An interdisciplinary guideline development process: the Clinic on Low-back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice (CLIP) low-back pain guidelines

High Intensity Training to Treat Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Effectiveness of Various Exercise Modes

High-intensity training (HIT) improves rehabilitation outcomes such as functional disability and physical performance in several chronic disorders. Promising results were also found in chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). However, the impact of different exercise modes on HIT effectiveness in CNSLBP remains unclear. Therefore, this study evaluated the effectiveness of various HIT exercise modes and compared differences between these modes, on pain intensity, disability, and physical performance, as a therapeutic intervention for persons with CNSLBP. In a randomized comparative trial, consisting of a 12-week program, persons with CNSLBP were divided into four HIT groups, i.e., cardiorespiratory interval training coupled with either general resistance training, core strength training, combined general resistance and core strength training, or mobility exercises. Before and after the program, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Modified Oswestry Disability Index (MODI), and Patient Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS) were recorded, and a cardiopulmonary exercise test (VO₂max, cycling time) and isometric trunk strength test (maximum muscle torque) were performed. Eighty participants (mean age: 44.0 y, 34 males) were included. Improvements were found within all groups after the HIT programs and ranged from −39 to −57% on the NPRS, +27 to +64% on the MODI, +38 to +89% on the PSFS, +7 to +14% on VO₂max, and +11 to +18% on cycling time. No differences between groups were found. High-intensity cardiorespiratory interval training improves CNSLBP rehabilitation outcomes when performed with other HIT exercise modes or mobility exercises. Hence, when setting up an exercise therapy program in CNSLBP rehabilitation, various HIT modes can be considered as therapy modalities.

Effectiveness of communicative and educative strategies in chronic low back pain patients: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of communicative and educative strategies on 1) patient's low back pain awareness/knowledge, 2) maladaptive behavior modification and 3) compliance with exercise in patients with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. Searches were performed on 13 databases. Only randomized controlled trials enrolling patients ≥ 18 years of age were included. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and interrater agreement between authors for full-texts selection was evaluated with Cohen's Kappa. No meta-analysis was performed and qualitative analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

24 randomized controlled trials which intervention included communicative and educative strategies were selected. Most of the studies were judged as low risk of bias and Cohen's Kappa was excellent ( = 0.822). Interventions addressed were cognitive behavioral therapy as unique treatment or combined with other treatments (multimodal interventions), coaching, mindfulness, pain science education, self-management, graded activity and graded exposure.

CONCLUSIONS, PRACTICE IMPLICATION

Patient's low back pain awareness/knowledge is still a grey area of literature. Pain science education, graded exposure and multimodal interventions are the most effective for behavior modification and compliance with exercise with benefits also in the long-term, while self-management, graded activity and coaching provide only short-term or no benefits.

What is the association between the presence of comorbidities and the appropriateness of care for low back pain? A population-based medical record review study

Background

Although “non-specific” in 90% of cases, low back pain (LBP) is often treated as an independent entity, even though comorbidities are commonly associated with it. There is evidence that some LBP may be related to chronic conditions or be a symptom of poor health. The purpose of this study was to clarify the extent of comorbidities amongst a cohort of Australian adults with LBP and examine if having concurrent conditions has any association with appropriateness of care for LBP.

Methods

A population-based sample of patients with one or more of 22 common conditions was recruited by telephone; consents were obtained to review their medical records. Trained surveyors extracted information from their medical records to examine the care patients received for their LBP with respect to ten indicators of appropriate care, ratified by LBP experts. Using LBP as the index condition, lists of self-reported comorbidities and those that were documented in medical records were compared. Medical records were reviewed and analysed with respect to appropriateness of care to identify any significant differences in care received between patients with LBP only and those with LBP plus comorbidities.

