Physical therapists' treatment choices for non-specific low back pain in Florida: an electronic survey

Adherence to neck and low back pain clinical practice guidelines based on clinical specialization: a survey of physical therapists

OBJECTIVE

To investigate physical therapist adherence to the Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy's (AOPT) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of neck and low back pain (LBP) and to compare adherence among varying clinical specializations.

DESIGN

Electronic cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

The survey was sent to 17,348 AOPT members and 7,000 American Academy of Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT) members. Participants selected the best diagnosis and intervention(s) for six case vignettes based on the current AOPT CPGs for neck and LBP. Diagnostic and intervention adherence rates were reported as total percentages and delineated by the highest level of clinical specialization - fellowship training (PTFs), orthopedic residency training (PTRs), Board Certified Clinical Specialist in Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (PTSs), orthopedic background without clinical specialization (PTOs). Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the effects of clinical specialization (PTFs, PTRs, or PTSs) compared to PTOs on the likelihood of guideline adherence for all six cases.

RESULTS

Of the 159 participants who responded to the survey, 152 were eligible and 145 completed demographic data. Participant responses declined as the survey progressed from 125 completing case one to 106 completing case six. The odds ratio from binary logistic regression analyses were not significant for any specialization in all six cases (OR = 0.16; 95% CI: 0.02, 1.11; p = 0.064).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this manuscript demonstrated variable adherence rates across subgroups of patients with neck and LBP with no significant association between clinical specialization and adherence. Adherence to CPGs is dependent on the clinical presentation of various patient cohorts.

Measuring guideline adherence in physiotherapy: A scoping review of methodological approaches

RATIONALE

Clinical practice guidelines summarise the existing evidence on specific health conditions and aim to optimise quality of care by providing evidence-based recommendations. Studies have reported a gap between research findings and clinical practice in physiotherapy. Guideline adherence is often used as a measure of agreement between therapeutic care and guideline recommendations. However, there is currently no standardised methodological approach for measuring guideline adherence.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to summarise the methods and results of studies that assessed guideline adherence in physiotherapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro and CENTRAL databases were searched for relevant literature up to December 2022. Published reports of observational studies and controlled clinical trials that provided information on the assessment of guideline adherence in physiotherapists were included. The selection process was performed independently by two reviewers. The methodological quality of the identified reports was not assessed. Results were summarised narratively.

RESULTS

From a total of 2560 potentially relevant records, 53 reports were included in the analysis. Physiotherapists' adherence to guidelines was primarily assessed in the context of musculoskeletal conditions, such as low back pain (n = 25, 47.2%) and osteoarthritis (n = 8, 15.1%). A wide range of measurement approaches were used with the majority of reports using web-based surveys (n = 21, 39.6%), followed by chart reviews (n = 17, 32.1%). Most reports (n = 21, 39.6%) provided information on the level of adherence in terms of frequency dichotomising (self-reported) clinical practice as adherent or non-adherent. Adherence rates varied widely between included reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the large number of included reports indicates a high level of interest in the topic of guideline adherence, there is considerable heterogeneity between studies regarding the methodological approaches used to assess guideline adherence in physiotherapists. This reduces the comparability of the study results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

INPLASY (registration no. 202250081). Registered on 12th May 2022.

The effect of discharge training with the teach-back method on post-discharge challenges in lumbar disc herniation patients: A quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Shortened length of hospital stay in patients undergoing lumbar disc herniation surgery forces to undertake interventions that facilitate optimal patient outcomes.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of discharge training given by teach-back method, and counseling based on individual needs and a study-specific training booklet on postoperative pain and challenges experienced by lumbar disc herniation patients.

METHODS

This study had a quasi-experimental design and was conducted with 94 patients. Patients were divided into a control group (n = 48) and an intervention group (n = 46) using the blocking method. The pain was assessed at the time of patient admission, at discharge, and at follow-up; postoperative challenges were evaluated at discharge and follow-up.

RESULTS

Most patients experienced pain and challenges such as kinesiophobia, weakness-exhaustion-fatigue, irritability, constipation, and insomnia. The patients in the intervention group had less back and leg pain and challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of education given by teach-back method, and counseling in reducing the postoperative problems experienced by patients who underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation were demonstrated in this study. The findings suggest that study-specific training and counseling may be useful for addressing the pain and challenges of patients with lumbar disc herniation.

Treatment preference changes after exposure to treatment in adults with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Patients' pretreatment preferences can influence outcomes of nonpharmacologic treatments for musculoskeletal pain. Less is known about how patients' treatment preferences change following exposure to treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of exposure to treatment and change in disability and pain on treatment preference ratings of two exercise-based treatments for people with chronic low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a subsample of participants from a randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

Academic research setting.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals with chronic LBP (n = 83).

INTERVENTIONS

6 weekly sessions of motor skill training (MST) or strength and flexibility exercise (SFE).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prior to treatment, participants completed a treatment preference assessment measure (TPA) describing MST and SFE. Participants rated four attributes (effectiveness, acceptability/logicality, suitability/appropriateness, convenience) of each treatment on a 5-point Likert scale (0-4) with higher scores indicating higher ratings. An overall preference rating was calculated as the mean of the attribute ratings. The TPA was administered 12 months post treatment to reassess participants' ratings of the treatment they received.

RESULTS

Participants who received MST rated their preference for MST higher 12 months post treatment and participants who received SFE rated their preference for SFE lower. Smaller improvements (to worsening) in pain were associated with a reduction in preference ratings in the SFE group, whereas the MST group generally increased their ratings regardless of pain. Changes in disability were not related to changes in preference ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants changed their preference ratings of two exercise-based treatments for LBP after exposure to the treatment. Participants who received the less familiar MST viewed this treatment more favorably 12 months post treatment, and this change was less contingent on changes in disability/pain than for participants in the SFE group. Assessing preference ratings at various times during treatment is crucial to understand a person's preference for and perceptions of a treatment.

