Does a modified STarT Back Tool predict outcome with a broader group of musculoskeletal patients than back pain? A secondary analysis of cohort data

The perceptions and knowledge of prognosis of physiotherapists in musculoskeletal practice: An exploratory qualitative study

QUESTION(S)

What are the perceptions and knowledge of physiotherapists who treat musculoskeletal disorders towards prognosis?

DESIGN

Exploratory phenomenological study.

PARTICIPANTS

15 physiotherapists involved in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders.

DATA ANALYSIS

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analysed using inductive coding and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified. First, participants perception of prognosis was influenced by how they defined prognosis. Participants often perceived that prognosis was the timeline to recovery related to function, tissue health, or pain. Second, some participants could not recall foundational knowledge about prognosis being taught during their entry-level physiotherapy program. Others recalled it being taught in relation to the tissue healing model. Third, participants described learning about prognosis through experience, professional development, or from peers. Finally, participants identified that a potential learning opportunity is to conceptualise prognosis as separate outcomes associated with function, tissue health, and pain. Each can impact upon prognosis, have a prognosis of their own, and can occur simultaneously.

CONCLUSION

How physiotherapists perceive and understand the concept of prognosis is influenced by their foundational knowledge. It appears for physiotherapists, prognosis may be conceptualised within the biomedical model of health. Indeed, physiotherapists may perceive that prognosis is the timeline for recovery determined by the tissue model of healing. Physiotherapists also rely on experiential knowledge gained from clinical practice, professional development, and their peers to enhance learning about prognosis. The understanding of prognosis may be enhanced if physiotherapists conceptualise prognosis in terms of the multifactorial outcomes associated with function, tissue health, and pain.

Can assessment of human assumed central sensitisation improve the predictive accuracy of the STarT Back screening tool in acute low back pain?

BACKGROUND

The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT) is recommended to provide risk-stratified care in low back pain (LBP), yet its predictive value is moderate for disability and low for pain severity. Assessment of human assumed central sensitisation (HACS) in conjunction with the SBT may improve its predictive accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether assessment of HACS in acute LBP improves the predictive accuracy of the SBT for LBP recovery at six months in people with acute non-specific LBP.

DESIGN

A prospective longitudinal study.

METHOD

Data were drawn from the UPWaRD study. One hundred and twenty people with acute non-specific LBP were recruited from the community. Baseline measures included SBT risk status, nociceptive flexor withdrawal reflex, pressure and heat pain thresholds and conditioned pain modulation. Primary outcome was the presence of LBP (pain numeric rating scale ≥1 and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire score ≥3) at six-month follow-up. Regression coefficients were penalised using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator technique to select predictor variables. Internal validation was performed using ten-fold cross-validation.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

SBT risk status alone did not predict the presence of LBP at six months (area under receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.58). Adding measures of HACS to the SBT did not improve discrimination for whether LBP was present at six months (AUC = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed the suboptimal predictive accuracy of the SBT, administered during acute LBP, for LBP recovery at six months. Assessment of HACS in acute LBP does not improve the predictive accuracy of the SBT.

Validation of the Keele STarT MSK Tool for Patients With Musculoskeletal Pain in United States-based Outpatient Physical Therapy Settings

The STarT MSK tool was developed to enable risk stratification of patients with common musculoskeletal (MSK) pain conditions and help identify individuals who may require more targeted interventions or closer monitoring in primary care settings, however, its validity in U.S.-based outpatient physical therapy settings has not been investigated. The 10-item Keele STarT MSK risk stratification tool was tested for construct (convergent and discriminant) and predictive validity using a multicenter, prospective cohort study design. Participants (n = 141) receiving physical therapy for MSK pain of the back, neck, shoulder, hip, knee, or multisite regions completed intake questionnaires including the Keele STarT MSK tool, Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI), Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Review-of-Systems and Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag tools. Pain intensity, pain interference, and health-related quality of life (Medical Outcomes Study 8-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8) physical [PCS] and mental [MCS] component summary scores) were measured at 2- and 6-month follow-up. Participants were classified as STarT MSK tool low (44%), medium (39%), and high (17%) risk. Follow-up rates were 70.2% (2 months) and 49.6% (6 months). For convergent validity, fair relationships were observed between the STarT MSK tool and FCI and SF-8 MCS (r = .35-.37) while moderate-to-good relationships (r = .51-.72) were observed for 7 other clinical measures. For discriminant validity, STarT MSK tool risk-dependent relationships were observed for Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Review-of-Systems, Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag, pain interference, and SF-8 PCS (low < medium < high; P < .01) and FCI, pain intensity, and SF-8 MCS (low < medium-or-high; P < .01). For predictive validity, intake STarT MSK tool scores explained additional variability in pain intensity (11.2%, 20.0%), pain interference (7.5%, 14.1%), and SF-8 PCS (8.2%, 12.8%) scores at 2 and 6 months, respectively. This study contributes to the existing literature by providing additional evidence of STarT MSK tool cross-sectional construct validity and longitudinal predictive validity. PERSPECTIVE: This study presents STarT MSK risk stratification tool validity findings from a U.S. outpatient physical therapy sample. The STarT MSK tool has the potential to help physical therapists identify individuals presenting with the most common MSK pain conditions who may require more targeted interventions or closer monitoring.

Does the Keele STarT MSK tool predict the risk of poor outcome in non-specific shoulder complaints in primary care in a Dutch population?

OBJECTIVES

The Keele STarT MSK tool is a questionnaire to identify the prognostic factors for musculoskeletal conditions, such as shoulder complaints, developed by Keele University, UK. This study assessed whether the Keele STarT MSK tool can predict the risk of poor outcome in non-specific shoulder complaints in a Dutch population.

DESIGN

Multicentre prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Fourteen primary care physiotherapy clinics in the Netherlands participated in this study.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 180 patients with non-specific shoulder complaints with complete data from the Keele STarT MSK tool (baseline), Short-Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Numeric Pain Rating Score (NPRS) and Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale at week 6, week 12 or endpoint were included. Data were collected from January 2019 to January 2020. Of these, 180 patients were eligible for the study. Of these, 139 completed the study and were included in the analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Poor outcome was defined as: SF-12 score ≤33 (physical health), SPADI score ≥30% (disability in activity), NPRS score ≥3 (pain intensity) and GPE scale score ≥3 (patient-reported recovery).

RESULTS

The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for prediction of outcome were excellent for the SF-12, acceptable for the SPADI and NPRS, and showed no discrimination for the GPE scale. The optimal cut-off value for the Keele STarT MSK score to discriminate between low and medium/high risk groups was ≥5.

CONCLUSIONS

The Keele STarT MSK tool is able to predict the risk of poor outcome in patients with non-specific shoulder complaints in primary care physiotherapy clinics. Further research is needed to establish whether stratified care (subgrouping and targeted treatment) is more efficient. CONTRIBUTION OF PAPER.

Modifiable prognostic factors of high societal costs among people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders: findings from an occupational cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to identify modifiable prognostic factors of high societal costs among people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders, and to identify modifiable prognostic factors of high costs related to separately healthcare utilisation and productivity loss.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study with a 1-year follow-up.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

A total of 549 participants (aged 18-67 years) on sick leave (≥ 4 weeks) due to musculoskeletal disorders in Norway were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND METHOD

The primary outcome was societal costs aggregated for 1 year of follow-up and dichotomised as high or low, defined by the top 25th percentile. Secondary outcomes were high costs related to separately healthcare utilisation and productivity loss aggregated for 1 year of follow-up. Healthcare utilisation was collected from public records and included primary, secondary and tertiary healthcare use. Productivity loss was collected from public records and included absenteeism, work assessment allowance and disability pension. Nine modifiable prognostic factors were selected based on previous literature. Univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify associations (crude and adjusted for selected covariates) between each modifiable prognostic factor and having high costs.

RESULTS

Adjusted for selected covariates, six modifiable prognostic factors associated with high societal costs were identified: pain severity, disability, self-perceived health, sleep quality, return to work expectation and long-lasting disorder expectation. Depressive symptoms, work satisfaction and health literacy showed no prognostic value. More or less similar results were observed when high costs were related to separately healthcare utilisation and productivity loss.

CONCLUSION

Factors identified in this study are potential target areas for interventions which could reduce high societal costs among people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders. However, future research aimed at replicating these findings is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04196634, 12 December 2019.

Validity and reliability of the Persian version of the STarT musculoskeletal tool

BACKGROUND

The Subgrouping for Targeted Treatment (STarT) musculoskeletal (MSK) tool stratifies patients with MSK disorders (MSDs) into prognostic categories based on poor outcomes.

PURPOSE

This study aimed at investigating the validity and reliability of the Persian STarT MSK tool in people suffering from painful MSDs in Iran.

