale had acceptable internal consistency (α=0.70; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.73). Exploratory analysis identified five two-item principal components which accounted for 74% of the variance in the reduced data set: 'vulnerability of the back'; 'relationship between back pain and injury'; 'activity participation while experiencing back pain'; 'prognosis of back pain' and 'psychological influences on recovery'. Internal consistency was acceptable for the reduced 10-item scale (α=0.61; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.66) and the identified components (α between 0.50 and 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

The 34-item long form of the scale may be appropriate for use in future cross-sectional studies. The 10-item short form may be appropriate for use as a screening tool, or an outcome assessment instrument. Further testing of the 10-item Back-PAQ's construct validity, reliability, responsiveness to change and predictive ability needs to be conducted.

Predicting rapid recovery from acute low back pain based on the intensity, duration and history of pain: a validation study

BACKGROUND

Clinical prediction rules can assist clinicians to identify patients with low back pain (LBP) who are likely to recover quickly with minimal treatment; however, there is a paucity of validated instruments to assist with this task.

METHOD

We performed a pre-planned external validation study to assess the generalizability of a simple 3-item clinical prediction rule developed to estimate the probability of recovery from acute LBP at certain time points. The accuracy of the rule (calibration and discrimination) was determined in a sample of 956 participants enrolled in a randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

The calibration of the rule was reasonable in the new sample with predictions of recovery typically within 5-10% of observed recovery. Discriminative performance of the rule was poor to moderate and similar to that found in the development sample.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the rule can be used to provide accurate information about expected recovery from acute LBP, within the first few weeks of patients presenting to primary care. Impact analysis to determine if the rule influences clinical behaviours and patient outcomes is required.

The clinical course of low back pain: a meta-analysis comparing outcomes in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies

Background

Evidence suggests that the course of low back pain (LBP) symptoms in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) follows a pattern of large improvement regardless of the type of treatment. A similar pattern was independently observed in observational studies. However, there is an assumption that the clinical course of symptoms is particularly influenced in RCTs by mere participation in the trials. To test this assumption, the aim of our study was to compare the course of LBP in RCTs and observational studies.

Methods

Source of studies CENTRAL database for RCTs and MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and hand search of systematic reviews for cohort studies. Studies include individuals aged 18 or over, and concern non-specific LBP. Trials had to concern primary care treatments. Data were extracted on pain intensity. Meta-regression analysis was used to compare the pooled within-group change in pain in RCTs with that in cohort studies calculated as the standardised mean change (SMC).

Results

70 RCTs and 19 cohort studies were included, out of 1134 and 653 identified respectively. LBP symptoms followed a similar course in RCTs and cohort studies: a rapid improvement in the first 6 weeks followed by a smaller further improvement until 52 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in pooled SMC between RCTs and cohort studies at any time point:- 6 weeks: RCTs: SMC 1.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.2 (0.7to 1.7); 13 weeks: RCTs 1.2 (1.1 to 1.3) and cohorts 1.0 (0.8 to 1.3); 27 weeks: RCTs 1.1 (1.0 to 1.2) and cohorts 1.2 (0.8 to 1.7); 52 weeks: RCTs 0.9 (0.8 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.1 (0.8 to 1.6).

Conclusions

The clinical course of LBP symptoms followed a pattern that was similar in RCTs and cohort observational studies. In addition to a shared ‘natural history’, enrolment of LBP patients in clinical studies is likely to provoke responses that reflect the nonspecific effects of seeking and receiving care, independent of the study design.

Deviations from venous blood specimen collection guideline adherence among senior nursing students

BACKGROUND

Despite considerable efforts to increase patient safety by supporting the use of best practice medical and nursing guidelines by healthcare staff, adherence is often suboptimal. Swedish nurses often deviate from venous blood specimen collection (VBSC) guideline adherence. We assessed the adherence to national VBSC guidelines among senior nursing students.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported questionnaire survey among 101 out of 177 senior nursing students consisting of web-based students in their fifth semester and campus-based students in their fifth or sixth semester out of six. In regard to the VBSC procedures, we asked about adherence to the patient identification, test request handling, and test tube labelling protocols that the students had learned during their second semester and practiced thereafter.

RESULTS

Guideline adherence to patient identification was reported by 81%, test request handling by 74%, and test tube labelling by 2% of the students. Students with no prior healthcare education reported to a higher extent that they operated within the guidelines regarding labelling the test tube before entering the patient's room compared to students with prior healthcare education. Using multiple logistic regression analysis, we found that fifth semester web-based program students adhered better to VBSC guidelines regarding comparing patient ID/test request/tube label compared to campus-based students.