A survey of Indian physiotherapists' clinical practice patterns and adherence to clinical guidelines in the management of patients with acute low back pain

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) exist for the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). The objective of this study is to evaluate if Indian physiotherapists' follow CPGs when treating patients with acute LBP.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey using an online questionnaire was used to collect demographic information, views, and opinion about acute LBP and CPGs, and management strategies of a clinical vignette presenting a patient with acute LBP.

RESULTS

Responses from 328 physiotherapists were included in this study. Eighty-one percent of respondents indicated familiarity with CPGs for LBP and 75.3% (n = 328) respondents indicated that their intervention choices aligned with guidelines to at least some extent. Participants with post-graduate and doctoral degrees were more accustomed to CPGs than those with bachelor's degrees (p < 0.01). There were significant differences in clinical practice (p < 0.01) between therapists who expressed familiarity with guidelines and those who were not, as well as those with and without post-graduate and doctoral degrees.

CONCLUSION

In general, the study showed adherence to guidelines; however, there were areas that did not align with established evidence, especially referral for radiology and use of electrical modalities.

Clinician approaches to spinal manipulation for persistent spinal pain after lumbar surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND

This review aimed to identify variables influencing clinicians' application of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for persistent spine pain after lumbar surgery (PSPS-2). We hypothesized markers of reduced clinical/surgical complexity would be associated with greater odds of applying SMT to the lumbar region, use of manual-thrust lumbar SMT, and SMT within 1-year post-surgery as primary outcomes; and chiropractors would have increased odds of using lumbar manual-thrust-SMT compared to other practitioners.

METHODS

Per our published protocol, observational studies describing adults receiving SMT for PSPS-2 were included. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, OVID, PEDro, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched from inception to January 6, 2022. Individual patient data (IPD) were requested from contact authors when needed for selection criteria. Data extraction and a customized risk-of-bias rubric were completed in duplicate. Odds ratios (ORs) for primary outcomes were calculated using binary logistic regressions, with covariates including age, sex, symptom distribution, provider, motion segments, spinal implant, and surgery-to-SMT interval.

RESULTS

71 articles were included describing 103 patients (mean age 52 ± 15, 55% male). The most common surgeries were laminectomy (40%), fusion (34%), and discectomy (29%). Lumbar SMT was used in 85% of patients; and of these patients was non-manual-thrust in 59%, manual-thrust in 33%, and unclear in 8%. Clinicians were most often chiropractors (68%). SMT was used > 1-year post-surgery in 66% of cases. While no primary outcomes reached significance, non-reduced motion segments approached significance for predicting use of lumbar-manual-thrust SMT (OR 9.07 [0.97-84.64], P = 0.053). Chiropractors were significantly more likely to use lumbar-manual-thrust SMT (OR 32.26 [3.17-327.98], P = 0.003). A sensitivity analysis omitting high risk-of-bias cases (missing ≥ 25% IPD) revealed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians using SMT for PSPS-2 most often apply non-manual-thrust SMT to the lumbar spine, while chiropractors are more likely to use lumbar-manual-thrust SMT relative to other providers. As non-manual-thrust SMT may be gentler, the proclivity towards this technique suggests providers are cautious when applying SMT after lumbar surgery. Unmeasured variables such as patient or clinician preferences, or limited sample size may have influenced our findings. Large observational studies and/or international surveys are needed for an improved understanding of SMT use for PSPS-2. Systematic review registration PROSPERO (CRD42021250039).

Correlation between change in pain, disability, and surface electromyography topographic parameters after interferential current treatment in patients with chronic low back pain

[Purpose] Surface electromyography (SEMG) topography is used to objectively assess patients with low back pain (LBP). This study aimed to investigate the correlation between SEMG topographic variables, pain, and disability in patients with chronic LBP (CLBP) after interferential current (IFC) treatment, and to evaluate IFC treatment efficacy using SEMG topography. [Participants and Methods] Twenty nine patients with CLBP were recruited for a 6-week IFC treatment. Pain and disability scores, and the root-mean-square difference (RMSD) of SEMG topographic variables (relative areas [RAs] at flexion and extension) were compared before and after the intervention by repeated measures ANOVA; the correlation between variables was also explored and p-value was set at 0.001. [Results] Significant positive correlations between changes in pain score and the RMSD of RA at flexion (r(29)=0.593), and between changes in pain and disability scores (r(29)=0.426) were observed. All participants showed statistically significant improvements in the RMSD of RA at flexion, pain score, and disability score after IFC treatment. [Conclusion] SEMG topographic variables are closely associated with changes in pain score in patients with CLBP after IFC treatment. The RMSD of RA at flexion can be used as an objective marker in IFC treatment efficacy evaluation.

Physical therapy for patients with low back pain in Germany: a survey of current practice

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders worldwide. The National Disease Management Guideline (NVL) “Non-specific LBP” is a practical decision-making aid for both physicians and non-medical professionals in Germany to improve quality of health care. Although LBP is the most frequent diagnosis resulting in physical therapy treatment, information on the current management of patients with LBP and guideline adherence is limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate the current physical therapy management of patients with LBP in Germany, and to explore guideline adherence to the NVL “Non-specific LBP” recommendations.

Methods

An online survey among physical therapists working in Germany was conducted based on the recommendations given in the NVL “Non-specific LBP”. Participants were recruited using a snowball sampling approach and invited to complete the questionnaire. Guideline adherence was evaluated by comparing the survey findings with the recommendations of the NVL.

Results

In total, 1361 physical therapists (41 years of age (SD 11); 839 female, 514 male; 16 years of clinical experience (SD 10)) completed the survey.