METHODS

A total of 593 subjects with painful MSDs including neck, shoulder, low back, knee, and multisite pain received and completed the STarT MSK tool, visual analog scale (VAS), EuroQol five-dimensions three-levels questionnaire (EQ-5D-3 L), short form-36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36), and Örebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire (ÖMPSQ) in the first visit. To examine test-retest reliability, 234 patients completed the STarT MSK tool 2 days after the initial visit.

RESULTS

In this study, 139 (23.5%), 266 (44.9%), and 188 (31.7%) participants were classified as low-, medium-, and high-risk groupings for poor outcomes, respectively. Spearman's correlation coefficient showed a strong relationship among Persian STarT MSK tool and EQ-5D-3 L (-0.78), SF-36 (-0.76), and OMPSQ (0.70). The results of known-group validity indicated that this tool could distinguish among the participants in different risk subgroups based on the scores of the ÖMPSQ, VAS, SF36, and EQ-5D-5 L (p < .001). No ceiling and floor effects were observed. Cronbach's alpha and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) were acceptable (0.71) and excellent (0.98), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The Persian version of STarT MSK tool has shown to be a valid and reliable instrument to stratify people with painful MSDs into low-, medium-, and high-risk subgroups based on persistent pain disability.

The Swedish version of the STarT MSK Tool: cross-cultural adaption, test-retest reliability, and aspects of validity

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a common reason for seeking primary health care. The STarT Musculoskeletal (MSK) tool is designed to stratify patients suffering from MSDs to risk groups, based on prognostic factors.

AIM

The aim was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the STarT MSK tool in a Swedish primary health care context through testing of reliability and construct validity.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients with MSDs seeking primary care (n = 99). The STarT MSK was translated using international recommendations. Construct validity was investigated by correlation analysis (Spearmans Rho) with the following reference instruments: the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire (ÖMPQ), the EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) and the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSKHQ). Reliability was tested using test-retest (Intra Class Correlation, ICC2.1) (n = 31). Known-groups validity was calculated with a difference of 10% between risk groups based on how the participants had answered.

RESULTS

The STarT MSK was successfully translated into Swedish. The participants were grouped into low risk (n = 28), medium risk (n = 60) and high risk (n = 11). The construct validity showed a moderate to high correlation with the ÖMPQ (r = .61), EQ-5D (r = .59) and MSK-HQ (r = .56). All separate items except item 2 and 9 correlated according to predefined hypotheses. Test-retest demonstrated an excellent reliability for the total score (ICC2.1 0.85) (n = 31). The STarT MSK tool was able to differentiate by 10% between the risk groups, based on how the participants had answered.

CONCLUSION

The STarT MSK has been successfully translated and adapted into Swedish and shows acceptable measurement properties regarding test-retest reliability and aspects of validity and seems to be able to discriminate between the proposed risk groups. The tool can therefore be useful in a Swedish primary health care context. A future study needs to determine the tools predictive validity and to investigate if stratification to risk groups leads to a faster recovery and to lower health care costs.

Evaluating the Usage of Musculoskeletal Spinal Drop-In Services in East Lancashire: A Retrospective Audit of Performance Standards

Lower back pain (LBP) is a prevalent musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) that places a significant burden on patients as well as healthcare and economic systems. Musculoskeletal (MSK) spinal drop-in clinics in the North West of the United Kingdom (UK) have been introduced to provide more targeted therapies for those suffering from LBP. A retrospective audit was conducted from January to February 2017 to evaluate the utilization of the spinal clinic in relation to individual patient Keele STarT Back prognostication scores and to compare these with national guidelines. A total of 50 patients' case notes were reviewed over the four-week period. The focus was placed on how patients were made aware of the clinic, whether they had been seen by a primary care provider, and if first-line therapies had been administered. The results of this study demonstrate that some improvement is required in patient management and seek to provide recommendations for optimizing the service.

Cross-sectional analysis of generational differences in pain attitudes and beliefs of patients receiving physical therapy care in outpatient clinics

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal pain is a common reason to seek outpatient physical therapy care. Generational differences regarding attitudes and beliefs have been found in many areas, but it has not been explored regarding pain.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine generational differences in attitudes and beliefs regarding pain and the potential differences between beneficial and non-beneficial treatment options in patients receiving care in outpatient physical therapy clinics.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional descriptive survey.

METHOD

A survey was developed to explore attitudes, beliefs, and treatment preferences. The survey was emailed out to past and current physical therapy patients as part of the customer satisfaction survey over a four-month period.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

2260 surveys were completed during the collection period. Generational differences were found between the different generational groups. Younger generations were more in line with current pain neuroscience, understanding that pain is normal and part of the survival mechanism and less likely to believe that pain meant something wrong with one's tissues. Younger generations also reported more agreeance to the ability to cope without medication. However, significant variations existed in treatment choices that were most beneficial and least beneficial between respondents.

CONCLUSION

Generational differences do exist in some areas of pain attitudes and beliefs. Less variation was noted in treatment options between generations, but there were significant variations within all patient respondents.

Are changes in pain associated with changes in heart rate variability in patients treated for recurrent or persistent neck pain?

BACKGROUND

Persistent or recurrent neck pain is associated with perturbations in the autonomic nervous system balance, and nociceptive stimulation has been seen to influence this balance. However, very few prospective studies have addressed the extent to which changes in pain associate with changes in autonomic cardiac regulation. Therefore, we investigated if changes in pain vary with changes in heart rate variability in a cohort of patients treated for persistent or recurrent neck pain.

METHOD

This analysis is based on data from a randomized controlled trial in which participants were given home stretching exercises with or without spinal manipulative therapy for two weeks. As the effectiveness of the intervention (home stretching exercises and spinal manipulative therapy) was found to be equal to the control (home stretching exercises alone), all 127 participants were studied as one cohort in this analysis. During the intervention, pain levels were recorded using daily text messages, and heart rate variability was measured in the clinics three times over two weeks. Two approaches were used to classify patients based on changes in pain intensity: 1) Clinically important changes in pain were categorized as either "improved" or "not improved" and, 2) Pain development was measured using pain trajectories, constructed in a data driven approach. The association of pain categories and trajectories with changes in heart rate variability indices over time were then analysed using linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Heart rate variability did not differ significantly between improved and not-improved patients, nor were there any associations with the different pain trajectories.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, changes in pain after home stretching exercises with or without spinal manipulative therapy over two weeks were not significantly associated with changes in heart rate variability for patients with persistent or recurrent neck pain. Future studies should rely on more frequent measurements of HRV during longer treatment periods.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT03576846.

Risk-based stratified primary care for common musculoskeletal pain presentations (STarT MSK): a cluster-randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Risk-based stratified care shows clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness versus usual primary care for non-specific low back pain but is untested for other common musculoskeletal disorders. We aimed to test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care risk stratification (using Keele's STarT MSK Tool and risk-matched treatments) versus usual care for the five most common musculoskeletal presentations (back, neck, knee, shoulder, and multi-site pain).

METHODS

In this cluster-randomised, controlled trial in UK primary care with embedded qualitative and health economic studies we recruited patients from 24 general practices in the West Midlands region of England. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years or older whose general practitioner (GP) confirmed a consultation for a musculoskeletal presentation. General practices that consented to participate via a representative of the cluster were randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention or usual care, using stratified block randomisation. Researchers involved in data collection, outcome data entry, and statistical analysis were masked at both the cluster and individual participant level. Participating patients were told the study was examining GP treatment of common aches and pains and were not aware they were in a randomised trial. GPs in practices allocated to the intervention group were supported to deliver risk-based stratified care using a bespoke computer-based template, including the risk-stratification tool, and risk-matched treatment options for patients at low, medium, or high risk of poor disability or pain outcomes. There were 15 risk-matched treatment options. In the usual care group, patients with musculoskeletal pain consulting their GP received treatment as usual, typically including advice and education, medication, referral for investigations or tests, or referral to other services. The primary outcome was time-averaged pain intensity over 6 months. All analyses were done by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN15366334.

RESULTS

Between May 1, 2018, and April 30, 2019, 104 GPs from 24 practices (12 per study group) identified 2494 patients with musculoskeletal pain. 1211 (49%) participants consented to questionnaires (534 in the intervention group and 677 in the usual care group), with 1070 (88%) completing the follow-up questionnaire at 6 months. We found no significant difference in time-averaged pain intensity (mean(SD) mean 4·4 [SD 2·3] in the intervention group vs 4·6 [2·5] in the control group; adjusted mean difference -0·16, 95% CI -0·65 to 0·34) or in standardised function score (mean -0·06 [SD 0·94] in the intervention group vs 0·05 [1·04]; adjusted mean difference -0·07, 95% CI -0·22 to 0·08). No serious adverse events or adverse events were reported. Risk stratification received positive patient and clinician feedback.

INTERPRETATION

Risk stratification for patients in primary care with common musculoskeletal presentations did not lead to significant improvements in pain or function, although some aspects of GP decision making were affected, and GP and patients had positive experiences. The costs of risk-based stratified care were similar to usual care, and such a strategy only offers marginal changes in cost-effectiveness outcomes. The clinical implications from this trial are largely inconclusive.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research.