CONCLUSIONS

Senior nursing students were found to adhere to VBSC guidelines to a similar extent as registered nurses and other hospital ward staff in clinical healthcare. Thus student adherence to VBSC guidelines had deteriorated since their basic training in the second semester, and this can impact patient safety during university/clinical studies. The results of our study have implications for nursing practice education.

Spine surgery referrals redirected through a multidisciplinary care pathway: effects of nonsurgeon triage including MRI utilization

Object

The Saskatchewan Spine Pathway (SSP) was introduced to improve quality and access to care for patients with low-back and leg pain in the province. There is very limited data regarding the efficacy of nonsurgeon triage of surgical referrals. The objective of this early implementation study was to determine how the SSP affects utilization of MRI and spine surgery.

Methods

The authors performed a retrospective analysis of 87 consecutive patients with low-back and leg pain who were initially referred to a spine surgeon but were instead redirected to the SSP clinic between May 1, 2011, and November 30, 2011. The SSP clinic triaged patients into 2 groups: Group A (nonsurgical management) and Group B (referred back to the spine surgeon). The SSP classification was modified from the classification proposed by Hall et al. Pain and disability were scored by pain-related visual analog scale, modified Oswestry Disability Index, and EuroQol-5D.

Results

Sixty-two patients (Group A, 71.3%) were discharged after patient education, self-care advice, and/or referral for additional mechanical therapies. Although only 25 patients (Group B, 28.7%) were directed back to the surgeon, the final percentage (12.6%) offered surgery was similar to that of historic controls (15%). Total MRI utilization was significantly lower in Group A (25.8%) than Group B (92.0%) (p < 0.0001). Nonsurgeon triage captured all red flags detected by the surgeon. Patients in Group B were much more likely to have a leg-dominant pain (p = 0.0088) and had significantly higher Oswestry Disability Index (p = 0.0121) and EuroQol-5D mobility (p = 0.0484) scores.

Conclusions

The SSP significantly reduced MRI utilization and referrals seen by the surgeon for nonoperative care. Although this early implementation study suggests potential for cost savings, a more rigorous analysis of outcomes, costs, and patient satisfaction is required.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions for chronic noncancer pain management

BACKGROUND

Reliable evidence detailing effective treatments and management practices for chronic noncancer pain exists. However, little is known about which knowledge translation (KT) interventions lead to the uptake of this evidence in practice.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of KT interventions for chronic noncancer pain management.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches of electronic databases, the gray literature and manual searches of journals were undertaken. Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and controlled before-and-after studies of KT interventions were included. Data regarding interventions and primary outcomes were categorized using a standard taxonomy; a risk-of-bias approach was adopted for study quality. A narrative synthesis of study results was conducted.

RESULTS

More than 8500 titles and abstracts were screened, with 230 full-text articles reviewed for eligibility. Nineteen studies were included, of which only a small proportion were judged to be at low risk of bias. Interactive KT education for health care providers has a positive effect on patients' function, but its benefits for other health provider- and patient-related outcomes are inconsistent. Interactive education for patients leads to improvements in knowledge and function. Little research evidence supports the effectiveness of structural changes in health systems and quality improvement processes or coordination of care.

CONCLUSIONS

KT interventions incorporating interactive education in chronic noncancer pain led to positive effects on patients' function and knowledge about pain. Future studies should provide implementation details and use consistent theoretical frameworks to better estimate the effectiveness of such interventions.

Evaluation of a theory-informed implementation intervention for the management of acute low back pain in general medical practice: the IMPLEMENT cluster randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

This cluster randomised trial evaluated an intervention to decrease x-ray referrals and increase giving advice to stay active for people with acute low back pain (LBP) in general practice.

METHODS

General practices were randomised to either access to a guideline for acute LBP (control) or facilitated interactive workshops (intervention). We measured behavioural predictors (e.g. knowledge, attitudes and intentions) and fear avoidance beliefs. We were unable to recruit sufficient patients to measure our original primary outcomes so we introduced other outcomes measured at the general practitioner (GP) level: behavioural simulation (clinical decision about vignettes) and rates of x-ray and CT-scan (medical administrative data). All those not involved in the delivery of the intervention were blinded to allocation.

