General practitioners' decision-making process to prescribe pain medicines for low back pain: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Pain medicines are widely prescribed by general practitioners (GPs) when managing people with low back pain (LBP), but little is known about what drives decisions to prescribe these medicines. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate what influences GPs' decision to prescribe pain medicines for LBP. DESIGN: Qualitative study with in-depth interviews. SETTING: Australian primary care. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 25 GPs practising in Australia experienced in managing LBP (mean (SD) age 53.4 (9.1) years, mean (SD) years of experience: 24.6 (9.3), 36% female). GPs were provided three vignettes describing common LBP presentations (acute exacerbation of chronic LBP, subacute sciatica and chronic LBP) and were asked to think aloud how they would manage the cases described in the vignettes. DATA ANALYSIS: We summarised GP's choices of pain medicines for each vignette using content analysis and used framework analysis to investigate factors that affected GP's decision-making. RESULTS: GPs more commonly prescribed opioid analgesics. Anticonvulsants and antidepressants were also commonly prescribed depending on the presentation described in the vignette. GP participants made decisions about what pain medicines to prescribe for LBP largely based on previous experiences, including their own personal experiences of LBP, rather than guidelines. The choice of pain medicine was influenced by a range of clinical factors, more commonly the patient's pathoanatomical diagnosis. While many adhered to principles of judicious use of pain medicines, polypharmacy scenarios were also common. Concerns about drug-seeking behaviour, adverse effects, stigma around opioid analgesics and pressure from regulators also shaped their decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several aspects of decision-making that help explain the current profile of pain medicines prescribed for LBP by GPs. Themes identified by our study could inform future implementation strategies to improve the quality use of medicines for LBP.

An 11-year longitudinal analysis of refracture rates and public hospital service utilisation in Australia's most populous state.

This detailed 11-year longitudinal analysis calculated the public health cost of managing refractures in people aged ≥ 50 years in Australia's most populous state. It provides current and projected statewide health system costs associated with managing osteoporosis and provides a foundation to evaluate a novel statewide model of fracture prevention. PURPOSE: The purpose of this longitudinal analysis was to calculate current and projected refracture rates and associated public hospital utilisation and costs in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. These results will be used to inform scaled implementation and evaluation of a statewide Osteoporotic Refracture Prevention (ORP) model of care. METHODS: Linked administrative data (inpatient admissions, outpatient attendances, Emergency Department presentations, deaths, cost) were used to calculate annual refracture rates and refracture-related service utilisation between 2007 and 2018 and healthcare costs between 2008 and 2019. Projections for the next decade were made using 'business-as-usual' modelling. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2018, 388,743 people aged ≥ 50 years experienced an index fracture and 81,601 had a refracture. Refracture was more common in older people (rising from a cumulative refracture rate at 5 years of 14% in those aged 50-64 years, to 44% in those aged > 90 years), women with a major index fracture (5-year cumulative refracture rate of 26% in females, compared to 19% for males) or minimal trauma index fracture and those with an osteoporosis diagnosis (5-year cumulative refracture rate of 36% and 22%, respectively in those with and without an osteoporosis diagnosis). Refractures increased from 8774 in 2008 to 14,323 in 2018. The annual cost of refracture to NSW Health increased from AU$130 million in 2009 to AU$194 million in 2019. It is projected that, over the next decade, if nothing changes, 292,537 refracture-related hospital admissions and Emergency Department presentations and 570,000 outpatient attendances will occur, at an estimated total cost to NSW Health of AU$2.4 billion. CONCLUSION: This analysis provides a detailed picture of refractures and associated projected service utilisation and costs over the next decade in Australia's most populous state. Understanding the burden of refracture provides a foundation for evaluation of a novel statewide ORP model of care to prevent refractures in people aged ≥ 50 years.

Feasibility of delivering and evaluating stratified care integrated with telehealth ('Rapid Stratified Telehealth') for patients with low back pain: protocol for a feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Long waiting time is an important barrier to accessing recommended care for low back pain (LBP) in Australia's public health system. This study describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) that aims to establish the feasibility of delivering and evaluating stratified care integrated with telehealth ('Rapid Stratified Telehealth'), which aims to reduce waiting times for LBP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a single-centre feasibility and pilot RCT with nested qualitative interviews. Sixty participants with LBP newly referred to a hospital outpatient clinic will be randomised to receive Rapid Stratified Telehealth or usual care. Rapid Stratified Telehealth involves matching the mode and type of care to participants' risk of persistent disabling pain (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool) and presence of potential radiculopathy. 'Low risk' patients are matched to one session of advice over the telephone, 'medium risk' to telehealth physiotherapy plus App-based exercises, 'high risk' to telehealth physiotherapy, App-based exercises, and an online pain education programme, and 'potential radiculopathy' fast tracked to usual in-person care. Primary outcomes include the feasibility of delivering Rapid Stratified Telehealth (ie, acceptability assessed through interviews with clinicians and patients, intervention fidelity, appointment duration, App useability and online pain education programme usage) and evaluating Rapid Stratified Telehealth in a future trial (ie, recruitment rates, consent rates, lost to follow-up and missing data). Secondary outcomes include waiting times, number of appointments, intervention and healthcare costs, clinical outcomes (pain, function, quality of life, satisfaction), healthcare use and adverse events (AEs). Quantitative analyses will be descriptive and inform a future adequately-powered RCT. Interview data will be analysed using thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received approval from the Ethics Review Committee (RPAH Zone: X21-0221). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001104842.

Implementing models of care for musculoskeletal conditions in health systems to support value-based care.

Models of Care (MoCs), and their local Models of Service Delivery, for people with musculoskeletal conditions are becoming an acceptable way of supporting effective implementation of value-based care. MoCs can support the quadruple aim of value-based care through providing people with musculoskeletal disease improved access to health services, better health outcomes and satisfactory experience of their healthcare; ensure the health professionals involved are experiencing satisfaction in delivering such care and health system resources are better utilised. Implementation of MoCs is relevant at the levels of clinical practice (micro), service delivery organisations (meso) and health system (macro) levels. The development, implementation and evaluation of MoCs has evolved over the last decade to more purposively engage people with lived experience of their condition, to operationalise the Chronic Care Model and to employ innovative solutions. This paper explores how MoCs have evolved and are supporting the delivery of value-based care in health systems.