Fifty percent (n = 675) of our respondents adhered to the recommendations of the NVL on the therapeutic diagnostic process, and 72% (n = 973) to the recommendations concerning treatment. The guideline adherence across the entire management process (i.e., both diagnosis and treatment) of LBP was 38% (n = 513). German physical therapists predominantly provide active interventions, e.g., exercise therapy, but also use interventions with low or conflicting evidence, respectively. Massage and Kinesio Taping were frequently used despite being not recommended. Less than one third of study participants (n = 400, 29%) answered to know the NVL or had dealt with its recommendations.

Conclusions

In the management of LBP, overall guideline adherence among German physical therapists was 38% with higher adherence in the treatment section than in the physical therapeutic diagnostic process. Widespread employment of implementation strategies and removal of existing barriers against the application of evidence-based guidelines could facilitate the transfer of scientific evidence into clinical practice and contribute to optimize the quality of health care.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00012607). Registered 04 October 2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04422-2.

Factors associated with care-seeking for low back pain when genetics and the familial environment are considered

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Care-seekers for LBP cause substantial economic burden to governments and the healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate lifestyle and health-related factors associated with care-seeking (including pain medication use) in individuals experiencing LBP, after controlling for important genetic and early environmental confounders through the use of a within-twin pair case-control design.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of observational longitudinal data, derived from the Australian Twin low BACK pain (AUTBACK) study, was performed on 66 twin pairs that presented with similar symptoms of LBP at baseline but became discordant for care-seeking behaviour over one month.

METHODS

Subjective and objective assessment of pain intensity, disability, depression, sleep quality, physical activity and body mass index were performed. Data was analysed using stepwise conditional logistic regression in two stages: within-pair case-control for monozygotic and dizygotic twins together; and within-pair case-control analysis of monozygotic twins only. Results were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Higher LBP intensity (OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.3-6.8) and poorer sleep quality (OR 10.9; 95% CI 1.5-77.7) were the main factors that increased the likelihood of care-seeking for LBP. These associations remained significant and increased in magnitude after adjusting for genetic confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with higher LBP intensity and worse sleep quality are more likely to seek care for LBP, and this relationship is likely to be causal after adjustment of familial and genetic confounding.

Optimization of Spinal Manipulative Therapy Protocols: A Factorial Randomized Trial Within a Multiphase Optimization Framework

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a common nonpharmacological treatment for low back pain (LBP). Although generally supported by systematic reviews and practice guidelines, clinical trials evaluating SMT have been characterized by small effect sizes. This study adopts a Multiphase Optimization Strategy framework to examine individual components of an SMT delivery protocol using a single-blind trial with the goal of identifying and optimizing a multicomponent SMT protocol. We enrolled 241 participants with LBP. All participants received 2 SMT treatment sessions in the first week then were randomly assigned additional treatment based on a fully factorial design. The 3 randomized treatment components provided in twice weekly sessions over 3 weeks were multifidus activating exercise, spinal mobilizing exercise, and additional SMT dose. Primary outcomes included clinical (Oswestry Disability Index, numeric pain intensity rating) and mechanistic (spinal stiffness, multifidus muscle activation) measures assessed at baseline, 1, 4, and 12 weeks. Significant differences were found for the Oswestry index after 12 weeks for participants receiving multifidus activating exercise (mean difference = -3.62, 97.5% CI: -6.89, -0.35; P= .01). There were no additional significant main or interaction effects for other treatment components or different outcome measures. The optimized SMT protocol identified in this study included SMT sessions followed by multifidus activating exercises. PERSPECTIVE: Optimizing the effects of nonpharmacological treatments such as SMT for LBP is challenging due to uncertainty regarding mechanisms and the complexity of multicomponent protocols. This factorial randomized trial examined SMT protocols provided with differing co-interventions with mechanistic and patient-centered outcomes. Patient-centered outcomes were optimized by inclusion of lumbar multifidus strengthening exercises.

Determinants of clinical practice guidelines' utilization for the management of musculoskeletal disorders: a scoping review

CONTEXT

Many clinical practice guidelines have been developed for the management of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). However, there is a gap between evidence-based knowledge and clinical practice, and reasons are poorly understood. Understanding why healthcare providers use clinical practice guidelines is essential to improve their implementation, dissemination, and adherence.

AIM

To identify determinants of clinical practice guidelines' utilization by health care providers involved in the assessment and management of MSDs.

METHOD

A scoping review of the literature was conducted. Three databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Article identification, study design, methodological quality, type of healthcare providers, MSDs, barriers and facilitators associated with guidelines' utilization were extracted from selected articles.

RESULTS

8671 citations were retrieved, and 43 articles were selected. 51% of studies were from Europe, and most were quantitative studies (64%) following a cross-sectional design (88%). Almost 80% of articles dealt with low back pain guidelines, and the most studied healthcare providers were general practitioners or physiotherapists. Five main barriers to guideline utilization were expressed by providers: 1) disagreement between recommendations and patient expectations; 2) guidelines not specific to individual patients; 3) unfamiliarity with "non-specific" term, or with the bio psychosocial model of MSDs; 4) time consuming; and 5) heterogeneity in guideline methods. Four main facilitators to guideline utilization were cited: 1) clinician's interest in evidence-based practice; 2) perception from clinicians that the guideline will improve triage, diagnosis and management; 3) time efficiency; and 4) standardized language.

CONCLUSION

Identifying modifiable determinants is the first step in developing implementation strategies to improve guideline utilization in clinical practice.