RESULTS

47 practices (53 GPs) were randomised to the control and 45 practices (59 GPs) to the intervention. The number of GPs available for analysis at 12 months varied by outcome due to missing confounder information; a minimum of 38 GPs were available from the intervention group, and a minimum of 40 GPs from the control group. For the behavioural constructs, although effect estimates were small, the intervention group GPs had greater intention of practising consistent with the guideline for the clinical behaviour of x-ray referral. For behavioural simulation, intervention group GPs were more likely to adhere to guideline recommendations about x-ray (OR 1.76, 95%CI 1.01, 3.05) and more likely to give advice to stay active (OR 4.49, 95%CI 1.90 to 10.60). Imaging referral was not statistically significantly different between groups and the potential importance of effects was unclear; rate ratio 0.87 (95%CI 0.68, 1.10) for x-ray or CT-scan.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention led to small changes in GP intention to practice in a manner that is consistent with an evidence-based guideline, but it did not result in statistically significant changes in actual behaviour.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012606000098538.

Practice patterns in spine radiograph utilization among doctors of chiropractic enrolled in a provider network offering complementary care in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Nonspecific back pain is associated with high use of diagnostic imaging in primary care, yet current evidence suggests that routine imaging of the spine is unnecessary. The objective of this study is to describe current practice patterns in spine radiograph utilization among doctors of chiropractic enrolled in an American provider network.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis of administrative claims data from one of the largest providers of complementary health care networks for health plans in the United States was performed. Survey data containing provider demographics were linked with routinely collected data on spine radiograph utilization and patient characteristics aggregated at the provider level. We calculated rates and variations of spine radiographs over 12 months. Negative binomial regression was performed to identify significant predictors of high radiograph utilization and to estimate the associated incidence risk ratio.

RESULTS

Complete data for 6946 doctors of chiropractic and 249193 adult patients were available for analyses. In 2010, claims were paid for a total of 91542 new patient examinations and 23369 spine radiographs (including 17511 ordered within 5 days of initial patient examination). The rate of spine radiographs within 5 days of an initial patient visit was 204 per 1000 new patient examinations. Significant predictors of higher radiograph utilization rates included the following: practicing in the Midwest or South US census regions, practicing in an urban or suburban setting, chiropractic school attended, and being a male provider in full-time practice with more than 20 years of experience.

CONCLUSION

Chiropractic school attended and practice location were the most influential predictors of spine radiograph utilization among network chiropractors. This information may help to inform the development and evaluation of a tailored intervention to address overuse of radiograph utilization.

Clinical reasoning for a patient with neck and upper extremity symptoms: a case requiring referral

The purpose of this case report is to describe a 56-year old female patient with a bizarre pattern of cervicobrachial symptoms. The patient was managed according to the McKenzie "Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy" principles and the physical examination alongside the movement testing showed inconsistent findings. Due to the patient's cancer-related medical history, presence of night pain, general weakness and the non-response to treatment, a referral to a medical specialist was immediately made. Imaging studies revealed metastases to the axial skeleton in multiple sites and a metastatic lesion was established as a medical diagnosis. With many physical therapists becoming first-entry providers it is likely that encounters with cases other than the purely musculoskeletal will increase. Serious pathologies can mimic musculoskeletal disorders, confusing even the most experienced therapist and as a result, pernicious and possibly life-threatening disease might easily be missed. This would be crucial especially in cases when the patient should immediately be referred to a medical specialist. Physical therapists should hone their clinical skills not only in treatment aspects but also in screening procedures in order to prompt a referral when it is required.

Clinical course of non-specific low back pain: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies set in primary care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Non-specific low back pain is a relatively common and recurrent condition for which at present there is no effective cure. In current guidelines, the prognosis of acute non-specific back pain is assumed to be favourable, but this assumption is mainly based on return to function. This systematic review investigates the clinical course of pain in patients with non-specific acute low back pain who seek treatment in primary care. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: Included were prospective studies, with follow-up of at least 12 months, that studied the prognosis of patients with low back pain for less than 3 months of duration in primary care settings. Proportions of patients still reporting pain during follow-up were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were used to identify sources of variation between the results of individual studies.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies were eligible for evaluation. In the first 3 months, recovery is observed in 33% of patients, but 1 year after onset, 65% still report pain. Subgroup analysis reveals that the pooled proportion of patients still reporting pain after 1 year was 71% at 12 months for studies that considered total absence of pain as a criterion for recovery versus 57% for studies that used a less stringent definition. The pooled proportion for Australian studies was 41% versus 69% for European or US studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review indicate that the assumption that spontaneous recovery occurs in a large majority of patients is not justified. There should be more focus on intensive follow-up of patients who have not recovered within the first 3 months.