Results

One hundred and sixty four LBP patients were included in the analysis. Over 60% of adults with LBP in Australia had one of 17 comorbidities documented, with females being more likely than males to have comorbid conditions (63% vs 37%, p = 0.012). The more comorbidities, the poorer their reported health status (63% vs 30%, p = 0.006). Patients with comorbidities were significantly less likely to receive appropriate LBP care on nine of the ten LBP indicators (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

This study established that the presence of comorbidities is associated with poorer care for LBP. Understanding why this is so is an important direction for future research. Further studies using a larger cohort are needed to explore the association between comorbidities and appropriateness of care for LBP, to better inform guidelines and practice in this area.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2316-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of guideline-endorsed red flags to screen for fracture in patients presenting with low back pain

OBJECTIVES

(1) Describe the evolution of guideline-endorsed red flags for fracture in patients presenting with low back pain; (2) evaluate agreement between guidelines; and (3) evaluate the extent to which recommendations are accompanied by information on diagnostic accuracy of endorsed red flags.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and PubMed, PEDro, CINAHL and EMBASE electronic databases. We also searched in guideline databases, including the National Guideline Clearinghouse and Canadian Medical Association Infobase.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two review authors independently extracted the following data: health professional association or society producing guideline, year of publication, the precise wording of endorsed red flag for vertebral fracture, recommendations for diagnostic workup if fracture is suspected, if the guidelines substantiate the recommendation with citation to a primary diagnostic study or diagnostic review, if the guideline provides any diagnostic accuracy data.

RESULTS

78 guidelines from 28 countries were included. A total of 12 discrete red flags were reported. The most commonly recommended red flags were older age, use of steroids, trauma and osteoporosis. Regarding the evolution of red flags, older age, trauma and osteoporosis were the first red flags endorsed (in 1994); and previous fracture was the last red flag endorsed (in 2003). Agreement between guidelines in endorsing red flags was only fair; kappa=0.32. Only 9 of the 78 guidelines substantiated their red flag recommendations by research and only nine provided information on diagnostic accuracy.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION

The number of red flags endorsed in guidelines to screen for fracture has risen over time; most guidelines do not endorse the same set of red flags and most recommendations are not supported by research or accompanied by diagnostic accuracy data.

Adherence to Back Pain Clinical Practice Guidelines by Brazilian Physical Therapists: A Cross-sectional Study

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional observational study.

OBJECTIVES

(i) to investigate whether Brazilian physical therapists make clinical decisions for patients with low back pain based upon clinical practice guidelines and (ii) to determine whether the physical therapists are able to recognize differential diagnoses of low back pain associated with red or yellow flags.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Early adherence to clinical practice guidelines may accelerate recovery and reduce the costs associated with low back pain. It is unknown whether Brazilian physical therapists follow clinical practice guidelines to make their clinical decisions in the treatment of patients with low back pain.

METHODS

The sample consisted of physical therapists from two Brazilian physical therapy associations. The data were collected via electronic survey and face-to-face interviews. The survey was composed of six hypothetical clinical cases of low back pain, which served as a basis to evaluate clinical decisions and adherence to clinical practice guidelines for low back pain. The study participants had 27 possible answers for each clinical case and could choose up to five answers. The results were analyzed in three ways: full adherence, partial adherence, or no adherence to the recommendations from clinical practice guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 530 physical therapists were invited and 189 participated in the study (response rate = 35.6%). Full adherence to the guidelines was low for all six cases (rates ranging from 5%-24%). Partial adherence to the guidelines was higher when compared with full adherence (rates ranging from 32%-75%). The participants were more likely to identify differential diagnoses associated with yellow flags than with red flags.