Effectiveness of Ultrasound Therapy on the Management of Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review

Non-specific chronic low back pain is the most common self-reported kind of musculoskeletal ache associated with substantial health and socioeconomic problem and responsible for most years lived with a disability as compared with any other medical condition. So treating chronic non-specific low back pain is one of the main problems faced among physical therapists in the rehabilitation area. The effects of ultrasound for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain remain unknown, however it is commonly used to treat clients with low back pain in rehabilitation setting. Therefore, the main aim of this review was to evaluate the up-to-date confirmation in the efficacy of ultrasound therapy on the treatment of non-specific chronic low back pain. A comprehensive search of four computerized electronic databases was performed to identify the effectiveness of ultrasound therapy on the management of chronic non-specific low back pain. Searching was done through the Google Scholar, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Physiotherapy Evidence Databases (PEDro) and reported using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. The qualities of articles were appraised by the PEDro scale. The primary outcome measure visual analog scale was used. Six randomized clinical trials with a total sample size of 699 patients from the electronic database published in English were identified. In this review, the effect of UST in five articles was statically significant in reducing the visual analog scale (p<0.05) score. So this systematic review found ultrasound therapy could be an alternative treatment to reduce the intensity of pain in subjects with non-specific chronic LBP.

Movement Matters, and So Does Context: Lessons Learned From Multisite Implementation of the Movement Matters Activity Program for Stroke in the Comprehensive Postacute Stroke Services Study

The purpose of this Special Communication is to discuss the rationale and design of the Movement Matters Activity Program for Stroke (MMAP) and explore implementation successes and challenges in home health and outpatient therapy practices across the stroke belt state of North Carolina. MMAP is an interventional component of the Comprehensive Postacute Stroke Services Study, a randomized multicenter pragmatic trial of stroke transitional care. MMAP was designed to maximize survivor health, recovery, and functional independence in the community and to promote evidence-based rehabilitative care. MMAP provided training, tools, and resources to enable rehabilitation providers to (1) prescribe physical activity and exercise according to evidence-based guidelines and programs, (2) match service setting and parameters with survivor function and benefit coverage, and (3) align treatment with quality metric reporting to demonstrate value-based care. MMAP implementation strategies were aligned with the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change project, and MMAP site champion and facilitator survey feedback were thematically organized into the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. MMAP implementation was challenging, required modification and was affected by provider- and system-level factors. Program and study participation were limited and affected by practice priorities, productivity standards, and stroke patient volume. Sites with successful implementation appeared to have empowered MMAP champions in vertically integrated systems that embraced innovation. Findings from this broad evaluation can serve as a road map for the design and implementation of other comprehensive, complex interventions that aim to bridge the currently disconnected realms of acute care, postacute care, and community resources.

Adherence to key domains in low back pain guidelines: A cross-sectional study of Danish physiotherapists

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was threefold: Firstly, to investigate the adherence to clinical practice guidelines for low back pain (LBP) among Danish physiotherapists with regard to three key domains: (a) activity, (b) work and (c) psychosocial risk factors. Secondly, to investigate whether adherence differed between physiotherapists working in private clinics (private physiotherapists) and physiotherapists working at public healthcare centres (public physiotherapists). Thirdly, to describe the physiotherapists' treatment modalities for patients with LBP.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 817 physiotherapists working in the Central Denmark Region. Adherence to the guideline domains was assessed using two vignettes. The difference in adherence between the groups was assessed using the Chi-squared test. Treatment modalities were reported using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 234 physiotherapists responded, hereof 163 private physiotherapists and 71 public physiotherapists (response rate 29%). The proportions of physiotherapists managing the patients strictly in line with the guideline domains were 32% (activity), 16% (work) and 82% (psychosocial risk factors) for Vignette 1 and 6% (activity), 53% (work) and 60% (psychosocial risk factors) for Vignette 2. Public physiotherapists were more likely to manage patients strictly in line with guidelines for assessing the psychosocial risk factors compared to private physiotherapist (Vignette 1: 92% vs. 77% p = .030; Vignette 2:70% vs. 55% p = .035). Regarding the other two domains, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of adherence (p > .05). Concerning treatment modalities, the majority of physiotherapists instructed the patients in adopting an exercise program or informed the patients about the benign nature and prognosis of LBP.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the participating Danish physiotherapists strictly adhered to only one out of three key domains. This underlines the importance of bringing focus on implementing the current guidelines' recommendations in clinical practice.

Does the Keele STarT Back Screening Tool Contribute to Effectiveness in Treatment and Cost and Loss of Follow-Up of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy for Patients with Low Back Pain?

Background: Mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT) and the stratified approach using the Keele STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) are examples of stratified low back pain (LBP) management. We investigated whether the medium–high risk in SBST can contribute to the time and sessions until discharge from MDT (Question 1) and to the loss of follow-up before identifying a promising management strategy (Question 2). Methods: A retrospective chart study was conducted. Multiple regression modeling was constructed using 10 independent variables, including whether the SBST was medium–high risk or not for Question 1, and the 9/10 independent variables for Question 2. Results: The data of 89 participants for Question 1 and 166 participants for Question 2 were analyzed. SBST was not a primary contributing factor for Question 1 (R² = 0.17–0.19). The model for Question 2 included SBST as a primary contributing factor and the shortest distance from the patient address to the hospital as a secondary contributing factor (93.4% correct classification). Conclusion: SBST status was not a primary contributing factor for time and sessions until discharge from MDT, but was a critical factor for the loss of MDT follow-up before identifying a promising management strategy.

A user-friendly clinical practice guideline summary for managing low back pain in South Africa

Background

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide conveniently packaged evidence-based recommendations to inform clinical decisions. However, intended end-users often do not know how to source, appraise, interpret or choose among CPGs. Moreover, it can be confusing when recommendations on the same topic differ among CPGs, in wording, intent and underpinning evidence.

Objectives

This article reports on the processes of: (1) identifying current CPGs for acute and subacute low back pain (LBP) to fit the needs of South African physiotherapists, (2) collating and summarising CPG recommendations to produce a user-friendly end-user product and (3) testing the utility of the summary CPG document on South African physiotherapy clinicians to efficiently determine acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility to inform clinical decision-making.