Use of strength exercises in rehabilitation process of persons with low back pain syndrome

This work presents use of strength exercises in rehabilitation process of persons with low back pain syndrome. Numerous authors have exerted, that employment of these exercises has beyond increase of muscle strength also positive influence on range of motion of trunk and lower limbs and decrease of pain in persons with low back pain syndrome

Adherence of Irish general practitioners to European guidelines for acute low back pain: A prospective pilot study

There are no national low back pain (LBP) clinical guidelines in Ireland, and neither the level of adherence of General Practitioners (GPs) to the European guidelines, nor the cost of LBP to the patient and the state, have been investigated. A prospective pilot study was conducted on 54 consenting patients (18M, 36F: mean age (SD): 40.5 (14.3) years) with a new episode of acute LBP (<3 months) attending one of nine participating GPs. Baseline demographic, LBP classification [i.e. simple back ache (SBA), nerve root pain (NRP), serious spinal pathology (SSP)] and primary care management data were recorded over a three month period. Adherence and costs were estimated based on: medication prescription, referral for investigations, treatment or consultations, and wage replacement costs (time signed off work). For both SBA and NRP, medication prescriptions were consistent with European guideline recommendations, but not for referral for further treatment (39% of SBA patients were referred on first visit), secondary care (54% of NRP patients were referred on first visit), or discontinuation of work (50% NRP patients on first GP visit). The average total cost (direct and wage replacement) for a single episode of LBP over 12 weeks was 20,531 Euros (20,300-20,762). Direct costs accounted for 43% [8874.36 Euros, (8643.37-9105.37 Euros)] and wage replacement costs 57% (11,657 Euros). In conclusion, management of acute LBP in a cohort of GPs in Ireland was not consistent with European clinical guideline recommendations, and warrants higher levels of postgraduate education among GPs, as well as restructuring of primary care services, which should improve patient outcome and reduce costs.

Ten-year survey reveals differences in GP management of neck and back pain

PURPOSE

Clinical guidelines provide similar recommendations for the management of new neck pain and low back pain (LBP) but it is unclear if general practitioner's (GP) care is similar. While GP's management of LBP is well documented, little is known about GP's management of neck pain. We aimed to describe GP's management of new neck pain and compare this to GP's management of new LBP in Australia between April 2000 and March 2010.

METHODS

All GP-patient encounters for a new (i.e. first visit to any medical practitioner) neck pain or LBP problem were compared in terms of treatment delivered, referral patterns and requests for laboratory and imaging investigations.

RESULTS

General practitioners in Australia have managed new neck pain and LBP problems at a rate of 3.1 and 5.8 per 1,000 GP-patient encounters, respectively. GP's primarily utilised medications, in particular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, to manage new neck and LBP problems and referred approximately 25% of all patients for imaging. Patients with new neck pain are more frequently managed using physical treatments and were referred more often to allied health professionals and specialists. In comparison, patients with new LBP were managed more frequently with medication, advice, provision of a sickness certificate and ordering of pathology tests.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first time GP management of a new episode of neck pain has been documented using a nationally representative sample and it is also the first time that the management of back and neck pain has been compared. Despite guidelines endorsing a similar approach for the management of new neck pain and LBP, in actual clinical practice Australian GPs manage these two conditions differently.

A systematic review of clinical pathways for lower back pain and introduction of the Saskatchewan Spine Pathway

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of spine care pathways and case study of the Saskatchewan Spine Pathway (SSP).

OBJECTIVE

(1) What are the differences between clinical pathways and clinical guidelines? (2) Are there examples of clinical pathways in the management of lower back pain (LBP)? Is there evidence that they are successful? (3) What is the SSP, and what are its key features?

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for LBP produces superior outcomes and may improve efficiency by reducing unnecessary imaging, ineffective treatments, and inappropriate surgical referrals. A clinical pathway is an attempt to bridge the "translation gap" between guidelines and clinical practice.

METHODS

A qualitative review was performed for question 1. For question 2, a systematic review of the English language literature was performed for articles published through March 31, 2011. A case study is provided for question 3.

RESULTS

(1) Evidence for clinical pathways is mainly derived from guidelines, but pathways are distinguished by several features including the coordination of multidisciplinary care, facilitation of communication among care providers, resources for ongoing quality improvements, and a central focus on the patient experience. (2) Five articles describing four clinical pathways met the a priori criteria, but none tested comparative effectiveness. (3) The SSP is unique in that it is (a) inclusive for all types of LBP, (b) based on a classification system, (c) patient-focused mostly at primary care rather than in specialized clinics, (d) implemented in the health care system of a geopolitically defined region, and (e) includes all of the defining features of modern care pathways.

CONCLUSION

Several clinical pathways for LBP have been described, but effectiveness has not been tested.

CLINICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Clinical pathways for LBP need to be further developed and investigated as a means to facilitate guidelines-concordant practice and improve patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Insufficient.

RECOMMENDATION

Weak.