Individuals' beliefs about the biopsychosocial factors that contribute to their chronic musculoskeletal pain: protocol for a qualitative study in the UK

INTRODUCTION

Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is described as pain that persists for longer than 3 months. At present, no research is available that understands why CMP develops and continues from the perspective of the individual. Research is needed to establish if there are any consistent biopsychosocial factors perceived as contributing to CMP and what informs such beliefs. Understanding individual beliefs will inform more effective communication between clinicians and patients about their CMP, as well as informing future research into the epidemiology of CMP. Interpretative phenomenological analysis will be used as a methodological framework as it explores how individuals make sense of their world through personal experiences and perceptions while preserving individual nuance. The aim of this study is to understand individuals' beliefs and perceptions about the biological, psychological and social factors, which contribute to the development and maintenance of their CMP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A qualitative study informed by the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research using interpretative phenomenological analysis and semistructured interviews. A maximum variation purposive sample of 6-12 adults with CMP will be recruited from the general public in the UK. One semistructured interview will be conducted with each participant via an online video platform with interviews transcribed verbatim. The interview schedule (codesigned with expert patients and informed by existing evidence) identifies three domains of important questions; (1) patient beliefs on why they developed and continue to experience CMP; (2) the relationship between their biopsychosocial experiences and CMP; and (3) the origin of their beliefs. Strategies such as 'member checking' will be employed to ensure trustworthiness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was granted by the Research Ethics Office at the University of Birmingham (reference ERN_21-0813). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The study findings will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and for presentation at conferences.

Stratifying workers on sick leave due to musculoskeletal pain: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and construct validity of the Norwegian Keele STarT MSK tool

OBJECTIVES

Stratified care using prognostic models to estimate the risk profiles of patients has been increasing. A refined version of the popular STarT Back tool, the Keele STarT MSK tool, is a newly developed model for matched treatment across a wide range of musculoskeletal pain presentations. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the Keele STarT MSK tool into Norwegian, examine its construct validity and assess the representativeness of the included sample.

METHODS

The Keele STarT MSK tool was formally translated into Norwegian following a multistep approach of forward and backward translation. A pre-final version was tested in 42 patients. Minor changes were implemented. To assess its construct validity, an online survey was conducted among workers aged 18-67 years who were on sick leave (>4 weeks) due to musculoskeletal disorders. Construct validity was evaluated in terms of convergent and discriminant validity using Pearson's correlation coefficient, and known-group validity by comparing risk subgroups as suggested by the COSMIN checklist. The representativeness of the sample was assessed by comparing demographic and sick leave information of participants to eligible non-participants (n=168,137).

RESULTS

A representative sample of 549 workers participated in the validity assessment; 74 participants (13.5%) were categorised as low risk, 314 (57.2%) as medium risk and 161 (29.3%) as high risk. The construct validity was found sufficient, with 90.9% and 75.0% of the pre-defined hypotheses confirmed for convergent and discriminant validity, and known-group validity, respectively. Floor or ceiling effects were not found.

CONCLUSIONS

The Keele STarT MSK tool was successfully translated into Norwegian. The construct validity of the tool was acceptable in a representative cohort of workers on sick leave as a result of musculoskeletal pain. However, the analyses raised concerns as to whether one of the questions captures the construct it is intended to measure.

Low Risk for Persistent Back Pain Disability Is Characterized by Lower Pain Sensitivity and Higher Physical Performance

OBJECTIVE

The STarT Back Tool (SBT) predicts risk for persistent low back pain (LBP)-related disability based on psychological distress levels. Other non-psychological factors associated with LBP, such as pain sensitivity and physical performance, may further characterize SBT-risk subgroups. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a low-risk SBT subgroup demonstrated lower pain sensitivity and/or higher physical performance compared with a medium-/high-risk SBT subgroup.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional, secondary analysis, adults with LBP (N = 76) completed SBT and demographics (age, sex, race, chronicity) questionnaires. Participants underwent pain sensitivity (local and remote pressure pain thresholds, temporal summation, conditioned pain modulation) and physical performance (Back Performance Scale, walking speed, obstacle negotiation, Timed "Up & Go" [TUG], TUG Cognitive) testing. Independent samples t tests determined low- versus medium-/high-risk SBT subgroup differences. A follow-up discriminant function analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

The medium-/high-risk subgroup demonstrated a lower proportion of participants with acute pain. The low-risk subgroup demonstrated lower pain sensitivity (higher local pressure pain thresholds and higher conditioned pain modulation) and higher physical performance (superior Back Performance Scale scores, faster walking speeds, faster obstacle approach and crossing speeds, and faster TUG completion). Discriminant function analysis results supported the 2-subgroup classification and indicated strong to moderate relationships with obstacle crossing speed, chronicity, and conditioned pain modulation.

CONCLUSION

Lower pain sensitivity and higher physical performance characterized the low-risk SBT subgroup and may represent additional LBP prognostic factors associated with persistent disability. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm whether these factors can enhance SBT prediction accuracy and further direct treatment priorities.

IMPACT

Sensory and physical factors contribute to SBT risk classification, suggesting additional, non-psychological factors are indicative of favorable LBP outcomes. Findings highlight the need for assessment of multiple factors to improve LBP clinical prediction.

LAY SUMMARY

People at low risk for back pain disability have less sensitivity to pain and better physical performance. By measuring these factors, physical therapists could guide treatment and improve outcomes for people with back pain.

Complex Lifestyle and Psychological Intervention in Knee Osteoarthritis: Scoping Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) causes pain, disability and poor quality of life in the elderly. The primary aim was to identify and map out the current evidence for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on complex lifestyle and psychosocial interventions for knee OA. The secondary aim was to outline different components of complex lifestyle and psychosocial interventions. Our scoping review searched five databases from 2000 to 2021 where complex lifestyle or psychosocial interventions for patients with knee OA were compared to other interventions. Screening and data extraction were performed by two review authors independently and discrepancies resolved through consensus and in parallel with a third reviewer. A total of 38 articles were selected: 9 studied the effectiveness of psychological interventions; 11 were on self-management and lifestyle interventions; 18 looked at multifaceted interventions. This review highlights the substantial variation in knee OA interventions and the overall lack of quality in the current literature. Potential areas of future research, including identifying prognostic social factors, stratified care models, transdisciplinary care delivery and technology augmented interventions, have been identified. Further high-quality RCTs utilizing process evaluations and economic evaluation in accordance with the MRC guidelines are critical for the development of evidence-based knee OA programs globally.

Evaluation of the First Contact Physiotherapy (FCP) model of primary care: patient characteristics and outcomes

OBJECTIVE

First Contact Physiotherapy (FCP) is a primary care model where expert musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapists undertake the first patient consultation, to enhance MSK-patient care and free-up GP capacity. The authors report the quantitative findings from the FCP National Evaluation (Phase 3) which evaluated the FCP model against success criteria.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A mixed-methods 24-month service evaluation involving 40 FCP sites and 240 FCPs across England.

METHODS

An online platform collected patient-reported experience and outcomes following the FCP consultation and at 1, 2 and 3-months follow-up. These included the Keele STarT MSK Tool, pain intensity (0-10 NRS scale), Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ, range 0-56), and Friends-and-Family Test.

RESULTS

Over 13 months, 2825 patients were invited by email and 24% (n=680) completed their initial questionnaire. Their mean age was 56.2 (SD 14.9), 61% were female, ethnicity was 97% white, mean pain intensity was 6.1 (SD 2.13) and mean MSK-HQ score was 33.8 (SD 9.5). At 3-months follow-up (n=370) there was a 2.8 (CI 2.5 to 3.1) mean pain intensity reduction from baseline, a mean 7.1 (6.0 to 8.2) score improvement in MSK-HQ and 64% reporting overall improvement (much better/better) since seeing the FCP. One of the six success criteria was not met; 29% of those in employment reported receiving specific work advice from the FCP (target ≥75%).

CONCLUSION

Ahead of the planned scale-up of the FCP primary care model across the UK, this evaluation provides useful data on patients who access this service, their short-term clinical outcomes and whether key success criteria are being met.

Osteopathic model of the development and prevention of occupational musculoskeletal disorders

Context

The direct and indirect costs of work-related musculoskeletal disorders are significant. Prevention is the most effective way to control these costs. To do that, we must understand how these disorders develop.

Objectives

To use the five models of osteopathic care to illustrate how cellular processes and neural reflexes interact to create work-related musculoskeletal pathology and to provide evidence-informed musculoskeletal injury and disability prevention recommendations.

Methods

A literature review of electronic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, and OSTMED.DR) from inception to October 16, 2019 and hand-search of publication references was performed for systematic reviews, cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized controlled trials. The search terms reflected topics related to occupational injury and injury prevention, and included supplementary laboratory studies and narrative reviews related to the biological aspects of musculoskeletal injury. The eligible studies contained the following criteria: (1) the population of working age; (2) exposures to known risk factors, musculoskeletal disorders, and psychosocial factors; (3) written in English; (4) full text papers published in peer-reviewed journals; and (5) systematic review, cohort study, case-control study, and randomized controlled trial methodology. Studies were excluded if they included outcomes of productivity and costs only or outcomes that were assessed through qualitative methods only.