Method

An adapted approach was followed by systematically searching online CPG repositories and online databases for LBP CPGs; screening and critically appraising identified CPGs; summarising recommendations from relevant CPGs and organising them into clinical practice activities. Feedback on utility was obtained from 11 physiotherapists.

Results

Three high-quality, international CPGs provided 25 recommendations on the assessment and management of acute and subacute LBP relevant to South African physiotherapy practice. They were organised into 10 headings. Physiotherapy user feedback suggested that this document would assist in clinical decision-making.

Conclusion

Organised recommendations extracted from multiple, relevant CPGs provide an end-user-friendly resource for physiotherapists treating LBP.

Clinical implications

Collated and organised CPG recommendations may effectively assist South African physiotherapists’ clinical decision-making in assessing and managing patients with acute and subacute LBP.

Do physical therapists follow evidence-based guidelines when managing musculoskeletal conditions? Systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Physicians often refer patients with musculoskeletal conditions to physical therapy. However, it is unclear to what extent physical therapists' treatment choices align with the evidence. The aim of this systematic review was to determine what percentage of physical therapy treatment choices for musculoskeletal conditions agree with management recommendations in evidence-based guidelines and systematic reviews.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

We performed searches in Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Scopus and Web of Science combining terms synonymous with 'practice patterns' and 'physical therapy' from the earliest record to April 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

Studies that quantified physical therapy treatment choices for musculoskeletal conditions through surveys of physical therapists, audits of clinical notes and other methods (eg, audits of billing codes, clinical observation) were eligible for inclusion.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Using medians and IQRs, we summarised the percentage of physical therapists who chose treatments that were recommended, not recommended and had no recommendation, and summarised the percentage of physical therapy treatments provided for various musculoskeletal conditions within the categories of recommended, not recommended and no recommendation. Results were stratified by condition and how treatment choices were assessed (surveys of physical therapists vs audits of clinical notes).

RESULTS

We included 94 studies. For musculoskeletal conditions, the median percentage of physical therapists who chose recommended treatments was 54% (n=23 studies; surveys completed by physical therapists) and the median percentage of patients that received recommended physical therapy-delivered treatments was 63% (n=8 studies; audits of clinical notes). For treatments not recommended, these percentages were 43% (n=37; surveys) and 27% (n=20; audits). For treatments with no recommendation, these percentages were 81% (n=37; surveys) and 45% (n=31; audits).

CONCLUSIONS

Many physical therapists seem not to follow evidence-based guidelines when managing musculoskeletal conditions. There is considerable scope to increase use of recommended treatments and reduce use of treatments that are not recommended.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018094979.

The New Agenda for Neck Pain Research: A Modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Though a large amount of research on neck pain has been conducted, no coordinated agenda has identified and addressed high-priority research questions.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and rank the neck pain research priorities of neck pain researchers.

METHODS

A total of 400 experts in the field of neck pain were invited to participate in this modified Delphi study. The study was conducted in 3 rounds. The first round aimed to identify the most important relevant questions that neck pain researchers should address. These questions were then categorized and ranked during the second and third rounds.

RESULTS

A total of 117 experts agreed to participate (29% response rate). A total of 15 neck pain research priorities were identified. The top 5 research priorities were to (1) establish effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of available treatments for neck pain, (2) translate research evidence into clinical settings, (3) identify the effectiveness of education and self-care in prevention and treatment of neck pain, (4) identify causal factors in the development of neck pain, and (5) define the natural course and prognostic factors in people with neck pain.

CONCLUSION

A new research-priority agenda was developed through a consensus process from a group of neck pain researchers. This agenda can be used as a guide for researchers and funding agencies to ensure that future research addresses the most important research questions in this area. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(9):666-674. Epub 10 Jul 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8704.

Are improvements in symptoms associated with changes in lumbopelvic posture in patients with posterior derangement using Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy?

BACKGROUND

Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) manages low back pain (LBP) with subgroup classifications. For a subgroup of the posterior derangement syndrome, postural education limiting lumbar flexion is included. However, it is not known if habitual posture in this subgroup actually changes through MDT management because of technical difficulties in monitoring habitual lumbopelvic posture. However, a wearable device, "LUMOback", which can evaluate the proportion of time with a neutral lumbopelvic posture (posture score), has now become available.

OBJECTIVE

To preliminarily investigate whether the posture score changes through the course of MDT management.

METHODS

Primary inclusion criterion was LBP with the posterior derangement syndrome. Primary outcome measure was the posture score during one week. The posture score was assessed one week before and six weeks after the initial MDT management, which included extension exercises and postural education.

RESULTS

All participants (n= 8) reported a successful treatment effect after the 6-week MDT intervention; however, there was no specific trend in the posture score (Friedman test: p= 0.277).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found evidence that the proportion of time with a neutral lumbopelvic posture during daily living, the posture score, which was measured with the LUMOback, did not systematically change with MDT management.

Are Productivity Goals in Rehabilitation Practice Associated With Unethical Behaviors?

Objectives

To evaluate the presence of productivity goals among licensed rehabilitation clinicians and their relationship with observed unethical behavior.

Design

Exploratory, cross-sectional survey.

Setting

Online.

Participants

Licensed physical therapy clinicians (N=3446).

Intervention

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measure

Participants completed an electronic survey regarding use of clinical productivity goals. They rated the frequency in which they observed 6 unethical behaviors on a 7-point Likert scale in their practice setting from 1=never to 7=always. An overall observed unethical behavior score was calculated by summing these scales.