CONCLUSION

Brazilian physical therapists are not using the best available evidence in their clinical decision making for patients with low back pain. Wider dissemination of clinical practice guidelines should be urgently undertaken.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Therapeutic efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy versus exercise therapy in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a prospective study

Therapy for chronic, nonspecific low back pain is mainly conservative: medication and/or exercise.　Pharmacotherapy, however, has side effects, and the quantities of concomitant drugs in older persons require attention.　Although exercise promises improved function, its use to alleviate pain is controversial.　Thus, we compared the efficacy of pharmacotherapy versus exercise for treating chronic nonspecific low back pain.　The pharmacotherapy group (n=18: 8 men, 10 women) were prescribed celecoxib monotherapy.　The exercise group (n=22: 10 men, 12 women) undertook stretching exercises.　Because of drop-outs, the NSAID group (n=15: 7 men, 8 women) and the exercise group (n =18: 8 men, 10 women) were finally analyzed.　We applied a visual analog scale, Roland-Morris disability scores, and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey.　We used a paired t-test for within-group analyses and an unpaired t-test for between-group analyses.　Pain relief was achieved after 3 months of pharmacotherapy or exercise.　Quality of life improved only in the exercise group.　Recovery outcomes for the two groups were not significantly different.　Efficacy of exercise therapy for strictly defined low back pain was almost equivalent to that of pharmacotherapy and provided better quality of life.

Developing a practice guideline for the occupational health services by using a community of practice approach: a process evaluation of the development process

Background

One way to facilitate the translation of research into the occupational health service practice is through clinical practice guidelines. To increase the implementability of guidelines it is important to include the end-users in the development, for example by a community of practice approach. This paper describes the development of an occupational health practice guideline aimed at the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP) by using a community of practice approach. The paper also includes a process evaluation of the development providing insight into the feasibility of the process.

Methods

A multidisciplinary community of practice group (n = 16) consisting of occupational nurses, occupational physicians, ergonomists/physical therapists, health and safety engineers, health educators, psychologists and researchers from different types of occupational health services and geographical regions within Sweden met eleven times (June 2012–December 2013) to develop the practice guideline following recommendations of guideline development handbooks. Process-outcomes recruitment, reach, context, satisfaction, feasibility and fidelity were assessed by questionnaire, observations and administrative data.

Results

Group members attended on average 7.5 out of 11 meetings. Half experienced support from their workplace for their involvement. Feasibility was rated as good, except for time-scheduling. Most group members were satisfied with the structure of the process (e.g. presentations, multidisciplinary group). Fidelity was rated as fairly high.

Conclusions

The described development process is a feasible process for guideline development. For future guideline development expectations of the work involved should be more clearly communicated, as well as the purpose and tasks of the CoP-group. Moreover, possibilities to improve support from managers and colleagues should be explored. This paper has important implications for future guideline development; it provides valuable information on how practitioners can be included in the development process, with the aim of increasing the implementability of the developed guidelines.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Graded Activity and Graded Exposure for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of graded activity (GA) or graded exposure (GEXP) for chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP).

METHODS

A literature search of multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and PsychINFO) was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs). Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for relevant outcome measures (pain intensity, disability, quality of life, and catastrophizing).

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Only nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. GA was significantly more effective than the control group (CG) for improvements in disability in the short term (three studies: n = 254, SMD = -0.3, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.05, P = 0.02) and long term (two studies: n = 238, SMD = -0.53, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.27, P < 0.0001). GA was significantly less effective than GEXP for the improvement of disability in the short term (two studies: n = 105, SMD = 0.39, 95% CI 0.003-0.78, P = 0.048). GA was also significantly less effective than GEXP at improving catastrophizing in the short term (two studies: n = 105, SMD = 0.48, 95% CI 0.09-0.87, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence has been found to show that GA significantly reduces disability in the short and long term when compared with the CG in CNSLBP. There is moderate evidence that GEXP more effectively decreases catastrophizing than GA in the short term. No difference was found between GA and other exercise for any variable.

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

OBJECTIVES

No study has described low back pain (LBP) treatment choices among physical therapists (PTs) in the United States (US) in the new millennium. Intervention for LBP in the new millennium is largely based on evidence-based practice (EBP) recommendations. The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) to describe PTs' preferences for treating acute and subacute non-specific LBP in Florida and to compare these preferences to EBP guideline recommendations and (b) to compare outpatient musculoskeletal therapist (MSPT) choices for management of acute and subacute LBP to non-outpatient musculoskeletal therapist (NMSPT) choices.