Results

The literature search resulted in 1,074 citations; 26 clinical studies and 14 systematic reviews were used in this review. A comprehensive workplace musculoskeletal disorder prevention program should match demands to capacity, correct dysfunctional movement patterns, and limit tissue vulnerability (biomechanical-structural model); restore alpha-gamma balance, tonic-phasic synergistic function, and autonomic balance (neurological model); maximize physiologic reserve (metabolic-energy model) component of a prevention program; optimize respiration and circulation (respiratory-circulatory model); and address cognitive distortions (behavioral-biopsychosocial model).

Conclusions

The presented osteopathic model of the development and prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders suggests that a combination of preventive interventions will be more effective than any single preventive intervention.

Validity and reliability of the Norwegian version of the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire in people on sick leave

Background

The Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) is a recently developed generic questionnaire that consists of 14 items assessing health status in people with musculoskeletal disorders. The objective was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the MSK-HQ into Norwegian and to examine its construct validity and reliability in people on sick leave with musculoskeletal disorders.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was carried out in Norway on people between 18 and 67 years of age and sick leave due to a musculoskeletal disorder. The participants were recruited through the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration during November 2018–January 2019 and responded to the MSK-HQ at inclusion and after four weeks. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach’s alpha, and structural validity with a factor analysis. Construct validity was assessed by eight “a priori” defined hypotheses regarding correlations between the MSK-HQ and other reference scales. Correlations were analyzed by Spearman’s- or Pearson’s correlation coefficient and interpreted as high with values ≥ 0.50, moderate between 0.30–0.49, and low < 0.29. Reliability was tested with test–retest, standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC).

Results

A total of 549 patients, mean age (SD) 48.6 (10.7), 309 women (56.3%), were included. The mean (SD) MSK-HQ sum scores (min–max 3–56) were 27.7 (8.2). Internal consistency was 0.86 and a three-factor structure was determined by factor analysis. Construct validity was supported by the confirmation of all hypotheses; high correlation with HRQOL, psychosocial risk profile, and self-perceived health; moderate correlation with physical activity, self-perceived work ability, and work presenteeism; and low correlation with the number of sick days. The test–retest reliability was good with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74–0.89), SEM was 2.3 and SDC 6.5.

Conclusions

The Norwegian version of the MSK-HQ demonstrated high internal consistency, a three-factor structure, good construct validity and good test–retest reliability when used among people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders.

Unintended consequences: quantifying the benefits, iatrogenic harms and downstream cascade costs of musculoskeletal MRI in UK primary care

OBJECTIVES

The largest proportion of general practitioner (GP) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is musculoskeletal (MSK), with consistent annual growth. With limited supporting evidence and potential harms from early imaging overuse, we evaluated practice to improve pathways and patient safety.

METHODS

Cohort evaluation of routinely collected diagnostic and general practice data across a UK metropolitan primary care population. We reviewed patient characteristics, results and healthcare utilisation.

RESULTS

Of 306 MSK-MRIs requested by 107 clinicians across 29 practices, only 4.9% (95% CI ±2.4%) appeared clearly indicated and only 16.0% (95% CI ±4.1%) received appropriate prior therapy. 37.0% (95% CI ±5.5%) documented patient imaging request. Most had chronic symptoms and half had psychosocial flags. Mental health was addressed in only 11.8% (95% CI ±6.3%) of chronic sufferers with psychiatric illness, suggesting a solely pathoanatomical approach to MSK care. Only 7.8% (95% CI ±3.0%) of all patients were appropriately managed without additional referral. 1.3% (95% CI ±1.3%) of scans revealed diagnoses leading to change in treatment (therapeutic yield). Most imaged patients received pathoanatomical explanations to their symptoms, often based on expected age or activity-related changes. Only 16.7% (95% CI ±4.2%) of results appeared correctly interpreted by GPs, with spurious overperception of surgical targets in 65.4% (95% CI ±5.3%) who suffered 'low-value' (ineffective, harmful or wasteful) post-MRI referral cascades due to misdiagnosis and overdiagnosis. Typically, 20%-30% of GP specialist referrals convert to a procedure, whereas MRI-triggered referrals showed near-zero conversion rate. Imaged patients experienced considerable delay to appropriate care. Cascade costs exceeded direct-MRI costs and GP-MSK-MRI potentially more than doubles expenditure compared with physiotherapist-led assessment services, for little-to-no added therapeutic yield, unjustifiable by cost-consequence or cost-utility analysis.

CONCLUSION

Unfettered GP-MSK-MRI use has reached unaccceptable indication creep and disutility. Considerable avoidable harm occurs through ubiquitous misinterpretation and salient low-value referral cascades for two-thirds of imaged patients, for almost no change in treatment. Any marginally earlier procedural intervention for a tiny fraction of patients is eclipsed by negative consequences for the vast majority. Only 1-2 patients need to be scanned for one to suffer mismanagement. Direct-access imaging is neither clinically, nor cost-effective and deimplementation could be considered in this setting. GP-MSK-MRI fuels unnecessary healthcare utilisation, generating nocebic patient beliefs and expectations, whilst appropriate care is delayed and a high burden of psychosocial barriers to recovery appear neglected.

Predicting Recurrent Care Seeking of Physical Therapy for Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions

OBJECTIVE

Musculoskeletal pain conditions are a leading cause of pain and disability internationally and a common reason to seek health care. Accurate prediction of recurrence of health care seeking due to musculoskeletal conditions could allow for better tailoring of treatment. The aim of this project was to characterize patterns of recurrent physical therapy seeking for musculoskeletal pain conditions and to develop a preliminary prediction model to identify those at increased risk of recurrent care seeking.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Ambulatory care.

SUBJECTS

Patients (n = 578,461) seeking outpatient physical therapy (United States).

METHODS

Potential predictor variables were extracted from the electronic medical record, and patients were placed into three different recurrent care categories. Logistic regression models were used to identify individual predictors of recurrent care seeking, and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was used to develop multivariate prediction models.

RESULTS

The accuracy of models for different definitions of recurrent care ranged from 0.59 to 0.64 (c-statistic), and individual predictors were identified from multivariate models. Predictors of increased risk of recurrent care included receiving workers' compensation and Medicare insurance, having comorbid arthritis, being postoperative at the time of the first episode, age range of 44-64 years, and reporting night sweats or night pain. Predictors of decreased risk of recurrent care included lumbar pain, chronic injury, neck pain, pregnancy, age range of 25-44 years, and smoking.

CONCLUSION

This analysis identified a preliminary predictive model for recurrence of care seeking of physical therapy, but model accuracy needs to improve to better guide clinical decision-making.

Validity and reliability of the Dutch STarT MSK tool in patients with musculoskeletal pain in primary care physiotherapy

Objective

To evaluate the validity and reliability of the Dutch STarT MSK tool in patients with musculoskeletal pain in primary care physiotherapy.

Methods

Physiotherapists included patients with musculoskeletal pain, aged 18 years or older. Patients completed a questionnaire at baseline and follow-up at 5 days and 3 months, respectively. Construct validity was assessed by comparing scores of STarT MSK items with reference questionnaires. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated to test predefined hypotheses. Test-retest reliability was evaluated by calculating quadratic-weighted kappa coefficients for overall STarT MSK tool scores (range 0–12) and prognostic subgroups (low, medium and high risk). Predictive validity was assessed by calculating relative risk ratios for moderate risk and high risk, both compared with low risk, in their ability to predict persisting disability at 3 months.

Results

In total, 142 patients were included in the analysis. At baseline, 74 patients (52.1%) were categorised as low risk, 64 (45.1%) as medium risk and 4 (2.8%) as high risk. For construct validity, nine of the eleven predefined hypotheses were confirmed. For test-retest reliability, kappa coefficients for the overall tool scores and prognostic subgroups were 0.71 and 0.65, respectively. For predictive validity, relative risk ratios for persisting disability were 2.19 (95% CI: 1.10–4.38) for the medium-risk group and 7.30 (95% CI: 4.11–12.98) for the high-risk group.

Conclusion

The Dutch STarT MSK tool showed a sufficient to good validity and reliability in patients with musculoskeletal pain in primary care physiotherapy. The sample size for high-risk patients was small (n = 4), which may limit the generalisability of findings for this group. An external validation study with a larger sample of high-risk patients (≥50) is recommended.

Associations of the modified STarT back tool and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) with gait speed and knee pain in knee osteoarthritis: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The association of the modified STarT Back Tool (mSBT) psychosocial measure with gait speed and knee pain in knee osteoarthritis is not well defined. This study aimed to, in patients with knee osteoarthritis, (i) examine the convergent validity of mSBT with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and (ii) compare the predictive validity of mSBT and HADS with gait speed and knee pain.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of mSBT, HADS, gait speed, and knee pain outcomes data collected from 119 patients who received outpatient physical therapy. Of these patients who were evaluated at their first (baseline) physical therapy visit, 55 had available data at the Week-16 follow-up visit.