Results

The response rate was 12.8% (N=3446), with analyses showing low risk of nonresponse bias. Many respondents (73.9%) had a formal productivity goal. Most (89.4%) reported observing some form of unethical behavior, but many (68.6%) reported it occurred “rarely” or “never.” Those in skilled nursing facility (SNF) settings reported higher frequencies of observance and were 4.1 times more likely to report more unethical behavior than the median compared with all other settings. A positive correlation existed between expected productivity rate and rate of unethical behaviors observed (ρ=0.225; P<.0001). Amounts of organizational emphases on ethical practice (ρ=−0.509; P<.0001) and evidence-based practice (ρ=−0.492; P<.0001) were negatively correlated with total observed unethical behavior.

Conclusions

Use of productivity goals in rehabilitation practice is significantly related with rate of unethical behavior observed. Frequency of observed unethical behavior in rehabilitation practice was very low overall. Organizational culture appears to be a greater predictor of observed unethical behavior than any individual clinician-related characteristics. The SNF setting displays the greatest areas of ethical concern.

No increase in 6-week treatment effect of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy with the use of the LUMOback in people with non-acute non-specific low back pain and a directional preference of extension: a pilot randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To pilot the methods for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to investigate whether the treatment effect of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is enhanced with the LUMOback.

DESIGN

Assessor blinded RCT with 3 and 6-week follow-ups.

SETTING

An outpatient clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary eligibility criteria were: a directional preference of lumbar extension, ≥18years of age, and non-specific low back pain lasting for ≥1month.

INTERVENTIONS

The MDT group undertook extension exercises (10reps/3hour) and postural correction using a lumbar roll at home. The MDT+LUMOback group also wore the LUMOback daily, providing a vibration alert in a slouched posture.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Global Rating of Change Scale (GRCS) (0-6), recruitment rate per month, treatment sessions, compliance rate of wearing the LUMOback, participants' adherence with treatment, dropout rate and the stage of the MDT program at six weeks.

RESULTS

Twenty-two participants were included for 20 months (a recruitment rate of 1.1 patient/month). Dropout rate was 9%. The mean (SD) of the GRCS of the MDT and MDT+LUMOback groups were 4.7 (0.8) and 4.7 (0.5) at the 3-week follow-up and were both 4.9 (0.5) at the 6-week follow-up. The patients undertook a mean of 6.7 sessions for six weeks and exercises with mean of 3.7set/day in each group. The mean compliance rate of wearing the LUMOback was 88%. Nobody was discharged from the intervention with full recovery within six weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Data indicated a promising method for the full RCT, but a rationale for the full RCT was not justified.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000018380.

Improving Physical Therapy Pain Care, Quality, and Cost Through Effectiveness-Implementation Research

The variability and delay in utilizing evidence in clinical practice are barriers to improving care, quality, and cost in health care, as charged by the "triple aim" framework. Scientific research provides an avenue not only to further the field of pain research, but also to study and change the patterns and processes that drive systemic and individual clinical practices. Implementation science is an emerging field that can be integrated with more traditional effectiveness research to accomplish a combination of aims within the same study. This type of concurrent study of effectiveness and implementation is known as a hybrid design and can be used to improve behavioral or operational practice patterns as well as to collect evidence of clinical effectiveness. Recently, the National Pain Strategy put forth recommendations to improve the care of patients with pain through research and practice. Hybrid designs align well with recent efforts that emphasize value-based, patient-centered health care evolving and described in the National Pain Strategy. The purposes of this perspective are to describe implementation science and hybrid studies and to put forth opportunities to utilize this research to advance the care of patients with pain in the United States.

Physical therapy clinical specialization and management of red and yellow flags in patients with low back pain in the United States

Objectives

Physical therapists (PTs) may practice in direct access or act as primary care practitioners, which necessitate patients' screening and management for red, orange and yellow flags. The objective of the project was to assess the American PT's ability to manage red, orange and yellow flags in patients with low back pain (LBP), and to compare this ability among PTs with different qualifications.

Methods

The project was an electronic cross-sectional survey. The investigators contacted 2,861 PTs. Participants made clinical decisions for three vignettes: LBP with red flag for ectopic pregnancy, with orange flag for depression and with yellow flag for fear avoidance behaviour (FAB). The investigators used logistic regression to compare management of warning flags among PTs with distinct qualifications: orthopaedic clinical specialists (PTOs), fellows of the AAOMPT (PTFs), PTOs and PTFs (PTFOs), and PTs without clinical specialization (PTMSs).

Results

A total of 410 PTs completed all sections of the survey (142 PTOs, 110 PTFOs, 74 PTFs and 84 PTMSs). Two hundred and seventeen PTs (53%) managed the patient with LBP and symptoms of ectopic pregnancy correctly, 115 PTs (28.5%) of them managed the patient with LBP and symptoms of depression correctly, and 177 (43.2%) managed the patient with LBP and FAB correctly.

Discussion

In general, PTs with specialization performed significantly better than PTMSs in all three clinical vignettes. PTs ability to manage patients with warning flags was relatively low. Based on our results, further education on patients with LBP and warning flags is needed. The survey had the potential for non-response and self-selection bias.

Level of Evidence

3b.

Addressing Intervention Fidelity Within Physical Therapy Research and Clinical Practice

Intervention fidelity is a key component of the design and conduct of physical therapy research, defined as "the methodological strategies used to enhance and monitor the reliability and validity of behavioral interventions." This includes enhancing and assessing the extent to which an intervention is implemented as intended by its developers, including how they envisage the participants or patients to interact with the intervention. The authors of this Viewpoint focus predominantly on the fidelity of intervention delivery; highlight the importance of intervention fidelity for the physical therapy profession and its relevance for both physical therapy researchers and practitioners; and explore potential barriers to enhancing and assessing the fidelity of intervention delivery in physical therapy research. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(12):895-898. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0609.