METHODS

The data were collected with an electronic survey. Study participants selected treatment choices for acute and subacute LBP clinical vignettes.

RESULTS

A total of 327 PTs participated in the study, of which 128 worked in outpatient musculoskeletal settings. The most common treatment choices for acute and subacute LBP were home exercise program, exercise in the clinic, back care education, joint mobilization, ice/heat, and interferential current. The EBP adherence rate for acute LBP was 30% for MSPTs and 15% for NMSPTs. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of MSPTs and 30% of NMSPTs adhered to EBP guidelines for subacute LBP.

DISCUSSION

The EBP adherence rate for management of acute and subacute LBP was low. Spinal manipulation was underutilized for management of acute LBP, and passive therapeutic procedures were overutilized for subacute LBP. Physical Therapy schools and professional associations should reemphasize the benefits of spinal manipulation to manage non-specific acute LBP and active interventional procedures to manage subacute LBP.

Management of LBP at primary care level in South Africa: up to standards?

BACKGROUND

Primary Health Care (PHC) is well suited for management of low back pain (LBP). Prevalence of (chronic) LBP is suspected to be high among visitors of the South African primary care centers, but currently no information exists on prevalence or guideline adherence.

OBJECTIVES

To establish if treatment received for LBP in public PHC in the Cape Town area compares with international evidence based guidelines.

METHODS

Cluster randomization determined the 8 community health centres where the study took place. A measurement tool was developed and validated for this population. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression analytical techniques were applied.

RESULTS

489 participants (mean age: 44.8) were included in this study. Lifetime prevalence was 73.2% and 26.3% suffered from chronic low back pain (CLBP) . Pain medication was the only form of treatment received by 90% of the sample. Interventions received seemed to be unrelated to type of LBP (acute, sub acute and chronic). Referral to physiotherapy, education and advice to stay active were rarely done. Participants expressed low satisfaction with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Current management of LBP at PHC level appears to be ineffective and not conform guidelines. Further South African research should focus on barriers as well as measures to be taken for implementation of LBP guidelines.

Interventions focusing on psychosocial risk factors for patients with non-chronic low back pain in primary care--a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is a problem that is frequently encountered in primary care, and current guidelines encourage care providers to take into account psychosocial risk factors in order to avoid transition from acute to chronic LBP.

OBJECTIVE

To review the effectiveness of interventions focusing on psychosocial risk factors for patients with non-chronic LBP in primary care.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for controlled trials focusing on psychosocial factors in adult patients with non-chronic, non-specific LBP in primary care by exploring Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Francis, Web of Sciences and The Cochrane Library. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed before analysing their findings.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were selected, seven being considered as having a low risk of bias. Information strategies were assessed by eight trials, with high-quality evidence of no effectiveness for pain, function, work issues and health care use, low-quality evidence of no effectiveness for self-rated overall improvement, satisfaction and pain beliefs and lack of evidence in terms of quality of life. Cognitive behavioural therapy was assessed by three trials, with very low-quality evidence of moderate effectiveness for pain, function, quality of life, work issues and health care use. There was lack of evidence concerning the effectiveness of individual and group education intervention or work coordination.

CONCLUSION

Among the wide range of psychosocial risk factors, research has focused mainly on pain beliefs and coping skills, with disappointing results. Extended theoretical models integrating several psychosocial factors and multicomponent interventions are probably required to meet the challenge of LBP.