RESULTS

mSBT and HADS showed moderately strong pairwise correlations (Spearman correlation > 0.57; p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, body weight, and knee impairment variables in multivariable linear mixed-effects analyses, mSBT was associated with gait speed (p < 0.001) and knee pain intensity (p < 0.001) and it had comparable strength of association as HADS. In within-patient regression analyses, change in mSBT was associated with changes in gait speed (p = 0.04) and knee pain (p = 0.01) over 16 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The mSBT had convergent validity with HADS and it showed predictive validity with gait speed and knee pain in knee osteoarthritis. Although broader validation is required, the 5-item mSBT psychosocial measure may be applied as part of routine clinical care to assess psychological distress in patients with knee osteoarthritis. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION The 5-item psychosocial subscale of the modified STarT Back tool (mSBT) showed good convergent validity with the 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The mSBT psychosocial subscale showed predictive validity, at both cross-sectional and longitudinal levels, with gait speed and knee pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The mSBT can potentially be used in the busy clinical setting to assess psychological distress in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Existing validated clinical prediction rules for predicting response to physiotherapy interventions for musculoskeletal conditions have limited clinical value: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review clinical prediction rules (CPRs) that have undergone validation testing for predicting response to physiotherapy-related interventions for musculoskeletal conditions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were systematically searched to September 2020. Search terms included musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, physiotherapy interventions and clinical prediction rules. Controlled studies that validated a prescriptive CPR for physiotherapy treatment response in musculoskeletal conditions were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility. Original derivation studies of each CPR were identified. Risk of bias was assessed with the PROBAST tool (derivation studies) and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care group criteria (validation studies).

RESULTS

Nine studies aimed to validate seven prescriptive CPRs for treatment response for MSK conditions including back pain, neck pain, shoulder pain and carpal tunnel syndrome. Treatments included manipulation, traction and exercise. Seven studies failed to demonstrate an association between CPR prediction and outcome. Methodological quality of derivation studies was poor and for validation studies was good overall.

CONCLUSION

Results do not support the use of any CPRs identified to aid physiotherapy treatment selection for common musculoskeletal conditions, due to methodological shortcomings in the derivation studies and lack of association between CPR and outcome in validation studies.

Stratified care integrated with eHealth versus usual primary care physiotherapy in patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Neck and shoulder complaints are common in primary care physiotherapy. These patients experience pain and disability, resulting in high societal costs due to, for example, healthcare use and work absence. Content and intensity of physiotherapy care can be matched to a patient's risk of persistent disabling pain. Mode of care delivery can be matched to the patient's suitability for blended care (integrating eHealth with physiotherapy sessions). It is hypothesized that combining these two approaches to stratified care (referred to from this point as Stratified Blended Approach) will improve the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints compared to usual physiotherapy.

METHODS

This paper presents the protocol of a multicenter, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster randomized controlled trial. A total of 92 physiotherapists will be recruited from Dutch primary care physiotherapy practices. Physiotherapy practices will be randomized to the Stratified Blended Approach arm or usual physiotherapy arm by a computer-generated random sequence table using SPSS (1:1 allocation). Number of physiotherapists (1 or > 1) will be used as a stratification variable. A total of 238 adults consulting with neck and/or shoulder complaints will be recruited to the trial by the physiotherapy practices. In the Stratified Blended Approach arm, physiotherapists will match I) the content and intensity of physiotherapy care to the patient's risk of persistent disabling pain, categorized as low, medium or high (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool) and II) the mode of care delivery to the patient's suitability and willingness to receive blended care. The control arm will receive physiotherapy as usual. Neither physiotherapists nor patients in the control arm will be informed about the Stratified Blended Approach arm. The primary outcome is region-specific pain and disability (combined score of Shoulder Pain and Disability Index & Neck Pain and Disability Scale) over 9 months. Effectiveness will be compared using linear mixed models. An economic evaluation will be performed from the societal and healthcare perspective.

DISCUSSION

The trial will be the first to provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Stratified Blended Approach compared with usual physiotherapy in patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register: NL8249 . Officially registered since 27 December 2019. Date of first enrollment: 30 September 2020. Study status: ongoing, data collection.

Development and Psychometric Testing of the Japanese Version of the Fremantle Neck Awareness Questionnaire: A Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose

Contemporary theories of pain suggest that how the body is perceived is central to the emergence of pain. The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) was developed to assess body-perception specific to the back in people with chronic low back pain. However, there is no comprehensive measure to quantify self-perception of the painful area in Japanese people with neck pain. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of a self-perception questionnaire specific to the neck and evaluate the validity and reliability of the scale using Rasch analysis.

Materials and Methods

The Fremantle Neck Awareness Questionnaire (FreNAQ-J) was developed by modifying the FreBAQ-J. One hundred people with chronic neck pain and fifty-six matched healthy controls completed the questionnaire. Rasch analysis was used to evaluate targeting, category order, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, differential item functioning, and differential test functioning in the neck pain population. Validity was investigated by examining the relationship between the FreNAQ-J and clinical status.

Results

People with chronic neck pain endorsed FreNAQ-J items with greater frequency than healthy controls. FreNAQ-J did not reject the null hypothesis of fitting the Rasch model, had acceptable internal consistency and good test–retest reliability. Summed FreNAQ-J scores were significantly correlated with pain intensity, disability, pain-related catastrophizing and fear of movement.

Conclusion

The individual items of the FreNAQ-J can be validly summed to provide a score of self-perception. The FreNAQ-J is the first scale developed for comprehensively evaluating disturbed body perception in Japanese patients with chronic neck pain.

Development and validation of a shoulder-specific body-perception questionnaire in people with persistent shoulder pain

Background

There is evidence that people with persistent shoulder pain exhibit findings consistent with the presence of sensorimotor dysfunction. Sensorimotor impairments can manifest in a variety of ways, and further developing our understanding of sensorimotor dysfunction in shoulder pain may improve current models of care. The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) has been developed to assess disturbed body perception specific to the back. The purpose of the present study was to develop a shoulder-specific self-perception questionnaire and evaluate the questionnaire in people with persistent shoulder pain.

Methods

The Fremantle Shoulder Awareness Questionnaire (FreSHAQ-J) was developed by modifying the FreBAQ. One hundred and twelve consecutive people with persistent shoulder pain completed the FreSHAQ-J. Thirty participants completed the FreSHAQ-J again two-weeks later to assess test-retest reliability. Rasch analysis was used to assess the psychometric properties of the FreSHAQ-J. Associations between FreSHAQ-J total score and clinical status was explored using correlational analysis.

Results

The FreSHAQ-J has acceptable category order, unidimensionality, no misfitting items, and excellent test-retest reliability. The FreSHAQ-J was moderately correlated with disability and pain catastrophization.

Conclusions

The FreSHAQ-J fits the Rasch measurement model well and is suitable for use with people with shoulder pain. Given the relationship between the FreSHAQ-J score and clinical status, change in body perception may be worth assessing when managing patients with shoulder pain.

Construct validity and internal consistency of the modified Persian version of the STarT Back Screening Tool

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Considering the importance of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and its increasing spread, the need for instruments for the accurate diagnosis of back pain is evident in order to offer more effective treatment. One such instrument is the STarT Back Screening Tool (STarT) which is examined by numerous studies, while some of its psychometric dimensions still require attention. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the internal consistency and construct validity of this questionnaire to propose a modified version.

METHOD

In this cross-sectional study, the data of 295 patients with NSLBP were analyzed. Cronbach's alpha was used to assess internal consistency, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed to assess construct validity. The Χ2/df, GFI, CFI, and RMSEA indices were also utilized as the goodness-of-fit criteria. Data analysis was performed in SPSS, AMOS, and EQS programs.

RESULTS

Goodness-of-fit indicators were calculated for the original Persian version of the questionnaire, showing an improper fit (RMSEA = 0.162). According to the measures of sampling adequacy (MSA) of the questions, Questions 1 and 8 were deleted, resulting in an improved index (RMSEA = 0.062). All the regression coefficients in the CFA model were significant (p < 0.001for all 7 parameters).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results, the modified Persian version of the STarT is simpler and more practical than the previous version, serving as a valid and reliable tool for assessing patients with low back pain. With respect to the goodness-of-fit indices, we recommend that more studies with larger samples be conducted on different populations.

Reliability and Validity Evidence of the STarT-Lower Extremity Screening Tool for Patients With Lower Extremity Fracture: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a modified version of the STarT Back Screening Tool in its current structure has adequate properties for use in patients with lower extremity fracture.

DESIGN

Single-center, prospective study.