Real-world practice patterns, health-care utilization, and costs in patients with low back pain: the long road to guideline-concordant care

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Treatment guidelines suggest that most acute low back pain (LBP) episodes substantially improve within a few weeks and that immediate use of imaging and aggressive therapies should be avoided.

PURPOSE

Assess the actual practice patterns of imaging, noninvasive therapy, medication use, and surgery in patients with LBP, and compare their costs to those of matched controls without LBP.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of claims data from 40 self-insured employers in the United States.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The study sample included 211,551 patients, aged 18 to 64 years, with one LBP diagnosis or more (per Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set specification) during 2004 to 2006, identified from a claims database. Patients had continuous eligibility for 12 months or more after their index LBP diagnosis (study period), for 6 months or more before their index diagnosis (baseline period), and no other LBP diagnosis during the baseline period. Patients with LBP were matched to a random cohort of patients without LBP by age, gender, employment status, and index year.

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Physiological measures (eg, imaging and diagnostic tests), functional measures (eg, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment for LBP, health-care resource use), and direct (medical and prescription drug) and indirect (disability and medically related absenteeism) costs were assessed within the year after the LBP diagnosis.

METHODS

Univariate analyses described treatment patterns and compared baseline characteristics and study period costs.

RESULTS

Patients with LBP had significantly higher rates of baseline comorbidities and resource use compared with controls. Of patients with LBP, 41.6% had imaging mean (median) [standard deviation] 34.3 (0) [78.6] days after the LBP diagnosis. Most patients with LBP (69.4%) used medications starting 51.9 (8) [86.2] days after the diagnosis. Opioids were commonly prescribed early (41.6% of patients; after 82.8 (25) [105.9] days). Of patients with LBP, 2.05% had surgery during the study period. Patients with LBP were likely to have chiropractic treatment first, followed by pharmacotherapy with muscle relaxants and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Except for less surgery, these findings also held for patients with only nonspecific LBP. Patients with LBP had higher mean direct costs compared with controls ($7,211 vs. $2,382, respectively; p<.0001), with surgery patients having mean direct costs of $33,931.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to clinical guidelines, many patients with LBP start incurring significant resource use and associated expenses soon after the index diagnosis. Achieving guideline-concordant care will require substantial changes in LBP practice patterns.

[Quality indicators for managing patients with low back pain]

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) is an epidemiologically and economically relevant health care problem appropriate for quality assurance approaches. Therefore an expert panel (AQUIK) of the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians has proposed three quality indicators (QI) for monitoring the quality of ambulatory care for LBP. The aim of this article is to present and evaluate the proposed QIs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The three proposed QIs relating to red flags, imaging and sick leave certificates were evaluated with regard to the underpinning evidence, epidemiology and feasibility. Guidelines and original research as well results from surveys and observational studies evaluating adherence to LBP guidelines were used for assessment.

RESULTS

The expert panel concluded that only the recording of red flags is a relevant and feasible QI. Despite a two-stage expert method the epidemiology of LBP, feasibility and existing routine health care data were not sufficiently taken into account. The author's conclusion differs in two instances. The red flag concept is not sufficiently clinically validated and recordable to be used as a QI. Otherwise imaging is considered a suitable QI given the observed overuse and the availability of billing data.

CONCLUSION

Deriving valid and pragmatic QI from LBP guidelines for evaluating care for LBP is difficult. The core messages of guidelines are only recommendations with limited precision and transferability to individual patients. For pragmatic reasons definition of an upper or lower proportion of patients receiving a given health care service is recommended instead of tedious individual evaluation. Reasonable estimates can be based on data from research on health care services. Because of this uncertainty QIs should be evaluated before they are used as a steering instrument.

Comparison of physician's advice for non-specific acute low back pain in Japanese workers: advice to rest versus advice to stay active

To assess the effects of physician's advice on non-specific acute low back pain (ALBP) in Japanese workers, existing data from a prospective, epidemiological study of Japanese workers were analyzed. Among workers who had had low back strain during the past year at baseline and responded to the 1-yr follow-up survey (n=475), those who obtained medical care (n=255) and received advice either to rest (n=68 for the rest group) or to stay active (n=32 for the active group) were examined. The rest group seemed to have a higher risk of ALBP than the active group after adjusting for age, gender, history of low back strain, type of physical activity at work, and severity of LBP during the past month at baseline (adjusted OR for the rest group vs. the active group: 3.65, 95%CI: 0.96-13.8). Compared to the active group, low back strain was more likely to occur repeatedly and to become chronic in the rest group. These findings suggest that advice to rest may not be better than advice to stay active for preventing future episodes of ALBP in Japanese workers, which is consistent with previous studies or guidelines for the management of ALBP in Western countries.