Improving the reliability of clinical practice guideline appraisals: effects of the Korean AGREE II scoring guide

The Korean translated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (Korean AGREE II) instrument was distributed into Korean medical societies in 2011. However, inter-rater disagreement issues still exist. The Korean AGREE II scoring guide was therefore developed to reduce inter-rater differences. This study examines the effects of the Korean AGREE II scoring guide to reduce inter-rater differences. Appraisers were randomly assigned to two groups (Scoring Guide group and Non-Scoring Guide group). The Korean AGREE II instrument was provided to both groups. However, the scoring guide was offered to Scoring Guide group only. Total 14 appraisers were participated and each guideline was assessed by 8 appraisers. To evaluate the reliability of the Korean AGREE II scoring guide, correlation of scores among appraisers and domain-specific intra-class correlation (ICC) were compared. Most scores of two groups were comparable. Scoring Guide group showed higher reliability at all guidelines. They showed higher correlation among appraisers and higher ICC values at almost all domains. The scoring guide reduces the inter-rater disagreement and improves the overall reliability of the Korean-AGREE II instrument.

Topics and trends in research on non-clinical interventions aimed at preventing prolonged work disability in workers compensated for work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs): a systematic, comprehensive literature review

PURPOSE

This study sought to provide an overview of the main topics and trends in contemporary research on successful non-clinical interventions for preventing prolonged work disability in workers compensated for work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs).

METHODS

A systematic electronic search (English and French) was performed in ten scientific databases using keywords and descriptors. After screening the identified titles and abstracts using specific sets of criteria, categorical and thematic analyses were performed on the retained articles.

RESULTS

Five main topics appear to dominate the research: (1) risk factors and determinants; (2) effectiveness of interventions (programmes, specific components, strategies and policies); (3) viewpoints, experiences and perceptions of specific actors involved in the intervention process; (4) compensation issues; and (5) measurement issues. A currently widespread trend is early screening to identify risks factors for appropriate intervention and multidisciplinary, multimodal approaches. Morover, workplace-related psychosocial and ergonomic factors are considered vital to the success and sustainability of return-to-work (RTW) interventions. Finally, involving workplace actors, and more specifically, affected workers, in the RTW process appears to be a powerful force in improving the chances of moving workers away from disabled status.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this literature review provide with information about the main topics and trends in research on rehabilitation interventions, revealing some successful modalities of intervention aimed at preventing prolonged work disability.

IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION

Successful intervention for preventing prolonged work disability in workers compensated for WRMSDs address workplace issues: physical and psychosocial demands at work, ability of the workers to fill these demands, work organization and support of the worker, and worker' beliefs and attitudes related to work. Successful intervention promotes collaboration, coordination between all actors and stakeholders involved in the process of rehabilitation. Strategies able to mobilize the employees, employers, insurers and health care providers are still needed to be implemented.

Adapting low back pain guidelines within a multidisciplinary context: a process evaluation

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The Alberta Ambassador Program (AAP) adapted seven clinical practice guidelines on low back pain (LBP) into a single guideline spanning the continuum of care from prevention and diagnosis through to treatment. The Ambassador adaptation process was evaluated to 1 Identify the major challenges encountered and successful strategies utilized; 2 Assess strengths and weaknesses by benchmarking it with the ADAPTE framework; and 3 Identify opportunities for improvement.

METHOD

External consultants reviewed the Ambassador and ADAPTE materials and conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 29 participants from the AAP committees. All participants were asked about the major challenges encountered and potential areas for improvement.

RESULTS

The response rate was 83% (29/35). There was strong consensus that the Ambassador guideline adaptation process was sound and rigorous all respondents indicated willingness to participate in further iterations of the Program. Key elements of success were identified. The main steps and sequence of the process were closely aligned with the ADAPTE framework, although the AAP incorporated additional enhancements which augmented the process. The main divergences between the two frameworks centred on the organizational structure and the methods used to overcome methodological difficulties.

CONCLUSION

The AAP successfully utilized existing stakeholder interest to create an overarching guideline for managing LBP across multiple primary care disciplines. The study highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of the Program, and identified practical strategies for improvement. Evaluating guideline adaptation processes is pivotal to ensuring that they continue to be an efficient, rigorous and practicable option for producing contextualized, clinically relevant guidelines.