SETTING

Level I trauma center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with lower extremity fracture without a history of chronic pain (N=114), with 93% follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Six weeks after surgical fixation, individuals completed the Subgroups for Targeted Treatment of Lower Extremity Screening Tool (STarT-LE). A subsample completed the STarT-LE again 1 week later. The following questionnaires were completed at 6 weeks and 6 months: Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, Brief Pain Inventory pain intensity subscale, and PROMIS Depression and Pain Interference computer adaptive testing modules. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha (α). Convergent validity evidence was measured concurrently using the Spearman ρ correlation between the 6-week STarT-LE and established questionnaires. Predictive validity evidence was evaluated by area under the curve analysis (AUC) using the 6-week STarT-LE total and psychosocial scores and 6-month criterion physical and psychosocial reference standards.

RESULTS

The STarT-LE has good test-retest reliability (ICC, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.91) and acceptable internal consistency (α=0.74). The convergent validity evidence was fair to moderate (ρ, 0.53-0.68; P<.001) and the predictive validity evidence was acceptable to excellent (AUC, 0.73-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

The STarT-LE has adequate properties for use in patients with lower extremity fracture. Future larger scale studies are needed to validate risk cutoffs.

Beliefs about the body and pain: the critical role in musculoskeletal pain management

BACKGROUND

Beliefs about the body and pain play a powerful role in behavioural and emotional responses to musculoskeletal pain. What a person believes and how they respond to their musculoskeletal pain can influence how disabled they will be by pain. Importantly, beliefs are modifiable and are therefore considered an important target for the treatment of pain-related disability. Clinical guidelines recommend addressing unhelpful beliefs as the first line of treatment in all patients presenting with musculoskeletal pain. However, many clinicians hold unhelpful beliefs themselves; while others feel ill-equipped to explore and target the beliefs driving unhelpful responses to pain. As a result, clinicians may reinforce unhelpful beliefs, behaviours and resultant disability among the patients they treat.

METHODS

To assist clinicians, in Part 1 of this paper we discuss what beliefs are; how they are formed; the impact they can have on a person's behaviour, emotional responses and outcomes of musculoskeletal pain. In Part 2, we discuss how we can address beliefs in clinical practice. A clinical case is used to illustrate the critical role that beliefs can have on a person's journey from pain and disability to recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

We encourage clinicians to exercise self-reflection to explore their own beliefs and better understand their biases, which may influence their management of patients with musculoskeletal pain. We suggest actions that may benefit their practice, and we propose key principles to guide a process of behavioural change.

Risk assessment for prolonged sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders: protocol for a prospective cohort study

Background

Musculoskeletal disorders are the leading cause of sickness absence and disability pension in Norway. There is strong evidence that long-term sickness absence due to musculoskeletal disorders are associated with a reduced probability of return to work (RTW). A way to meet the economic and resource-demanding challenges related to individual follow-up of this group is to identify and treat those individuals with a high risk of prolonged sickness. The overall purposes of this project are 1) to determine the most accurate screening tool to identify people at a high risk of prolonged sickness absence due to an musculoskeletal disorder, and 2) to investigate severity of musculoskeletal health, health-related quality-of-life, health care utilization, and costs across different risk profiles in people on sick leave due to a musculoskeletal disorder.

Methods

People older than 18 years of age on sick leave for at least 4 weeks due to a musculoskeletal disorder will be invited to participate in this prospective observational cohort study conducted within the Norwegian Welfare and Labor Administration (NAV) system in collaboration with OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University. The main outcome is sickness absence, obtained from the NAV registry. Data on sickness absence will be retrieved prospectively in the period from study inclusion to 12 months follow-up, and retrospectively 12 months before inclusion in the study. Possible risk factors will be self-reported by the participants at inclusion while health care utilization will be retrieved from registry data. To conduct analyses including 15 to 20 predictor variables, we aim at including 500–600 people on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders.

Discussion

This study may provide tools that can be used to identify individuals with high risk of prolonged sickness absence and may thus be important from both a socioeconomic and individual perspective. Further, the study may give valuable insight into identification of sickness absence profiles and the associations between these profiles and musculoskeletal health status, health-related quality of life and costs.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04196634, 27.11.2019).

Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain from the five most common presentations to primary care (back, neck, shoulder, knee or multi-site pain), where the majority of patients are managed, is a costly global health challenge. At present, first-line decision-making is based on clinical reasoning and stratified models of care have only been tested in patients with low back pain. We therefore, examined the feasibility of; a) a future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT), and b) General Practitioners (GPs) providing stratified care at the point-of-consultation for these five most common MSK pain presentations.

METHODS

The design was a pragmatic pilot, two parallel-arm (stratified versus non-stratified care), cluster RCT and the setting was 8 UK GP practices (4 intervention, 4 control) with randomisation (stratified by practice size) and blinding of trial statistician and outcome data-collectors. Participants were adult consulters with MSK pain without indicators of serious pathologies, urgent medical needs, or vulnerabilities. Potential participant records were tagged and individuals sent postal invitations using a GP point-of-consultation electronic medical record (EMR) template. The intervention was supported by the EMR template housing the Keele STarT MSK Tool (to stratify into low, medium and high-risk prognostic subgroups of persistent pain and disability) and recommended matched treatment options. Feasibility outcomes included exploration of recruitment and follow-up rates, selection bias, and GP intervention fidelity. To capture recommended outcomes including pain and function, participants completed an initial questionnaire, brief monthly questionnaire (postal or SMS), and 6-month follow-up questionnaire. An anonymised EMR audit described GP decision-making.

RESULTS

GPs screened 3063 patients (intervention = 1591, control = 1472), completed the EMR template with 1237 eligible patients (intervention = 513, control = 724) and 524 participants (42%) consented to data collection (intervention = 231, control = 293). Recruitment took 28 weeks (target 12 weeks) with > 90% follow-up retention (target > 75%). We detected no selection bias of concern and no harms identified. GP stratification tool fidelity failed to achieve a-priori success criteria, whilst fidelity to the matched treatments achieved "complete success".

CONCLUSIONS

A future definitive cluster RCT of stratified care for MSK pain is feasible and is underway, following key amendments including a clinician-completed version of the stratification tool and refinements to recommended matched treatments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Name of the registry: ISRCTN.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

15366334. Date of registration: 06/04/2016.

Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: qualitative findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Stratified care involves subgrouping patients based on key characteristics, e.g. prognostic risk, and matching these subgroups to appropriate early treatment options. The STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) examined the feasibility of a future main trial and of delivering prognostic stratified primary care for patients with musculoskeletal pain. The pilot RCT was conducted in 8 UK general practices (4 stratified care; 4 usual care) with 524 patients. GPs in stratified care practices were asked to use i) the Keele STarT MSK development tool for risk-stratification and ii) matched treatment options for patients at low-, medium- and high-risk of persistent pain. This paper reports on a nested qualitative study exploring the feasibility of delivering stratified care ahead of the main trial.

METHODS

'Stimulated-recall' interviews were conducted with patients and GPs in the stratified care arm (n = 10 patients; 10 GPs), prompted by consultation recordings. Data were analysed thematically and mapped onto the COM-B behaviour change model; exploring the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation GPs and patients had to engage with stratified care.

RESULTS

Patients reported positive views that stratified care enabled a more 'structured' consultation, and felt tool items were useful in making GPs aware of patients' worries and concerns. However, the closed nature of the tool's items was seen as a barrier to opening up discussion. GPs identified difficulties integrating the tool within consultations (Opportunity), but found this easier as it became more familiar. Whilst both groups felt the tool had added value, they identified 'cumbersome' items which made it more difficult to use (Capability). Most GPs reported that the matched treatment options aided their clinical decision-making (Motivation), but identified some options that were not available to them (e.g. pain management clinics), and other options that were not included in the matched treatments but which were felt appropriate for some patients (e.g. consider imaging).

CONCLUSION

This nested qualitative study, using the COM-B model, identified amendments required for the main trial including changes to the Keele STarT MSK tool and matched treatment options, targeting the COM-B model constructs, and these have been implemented in the current main trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 15366334.

Musculoskeletal pain stakeholder engagement and partnership development: determining patient-centered research priorities

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is a global public health problem with increased societal burden. Increased attention has focused toward patient and other stakeholder perspectives when determining future MSK pain research priorities, however infrastructure and capacity building within the community are needed for individuals and organizations to participate in patient-centered outcomes research. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe our collaborative experiences with several MSK pain stakeholders and processes to identify a top priority research topic.

METHODS

Lunch meetings and formalized workshops were used to develop infrastructure for engaging patients and other stakeholders with early capacity building for partners to identify MSK pain research ideas based on their personal experiences. Additional capacity building and engagement through literature searching further prepared partners to contribute informed decisions about MSK pain research topics and subsequent selection of an important research question.

RESULTS

Several key deliverables (e.g., Governance Document, Communication Plan) were developed and completed over the course of this project to provide partnership structure. Other key deliverables included a list of preliminary comparative effectiveness research ideas (n = 8) and selection of shared decision making for MSK pain as the top priority research topic with patient partners identifying pain self-efficacy as an important outcome domain.