Mechanical diagnosis and therapy enhances attitude toward self-management in people with musculoskeletal disorders: A preliminary evidence with a before-after design

Objectives:

Mechanical diagnosis and therapy is one of the most common approaches for the management of low back pain. In mechanical diagnosis and therapy, a great emphasis is placed on patient education so that patients can manage their problems by themselves. However, there has been no evidence that mechanical diagnosis and therapy actually enhances patient’s self-management skills. This study aimed to preliminarily investigate whether self-reported skills of self-management for musculoskeletal problems are enhanced through the course of mechanical diagnosis and therapy.

Method:

Outpatients with musculoskeletal disorders in a local orthopedic clinic were included. The primary outcome measures were the “Self-monitoring and Insight” and “Skill and Technique Acquisition” scores of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire, where higher scores indicate greater self-management skills. Mechanical diagnosis and therapy was undertaken up to a maximum of twice per week for 1 month. The Self-monitoring and Insight and Skill and Technique Acquisition scores before and 1 month after the mechanical diagnosis and therapy interventions were compared. Proportions of patients who exceed the threshold for “reliable change” in the Health Education Impact Questionnaire scores (% >positive “reliable change”) and proportions of patients with the net positive “reliable change” (% net positive “reliable change”) were investigated.

Results:

Forty-five patients participated and 97.8% completed the 1-month follow-up. The Self-monitoring and Insight and Skill and Technique Acquisition scores significantly increased at the follow-up (Self-monitoring and Insight, p = 0.002; Skill and Technique Acquisition, p < 0.001. The % >positive “reliable change” (Self-monitoring and Insight = 22.2%, Skill and Technique Acquisition = 48.9%) and % net positive “reliable change” (Self-monitoring and Insight = 13.3%, Skill and Technique Acquisition = 46.7%) in this study were comparative to or greater than self-management programs in previous studies (%> positive “reliable change’: Self-monitoring and Insight = 20.5%, Skill and Technique Acquisition = 30.7%; % net positive “reliable change”: Self-monitoring and Insight = 14.1%, Skill and Technique Acquisition = 23.0%).

Conclusion:

This study provides a preliminary evidence that mechanical diagnosis and therapy enhances patient’s self-management skills, particularly in the self-monitoring skills for symptoms/functions and the self-management skill for symptoms/problems.

Clinical Specialization and Adherence to Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines for Low Back Pain Management: A Survey of US Physical Therapists

Study Design Electronic cross-sectional survey. Background The American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) evidence-based practice guideline for low back pain (LBP) elaborated on strategies to manage nonspecific LBP in routine physical therapy practice. This guideline described LBP associated with mobility deficit, leg pain and a directional preference, coordination impairment (lumbar instability), and fear-avoidance behavior. Objectives To assess American physical therapists' adherence to the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for LBP of the Orthopaedic Section of the APTA, and to compare adherence among physical therapists with different qualifications. Methods The investigators contacted 1861 members of the Orthopaedic Section of the APTA and 1000 members of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapists (AAOMPT). Participants made treatment choices for 4 clinical vignettes: LBP with mobility deficit, coordination impairment, leg pain (directional preference), or fear-avoidance behavior. The investigator used logistic regression analyses to compare guideline adherence among physical therapists with the following qualifications: orthopaedic clinical specialists (PTOs), Fellows of the AAOMPT (PTFs), PTOs and PTFs (PTFOs), and physical therapists without clinical specialization but with a musculoskeletal interest (PTMSs). Results A total of 410 physical therapists completed all sections of the survey (142 PTOs, 110 PTFOs, 74 PTFs, and 84 PTMSs). Adherence to the APTA's CPG was highest for LBP associated with leg pain and a directional preference (72.2%), followed by LBP with mobility deficit (57.1%), LBP with coordination impairment (46.1%), and fear-avoidance behavior (29.5%). Physical therapists who were PTFOs adhered better to the CPG for LBP than did PTMSs for all 4 patient vignettes. Orthopaedic clinical specialists adhered better to the CPG for LBP for the vignettes of mobility deficit and of LBP with fear-avoidance behavior than did PTMSs. Conclusion Physical therapists who were PTFOs and PTOs adhered better to the CPG than did PTMSs. Based on our preliminary results, further education on the CPG for LBP management is needed, particularly for managing LBP with coordination impairment and with fear-avoidance behavior. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(5):347-358. Epub 3 Mar 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.6561.

Stagnant Physical Therapy Referral Rates Alongside Rising Opioid Prescription Rates in Patients With Low Back Pain in the United States 1997-2010

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional observational study utilizing the National Ambulatory and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys between 1997 and 2010.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterize national physical therapy (PT) referral trends during primary care provider (PCP) visits in the United States.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite guidelines recommending PT for the initial management of low back pain (LBP), national PT referral rates remain low.

METHODS

Race, ethnicity, age, payer type, and PT referral rates were collected for patients aged 16 to 90 years who were visiting their PCPs. Associations among demographic variables and PT referral were determined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Between 1997 and 2010, we estimated 170 million visits for LBP leading to 17.1 million PT referrals. Average proportion of PCP visits associated with PT referrals remained stable at about 10.1% [odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.96-1.04)], despite our prior finding of increasing number of visits associated with opioid prescriptions in the same timeframe.Lower PT referral rates were observed among visits by patients who were insured by Medicaid (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33-0.69) and Medicare (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72). Furthermore, visits not associated with PT referrals were more likely to be associated with opioid prescriptions (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.22-2.35).