Guidelines on low back pain disability: interprofessional comparison of use between general practitioners, occupational therapists, and physiotherapists

STUDY DESIGN

Individual semistructured qualitative interviews.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate barriers to use of management recommendations, aimed at preventing low back pain (LBP) disability, with general practitioners (GPs), occupational therapists (OTs), and physiotherapists (PTs) working in Quebec (Canada), and identify areas of convergence and divergence between health professions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Studies have demonstrated inadequacies of practices of clinicians with regard to LBP management and prevention of persistent disability. Barriers to use of evidence by clinicians should be evaluated to understand these inadequacies and develop implementation strategies.

METHODS

Sixteen PTs, 8 OTs, and 8 GPs were recruited with different levels of experience and practice location (urban or rural). They were asked to follow management recommendations (Clinic on Low-back Pain in Interdisciplinary Practice [CLIP] guidelines), with a minimum of 2 patients. Individual semistructured interviews were used to identify barriers to use of management recommendations aimed at preventing LBP disability. Barriers between health professions were compared.

RESULTS

Barriers to use were lesser for OTs and greater for GPs, with divergences among PTs. OTs agreed with the guidelines, found them compatible with their current practice, and thought that using them would prevent persistent disability. GPs and PTs thought that the guidelines did not provide enough information on the pathophysiological management of LBP. GPs thought that it would be difficult to implement the guidelines in everyday practice. All 3 groups thought that management recommendations could conflict with patient expectations.

CONCLUSION

To address identified barriers, a process of care is proposed by fitting tasks to the most compatible providers. The task of GPs could focus on pain management through medication, red flag screening, encouragement to stay active, and reassurance. The tasks of PTs could center on pain management, general exercise, and encouragement to stay active. The tasks of OTs could focus on disability prognosis, yellow flags management, and return to activity parameters. The efficacy of this process of care to prevent persistent LBP disability should be assessed in a trial.

Change in psychosocial distress associated with pain and functional status outcomes in patients with lumbar impairments referred to physical therapy services

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort design.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim was to examine the association between changes in psychosocial distress (PD), and functional status (FS) and pain intensity at discharge from physical therapy.

BACKGROUND

Patients with lumbar impairments seeking physical therapy commonly demonstrate elevated PD. However, it is not clear if PD changes that occur during physical therapy management are associated with improved clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data from adults (n = 692) with lumbar impairment were analyzed. Patients were screened using the Symptom Checklist Back Pain Prediction Model questionnaire (SCL BPPM) to identify patients at intake and discharge into 3 levels of risk for persistent disability (high, intermediate, or low). SCL BPPM classifications allowed for 5 patterns of change in PD during therapy (decreased, stable low, stable intermediate, stable high, or increased). Associations between PD change patterns and discharge FS and pain intensity were assessed using multivariable linear regression models, controlling for selected risk-adjustment variables.

RESULTS

Proportions of patients classified by patterns of PD change for decreased, stable low, stable intermediate, stable high, and increased were 0.34, 0.52, 0.05, 0.06, and 0.03, respectively. Compared to the decreased PD group, (1) increased, stable high, and stable intermediate PD patterns were associated with worse discharge FS scores (-7.9 [95% CI: -13.5, -2.21], -10.9 [95% CI: -15.25, -6.49], and -8.9 [95% CI: -13.65, -4.21] units, respectively), and (2) stable high and stable intermediate PD patterns were associated with higher pain intensity (2.59 [95% CI: 1.81, 3.56] and 2.14 [95% CI: 1.25, 3.04] units, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower FS and higher pain intensity outcomes were associated in similar but not identical patterns with patients whose SCL BPPM classification of PD increased, or remained at high or intermediate levels during physical therapy. Serial assessments of change in PD during rehabilitation are recommended as a possible treatment-monitoring tool.

Management of low back pain by physical therapists in quebec: how are we doing?

PURPOSE

In this study, we characterized physiotherapists' attitudes and beliefs about the bio-psychosocial problem of low back pain (LBP), their use of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and the extent to which their advice and treatment is in line with best-evidence CPGs.