CONCLUSIONS

Our patient partners provided the catalyst for identifying shared decision making as a high priority research topic based on a wide spectrum of stakeholder perspectives and unique experiences. Patient partners were primarily identified using a single rehabilitation health system and clinician partners were heavily weighted by physical therapists which may have introduced selection bias.

Descriptive Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Musculoskeletal Program

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary musculoskeletal programs address comorbidities confounding musculoskeletal conditions and serve as an alternative to the single provider model.

OBJECTIVE

Descriptive analysis of an interdisciplinary musculoskeletal program.

DESIGN

Retrospective descriptive analysis of patients enrolled in an interdisciplinary musculoskeletal program. Retrospective subanalysis: cohort of patients enrolled in interdisciplinary program with low back pain compared to historical cohort of patients in a single provider clinic.

SETTING

Academic interdisciplinary musculoskeletal health program.

PATIENTS

Patients referred to program with at least one follow-up visit over a 2-year period.

INTERVENTIONS

Interdisciplinary musculoskeletal program involving physiatry, pain anesthesia, nutrition, psychology, rheumatology, sleep medicine, nursing, and physical therapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), Oswestry Low Back Disability Index (ODI), number of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, computed tomography (CT) scans, opioid prescriptions; Press Ganey scores.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-three patients were enrolled and had at least one follow-up visit. Twenty-four percent of patients with any musculoskeletal complaint demonstrated clinically significant improvements in total PSFS. Mean improvement in PSFS was + 0.864 (SD 1.94), which was a statistically significant improvement (P = .0005), but not clinically significant. Magnetic resonance imaging was ordered for 5% of patients, and no computed tomography scans were ordered. Six percent of patients received opioid prescriptions. Press Ganey scores: 96% responded favorably in regard to physician communication quality, 86% of patients responded favorably for access to care, and 78% responded favorably for care coordination. 27.8% of patients with low back pain in the interdisciplinary program achieved a significant decrease in their ODI, compared to 26.6% in the single provider clinic (P = .87).

CONCLUSIONS

Interdisciplinary musculoskeletal programs are a promising model to improve the functioning of patients with musculoskeletal pain and decrease downstream utilization. These programs may be more appropriate for patients at higher risk of developing chronic pain.

The Role of Social Support and Psychological Distress in Predicting Discharge: A Pilot Study for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Patients

BACKGROUND

Bundled payment initiatives for joint replacement have prompted re-evaluation of the continuum of care with emphasis on anticipating disposition needs. The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of social support and psychological distress in patient optimization after lower joint replacement.

METHODS

Two hundred thirty-one patients undergoing elective joint replacement completed the Risk Assessment and Predictive Tool (RAPT) (social support assessment) and modified STarT Back Tool (mSBT) (assessment of pain-related psychological distress). Outcomes of interest were length of stay (LOS) and discharge location (home vs facility).

RESULTS

No significant differences in mSBT scores were observed across RAPT levels when comparing individuals by discharge location (P > .05). There was significant indirect effect (0.07; P < .001) between mSBT and LOS. Therefore, the mSBT does not predict discharge location as a standalone metric for this sample. Mediation analysis for LOS indicates that higher psychological distress was predictive of longer LOS. Higher psychological distress and lower social support are associated with longer LOS. Despite higher psychological distress scores, higher social support scores are associated with shorter LOS.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of this cohort suggests that pre-operative assessments of social and psychological constructs may provide preparatory information for patient discharge status. The RAPT is important for predicting LOS and discharge location. The mSBT may be important for predicting LOS for individuals with low to moderate social support.

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.

Comparison between the STarT Back Screening Tool and the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire: Which tool for what purpose? A semi-systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prevention of chronicization of low back pain requires accurate detection of at-risk patients. Questionnaires have been validated, including the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) and the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (OMPSQ). This review aims to compare these questionnaires in terms of predictive value and in terms of aims, to guide the choice in clinical practice.

METHODS

This study is a semi-systematic literature review. Studies evaluating at least one of the questionnaires and written between 1997 and October 10th 2017 were selected from Pubmed database. Inclusion criteria were pain duration<3months, outcomes including pain, function and/or global recovery. For work outcomes, inclusion criteria were extended to chronic patients. Studies had to provide information on sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC Curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria (7 SBST, 21 original OMPSQ, 3 short OMPSQ). The OMPSQ best predicted a Pain NRS≥3 at 3 months (AUC=0.64 (0.50-0.78)) and at 6 months (AUC between 0.70 (no confidence interval provided) and 0.84 (0.71-0.97)). The SBST and the OMPSQ are comparable to predict an Oswestry Disability Index≥30% at 6 months. A single study showed no difference between the SBST and the OMPSQ to predict absenteeism≥30 days at 6 months. The two questionnaires cannot be compared for "global recovery" outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The OMPSQ seems better than the SBST for predicting "pain" and "work" outcomes, the SBST may be better for "function" outcomes. These results should be taken with caution because of the high heterogeneity between studies. It should be noted that the OMPSQ was elaborated with the aim of creating a prognostic tool while the SBST was devised as a treatment-allocating tool and is easier to use in clinical practice. This should guide the choice of using one questionnaire rather than the other.

Psychosoziale Risikofaktoren in der Entstehung von chronisch unspezifischen Rückenschmerzen

Zusammenfassung. Chronisch unspezifische Rückenschmerzen (CURS) gehören international zu den häufigsten Schmerzphänomenen und können für Athletinnen und Athleten karrierelimitierend sein. Knapp ein Drittel der jährlichen Trainingsausfallzeiten werden auf CURS zurückgeführt. In der Entstehung von chronischen Schmerzen ist ein multifaktorielles Ätiologiemodell mit einem signifikanten Einfluss psychosozialer Risikofaktoren evident. Obwohl dies in der Allgemeinbevölkerung bereits gut erforscht ist, gibt es in der Sportwissenschaft vergleichsweise wenige Arbeiten darüber. Dieses Thema wird daher in drei Multicenterstudien und zahlreichen Teilstudien des MiSpEx-Netzwerks ( Medicine in Spine-Exercise-Network, Förderzeitraum 2011 – 2018) aufgegriffen. Entsprechend der Empfehlung einer frühzeitigen Diagnostik von Chronifizierungsfaktoren in der „Nationalen Versorgungsleitlinie Kreuzschmerz“, beschäftigt sich das Netzwerk u. a. mit der Überprüfung, Entwicklung und Evaluation diagnostischer Möglichkeiten. Der vorliegende Beitrag beschreibt die Entwicklung einer Diagnostik von psychosozialen Risikofaktoren, die einerseits eine Einschätzung des Risikos der Entwicklung von CURS und andererseits eine individuelle Zuweisung zu (Trainings)Interventionen erlaubt. Es wird die Entwicklungsrationale beschrieben und dabei verschiedene methodische Herangehensweisen und Entscheidungssequenzen reflektiert.

Can the STarT Back Tool predict health-related quality of life and work ability after an acute/subacute episode with back or neck pain? A psychometric validation study in primary care

OBJECTIVES

The predictive ability of the STarT Back Tool (SBT) has not yet been examined among acute/subacute back and/or neck pain in a primary care setting in respect to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work ability outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SBT's predictive validity for HRQoL and work ability outcomes at long-term follow-up in a population with acute/subacute back and/or neck pain.

SETTING

Prospective data from 35 primary care centres in south Sweden during 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (n=329) with acute/subacute back and/or neck pain, aged 18-67 years, not on sick leave or <60 days of sick leave completed the SBT when applying for physiotherapy treatment. Long-term follow-up measures (median 13 months, range 11-27 months) of HRQoL (EQ-5D) and work ability (Work Ability Score) was completed by 238 patients (72%).

OUTCOMES

The predictive ability of the SBT for HRQoL and work ability outcomes was examined using Kruskal-Wallis test, logistic regression and area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Based on SBT risk group stratification, 103 (43%), 107 (45%) and 28 (12%) patients were considered as low, medium and at high risk, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in HRQoL (p<0.001) and work ability (p<0.001) at follow-up between all three SBT risk groups. Patients in the high risk group had a significantly increased risk of having poor HRQoL (OR 6.16, 95% CI 1.50 to 25.26) and poor work ability (OR 5.08, 95% CI 1.75 to 14.71) vs the low risk group at follow-up. The AUC was 0.73 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.84) for HRQoL and 0.68 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.76) for work ability.

CONCLUSIONS

The SBT is an appropriate tool for identifying patients with a poor long-term HRQoL and/or work ability outcome in a population with acute/subacute back and/or neck pain, and maybe a useful adjunct to primary care physiotherapy assessment and practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02609750; Results.

Are Psychologic Factors Associated With Shoulder Scores After Rotator Cuff Surgery?