CONCLUSION

Although therapies delivered by PTs are promoted as a first-line treatment for LBP, PT referral rates remain low. There also exist disparately lower referral rates in populations with more restrictive health plans and simultaneous opioid prescription. Our findings provide a broad overview to PT prescription trend and isolate concerning associations requiring further explorations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Graded group exercise and fear avoidance behavior modification in the treatment of chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Approaches in the treatment of general chronic low back pain (CLBP) are multifaceted relative to specific interventions. In the past, passive interventions have commonly been employed with little evidence to support their effectiveness. Recent reviews suggest a focus on active exercises programs that includes pain education and cognitive behavioral therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the outcomes of CLBP patients and describe the approach in persons undergoing a group spinal rehabilitation program using graded exercise, and operant conditioning.

METHODS

Adult patients with CLBP participated in a twice weekly 90 minute exercise sessions for 8-weeks (n= 201). The program consisted of behavioral education, stretching, aerobic exercises, graded progressive resistance exercise, MedX isotonic strengthening, and functional bending lifting task exercises.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patient records were evaluated where the overall ODI improvement was 13.2% (± 14.0) (p< 0.001). There were significant and clinically meaningful improvements in flexibility, VAS, functional lifting tasks (p< 0.001), and lumbar extension strength (p= 0.01) at 8-week follow-up. Questionnaires were delivered via mail with a 21% return rate revealed sustained improvements.

CONCLUSION

CLBP patients undergoing an 8-week intensive exercise approach incorporating both behavioral and physical conditioning principles showed both significant and clinically significant improvements in this observational case series. Long-term benefits were also seen in both the 6 and 12 month follow-up questionnaires although further investigation is warranted due to limited survey return rate and study design.

Does case misclassification threaten the validity of studies investigating the relationship between neck manipulation and vertebral artery dissection stroke? Yes

Background

For patients and health care providers who are considering spinal manipulative therapy of the neck, it is crucial to establish if it is a trigger for cervical artery dissection and/or stroke, and if it is, the magnitude of the risk.

Discussion

We discuss the biological plausibility of how neck manipulation could cause cervical artery dissection. We also discuss how case misclassification threatens the validity of influential published studies that have investigated the relationship between neck manipulation and dissection. Our position is supported by the fact that the largest epidemiologic studies of neck manipulation safety with respect to neurological outcomes have relied on International Classification of Diseases-9 codes for case identification. However, the application of these codes in prior studies failed to identify dissections (rather than strokes in general) and so conclusions from those studies are invalid.

Conclusion

There are several methodological challenges to understanding the association between neck manipulation and vertebral artery dissection. Addressing these issues is critical because even a modest association between neck manipulation and cervical artery dissection could translate into a significant number of avoidable dissections given the widespread use of neck manipulation by providers from various backgrounds. We believe that valid case classification, accurate measurement of manipulative procedures, and addressing reverse causation bias should be top priorities for future research.

Effect of interferential current therapy on pain perception and disability level in subjects with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

Objective:

To assess the short-term efficacy of transregional interferential current therapy on pain perception and disability level in chronic non-specific low back pain.

Design:

A randomized, single-blinded (the assessor collecting the outcome data was blinded), controlled trial.

Setting:

A private physiotherapy research clinic.

Subjects:

A total of 64 individuals, 20 men and 44 women, mean (SD) age was 51 years (11.93), with low back pain of more than three months, with or without pain radiating to the lower extremities above the knee, were distributed into a control ( n = 20) or an experimental group ( n = 44). A 2:1 randomization ratio was used in favour of the latter.

Interventions:

A transregional interferential current electrotherapy protocol was performed for participants in the experimental group, while the control group underwent a ‘usual care’ treatment (massage, mobilization and soft-tissue techniques). All subjects received up to 10 treatment sessions of 25 minutes over a two-week period, and completed the intervention and follow-up evaluations.

Outcome measures:

Self-perceived pain was assessed with a Visual Analogue Scale. Secondary measure included the Oswestry Low Back Disability Index. Evaluations were collected at baseline and after the intervention protocol.

Results:

Significant between-group differences were found for interferential current therapy on pain perception ( p = 0.032) and disability level ( p = 0.002). The observed differences in the between-group mean changes were of 11.34 mm (1.77/20.91) and 13.38 points (4.97/21.78), respectively.

Conclusions:

A two-week transregional interferential current treatment has shown significant short-term efficacy, when compared with a ‘usual care’ protocol, on self-perceived pain and functionality in subjects with chronic low back pain.

The Influence of Physical Therapy Guideline Adherence on Healthcare Utilization and Costs among Patients with Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is common and associated healthcare costs are significant. While clinical practice guidelines have been established in an attempt to reduce costs and healthcare utilization, it is unclear if adherence to physical therapy guidelines for those with LBP is efficacious. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess current evidence and evaluate the impact of physical therapy guideline adherence on subsequent healthcare costs and utilization for patients with LBP.

METHODS

An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO Host), AMED (Ovid), and PEDro. Studies included in this review were published in peer reviewed journals and the primary mode of treatment was administered by a physical therapist. Also, the definition of adherence was clearly defined based on claims data and at least one measure of cost or utilization reported. Quality assessment was evaluated via a modified Downs and Black checklist. Due to the conceptual heterogeneity in variable measurements, data were qualitatively synthesized and stratified by reported utilization and cost measures.

RESULTS

A total of 256 results were identified and after omitting duplicates, 4 articles were retained, which were all retrospective in nature. Quality scores ranged between 19 and 21 points out of a possible 26 on the modified Downs and Black checklist. All identified studies used the same definition of guideline adherence, which focused on billing active codes and minimizing use of passive codes. The results demonstrated trends that, with a few exceptions, suggested those patients with LBP that were treated with an adherent guideline program demonstrated decreased healthcare utilization and an overall healthcare savings.

CONCLUSION

Preliminary evidence suggests that adherence to established clinical practice guidelines may assist with decreasing healthcare utilization and costs. Additional research based on prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to provide high quality evidence regarding the impact of guideline adherence among patients with LBP.