METHODS

One hundred eight physiotherapists completed an online survey that included questionnaires exploring the strength of physiotherapists' biomedical and bio-psychosocial orientations toward the management of LBP: the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists and the Attitudes to Back Pain Scale for musculoskeletal practitioners. In addition, participants responded to questions about treatment recommendations for patients in two vignettes.

RESULTS

Only 12% of respondents were aware of CPGs. Physiotherapists with a stronger biomedical orientation scored the severity of spinal pathology higher in the patient vignettes. A stronger biomedical orientation was also associated with disagreement with recommendations to return to usual activity or work.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest limited awareness by physiotherapists of best-evidence CPGs and contemporary understandings of LBP that support early activation and self-management. Research to better understand and facilitate the implementation of best-evidence professional education and clinical practice is an urgent priority.

How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature

Background

Communities of Practice (CoPs) are promoted in the healthcare sector as a means of generating and sharing knowledge and improving organisational performance. However CoPs vary considerably in the way they are structured and operate in the sector. If CoPs are to be cultivated to benefit healthcare organisations, there is a need to examine and understand their application to date. To this end, a systematic review of the literature on CoPs was conducted, to examine how and why CoPs have been established and whether they have been shown to improve healthcare practice.

Methods

Peer-reviewed empirical research papers on CoPs in the healthcare sector were identified by searching electronic health-databases. Information on the purpose of establishing CoPs, their composition, methods by which members communicate and share information or knowledge, and research methods used to examine effectiveness was extracted and reviewed. Also examined was evidence of whether or not CoPs led to a change in healthcare practice.

Results

Thirty-one primary research papers and two systematic reviews were identified and reviewed in detail. There was a trend from descriptive to evaluative research. The focus of CoPs in earlier publications was on learning and exchanging information and knowledge, whereas in more recently published research, CoPs were used more as a tool to improve clinical practice and to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practice. Means by which members communicated with each other varied, but in none of the primary research studies was the method of communication examined in terms of the CoP achieving its objectives. Researchers are increasing their efforts to assess the effectiveness of CoPs in healthcare, however the interventions have been complex and multifaceted, making it difficult to directly attribute the change to the CoP.

Conclusions

In keeping with Wenger and colleagues' description, CoPs in the healthcare sector vary in form and purpose. While researchers are increasing their efforts to examine the impact of CoPs in healthcare, cultivating CoPs to improve healthcare performance requires a greater understanding of how to establish and support CoPs to maximise their potential to improve healthcare.

An updated overview of clinical guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain in primary care

The aim of this study was to present and compare the content of (inter)national clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain. To rationalise the management of low back pain, evidence-based clinical guidelines have been issued in many countries. Given that the available scientific evidence is the same, irrespective of the country, one would expect these guidelines to include more or less similar recommendations regarding diagnosis and treatment. We updated a previous review that included clinical guidelines published up to and including the year 2000. Guidelines were included that met the following criteria: the target group consisted mainly of primary health care professionals, and the guideline was published in English, German, Finnish, Spanish, Norwegian, or Dutch. Only one guideline per country was included: the one most recently published. This updated review includes national clinical guidelines from 13 countries and 2 international clinical guidelines from Europe published from 2000 until 2008. The content of the guidelines appeared to be quite similar regarding the diagnostic classification (diagnostic triage) and the use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Consistent features for acute low back pain were the early and gradual activation of patients, the discouragement of prescribed bed rest and the recognition of psychosocial factors as risk factors for chronicity. For chronic low back pain, consistent features included supervised exercises, cognitive behavioural therapy and multidisciplinary treatment. However, there are some discrepancies for recommendations regarding spinal manipulation and drug treatment for acute and chronic low back pain. The comparison of international clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain showed that diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations are generally similar. There are also some differences which may be due to a lack of strong evidence regarding these topics or due to differences in local health care systems. The implementation of these clinical guidelines remains a challenge for clinical practice and research.