BACKGROUND

Psychologic factors are associated with pain and disability in patients with chronic shoulder pain. Recent research regarding the association of affective psychologic factors (emotions) with patients' pain and disability outcome after surgery disagrees; and the relationship between cognitive psychologic factors (thoughts and beliefs) and outcome after surgery is unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Are there identifiable clusters (based on psychologic functioning measures) in patients undergoing shoulder surgery? (2) Is poorer psychologic functioning associated with worse outcome (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] score) after shoulder surgery?

METHODS

This prospective cohort study investigated patients undergoing shoulder surgery for rotator cuff-related shoulder pain or rotator cuff tear by one of six surgeons between January 2014 and July 2015. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing surgery for rotator cuff repair with or without subacromial decompression and arthroscopic subacromial decompression only. Of 153 patients who were recruited and consented to participate in the study, 16 withdrew before data collection, leaving 137 who underwent surgery and were included in analyses. Of these, 124 (46 of 124 [37%] female; median age, 54 years [range, 21-79 years]) had a complete set of four psychologic measures before surgery: Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale; Pain Catastrophizing Scale; Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire; and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. The existence of clusters of people with different profiles of affective and cognitive factors was investigated using latent class analysis, which grouped people according to their pattern of scores on the four psychologic measures. Resultant clusters were profiled on potential confounding variables. The ASES score was measured before surgery and 3 and 12 months after surgery. Linear mixed models assessed the association between psychologic cluster membership before surgery and trajectories of ASES score over time adjusting for potential confounding variables.

RESULTS

Two clusters were identified: one cluster (84 of 124 [68%]) had lower scores indicating better psychologic functioning and a second cluster (40 of 124 [32%]) had higher scores indicating poorer psychologic functioning. Accounting for all variables, the cluster with poorer psychologic functioning was found to be independently associated with worse ASES score at all time points (regression coefficient for ASES: before surgery -9 [95% confidence interval {CI}, -16 to -2], p = 0.011); 3 months after surgery -15 [95% CI, -23 to -8], p < 0.001); and 12 months after surgery -9 [95% CI, -17 to -1], p = 0.023). However, both clusters showed improvement in ASES score from before to 12 months after surgery, and there was no difference in the amount of improvement between clusters (regression coefficient for ASES: cluster with poorer psychologic function 31 [95% CI, 26-36], p < 0.001); cluster with better psychologic function 31 [95% CI, 23-39], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who scored poorly on a range of psychologic measures before shoulder surgery displayed worse ASES scores at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Screening of psychologic factors before surgery is recommended to identify patients with poor psychologic function. Such patients may warrant additional behavioral or psychologic management before proceeding to surgery. However, further research is needed to determine the optimal management for patients with poorer psychologic function to improve pain and disability levels before and after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study.

Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) for Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: Results From the Validation Cohort

Study Design Observational, prospective cohort. Background Musculoskeletal pain is a common reason to seek health care, and earlier nonpharmacological treatment and enhancement of personalized care options are 2 high-priority areas. Validating concise assessment tools is an important step toward establishing better care pathways. Objectives To determine the predictive validity of Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) tools for individuals with neck, low back, shoulder, or knee pain. Methods A convenience sample (n = 440) was gathered by Orthopaedic Physical Therapy-Investigator Network clinics (n = 9). Participants completed demographic, clinical, and comorbidity questionnaires and the OSPRO tools, and were followed for 12-month outcomes in pain intensity, region-specific disability, quality of life, and comorbidity change. Analyses predicted these 12-month outcomes with models that included the OSPRO review-of-systems (OSPRO-ROS) and yellow flag (OSPRO-YF) tools and planned covariates (accounting for comorbidities and established demographic and clinical factors). Results The 10-item OSPRO-YF tool (baseline and 4-week change score) consistently added to predictive models for 12-month pain intensity, region-specific disability, and quality of life. The 10-item OSPRO-ROS tool added to a predictive model for quality of life (mental summary score), and 13 additional items of the OSPRO-ROS+ tool added to prediction of 12-month comorbidity change. Other consistent predictors included age, race, income, previous episode of pain in same region, comorbidity number, and baseline measure for the outcome of interest. Conclusion The OSPRO-ROS and OSPRO-YF tools statistically improved prediction of multiple 12-month outcomes. The additional variance explained was small, and future research is necessary to determine whether these tools can be used as measurement adjuncts to improve management of musculoskeletal pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(6):460-475. Epub 7 Apr 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7811.

Diagnosis of psychosocial risk factors in prevention of low back pain in athletes (MiSpEx)

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is a common pain syndrome in athletes, responsible for 28% of missed training days/year. Psychosocial factors contribute to chronic pain development. This study aims to investigate the transferability of psychosocial screening tools developed in the general population to athletes and to define athlete-specific thresholds.

Methods

Data from a prospective multicentre study on LBP were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up (n=52 athletes, n=289 recreational athletes and n=246 non-athletes). Pain was assessed using the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire. The psychosocial Risk Stratification Index (RSI) was used to obtain prognostic information regarding the risk of chronic LBP (CLBP). Individual psychosocial risk profile was gained with the Risk Prevention Index - Social (RPI-S). Differences between groups were calculated using general linear models and planned contrasts. Discrimination thresholds for athletes were defined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves.

Results

Athletes and recreational athletes showed significantly lower psychosocial risk profiles and prognostic risk for CLBP than non-athletes. ROC curves suggested discrimination thresholds for athletes were different compared with non-athletes. Both screenings demonstrated very good sensitivity (RSI=100%; RPI-S: 75%-100%) and specificity (RSI: 76%-93%; RPI-S: 71%-93%). RSI revealed two risk classes for pain intensity (area under the curve (AUC) 0.92(95% CI 0.85 to 1.0)) and pain disability (AUC 0.88(95% CI 0.71 to 1.0)).

Conclusions

Both screening tools can be used for athletes. Athlete-specific thresholds will improve physicians' decision making and allow stratified treatment and prevention.

Determining the impact of a new physiotherapist-led primary care model for back pain: protocol for a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Back pain is a leading contributor to disability, healthcare costs, and lost work. Family physicians are the most common first point of contact in the healthcare system for people with back pain, but physiotherapists (PTs) may be able to support the primary care team through evidence-based primary care. A cluster randomized trial is needed to determine the clinical, health system, and societal impact of a primary care model that integrates physiotherapists at the first visit for people with back pain. Prior to conducting a future fully powered cluster randomized trial, we need to demonstrate feasibility of the methods. Therefore, the purpose of this pilot study will be to: 1) Determine feasibility of patient recruitment, assessment procedures, and retention. 2) Determine the feasibility of training and implementation of a new PT-led primary care model for low back pain (LBP) 3) Explore the perspectives of patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) related to their experiences and attitudes towards the new service delivery model, barriers/facilitators to implementation, perceived satisfaction, perceived value, and impact on clinic processes and patient outcomes.

METHODS

This pilot cluster randomized controlled trial will enroll four sites and randomize them to implement a new PT-led primary care model for back pain or a usual physician-led primary care model. All adults booking a primary care visit for back pain will be invited to participate. Feasibility outcomes will include: recruitment and retention rates, completeness of assessment data, PT training participation and confidence after training, and PT treatment fidelity. Secondary outcomes will include the clinical, health system, cost, and process outcomes planned for the future fully powered cluster trial. Results will be analyzed and reported descriptively and qualitatively. To explore perspectives of both HCPs and patients, we will conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients and focus groups with HCPs from participants in the PT-led primary care sites.

DISCUSSION

If this pilot demonstrates feasibility, a fully powered trial will provide evidence that has the potential to transform primary care for back pain. The full trial will inform future service design, whether these models should be more widely implemented, and training agendas.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03320148 . Submitted for registration on 17 September 2017.

Validity and reproducibility of the modified STarT Back Tool (Dutch version) for patients with neck pain in primary care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the STarT Back screening Tool (SBT), for patients with neck pain.

METHODS

We modified the SBT to fit patients with neck pain. General practitioners and physiotherapists included patients who completed both a baseline and a follow-up questionnaire at 3 days and 3 months, respectively. The construct validity was assessed using Pearson's correlation between the SBT and the reference questionnaires. The reproducibility was assessed in the first week using the quadratic weighted kappa and the specific agreement. Predictive validity was assessed using a relative-risk ratio (RR) for, amongst others, persisting disability at 3 months. Content validity was analysed using both floor and ceiling effects.

RESULTS

In total, 100 patients were included; 58% were categorised as being at "low risk" for persisting disability, 37% at "medium risk" and 5% at "high risk". As expected for the construct validity, we found a moderate to high correlation for all questions except for activity question 3. The reproducibility had a quadratic-weighted kappa of 0.58, and a specific agreement of 90.9% for "low-risk" and 66.7% for "medium-risk" patients. The RRs for persisting disability for "medium-risk" against "low-risk" patients were 1.5 (95% C.I. 0.9-2.4) and 1.5 (95% C.I. 0.5-4.1) for pain. The sample size for high-risk patients was low.

CONCLUSION

The original SBT is modified to fit patients with neck pain in Dutch primary care. The psychometric analysis indicates sufficiently reliable outcomes, although the predictive validity showed statistically insignificant results.