Back pain and work

Low back pain is a leading cause of work disability and constitutes a significant socioeconomic burden worldwide. In an attempt to stem the serious consequences of long-term disability, a new approach for back pain in primary care is being disseminated. It mainly focusses on identifying the relationship between pain/disability and work, recognising important workplace and psychosocial issues, providing patients reassuring messages about activity, facilitating the return to work process and engaging other resources as needed. This article examines current expert opinion and available evidence on work issues for effective back pain management. In general, return to work, if safe, is beneficial for recovery and well-being. Some cases might require physicians to actively communicate with employers, claims managers and others in order to achieve safe and sustained return to work, while in most instances, simple efforts to identify and discuss work issues directly with the patient can lead to better work outcomes.

Physiotherapists and use of low back pain guidelines: a qualitative study of the barriers and facilitators

INTRODUCTION

A new set of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of low back pain (LBP) and prevention of persistent disability entitled "Clinic on Low back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice" (CLIP) was developed in the province of Quebec, Canada. The literature shows that simply disseminating CPGs does not necessarily lead to their adoption by clinicians. To improve adherence to CPGs among healthcare professionals, the literature suggests that there is a need to identify and address the factors impeding or facilitating their use. The aim of this study was therefore to identify the barriers to and facilitators of CLIP CPG use, as perceived by physiotherapists (PTs).

METHODS

A descriptive study using a qualitative method was conducted with a sample of 16 PTs from a variety of professional backgrounds. Each participant used the CPGs over a 6-week period with two patients suffering from LBP, and then participated in a semi-structured interview in which he or she was asked to identify the barriers and facilitators experienced.

RESULTS

The participating PTs identified many barriers and facilitators pertaining to the guidelines themselves, the users and the environment. Four key nodes emerged from these barriers and facilitators during data analysis. It appears that the clinicians' understanding of the CPGs, the level of compatibility between their practices and the CLIP CPG recommendations, the level of CPG relevance as perceived by the clinicians, and their level of agreement with the CPGs, all affected their use of the guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to increase CLIP CPG use, the implementation strategy to be developed should take into account the barriers and facilitators that were identified in this study.

An interdisciplinary guideline development process: the Clinic on Low-back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice (CLIP) low-back pain guidelines

Background

Evaluation of low-back pain guidelines using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria has shown weaknesses, particularly in stakeholder involvement and applicability of recommendations. The objectives of this project were to: 1) develop a primary care interdisciplinary clinical practice guideline aimed at preventing prolonged disability from low-back pain, using a community of practice approach, and 2) assess the participants' impressions with the process, and evaluate the relationship between participant characteristics and their participation.

Methods

Ten stakeholder representatives recruited 136 clinicians to participate in this community of practice. Clinicians were drawn from the following professions: physiotherapists (46%), occupational therapists (37%), and family physicians (17%). Using previously published guidelines, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, a first draft of the guidelines was presented to the community of practice. Four communication tools were provided for discussion and exchanges with experts: a web-based discussion forum, an anonymous comment form, meetings, and a symposium. Participants were prompted for comments on interpretation, clarity, and applicability of the recommendations. Clinical management recommendations were revised following these exchanges. At the end of the project, a questionnaire was sent to the participants to assess satisfaction towards the guidelines and the development process.

Results

Twelve clinical management recommendations on management of low-back pain and persistent disability were initially developed. These were discussed through 188 comments posted on the discussion forum and 103 commentary forms submitted. All recommendations were modified following input of the participants. A clinical algorithm summarizing the guidelines was also developed. A response rate of 75% was obtained for the satisfaction questionnaire. The majority of respondents appreciated the development process and agreed with the guideline content. Most participants thought recommendations improved between versions, and that participant comments contributed to this improvement. All stakeholders officially endorsed the guidelines.

Conclusion

The community of practice approach was a successful method to develop guidelines on low-back pain, with participants providing information to improve guideline recommendations. The information technology infrastructure that was developed remains for continuous interdisciplinary exchanges and updating of the guidelines.