Invasive Treatments for Low Back Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Low Back Disorders guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for invasive treatments used to manage low back disorders. METHODS: Comprehensive systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking and often relied on analogy to other disorders for which evidence exists. A total of 47 high-quality and 321 moderate-quality trials were identified for invasive management of low back disorders. RESULTS: Guidance has been developed for the invasive management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 49 specific recommendations. CONCLUSION: Quality evidence should guide invasive treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Non-Invasive and Minimally Invasive Management of Low Back Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's (ACOEM) Low Back Disorders Guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for non-invasive and minimally invasive management of low back disorders. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking. A total of 70 high-quality and 564 moderate-quality trials were identified for non-invasive low back disorders. Detailed algorithms were developed. RESULTS: Guidance has been developed for the management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 121 specific recommendations. CONCLUSION: Quality evidence should guide treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Obesity in the Workplace: Impact, Outcomes, and Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a comprehensive literature review to develop recommendations for managing obesity among workers to improve health outcomes and to explore the impact of obesity on health costs to determine whether a case can be made for surgical interventions and insurance coverage. METHODS: We searched PubMed from 2011 to 2016, and CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials for interventions addressing obesity in the workplace. RESULTS: A total of 1419 articles were screened, resulting in 275 articles being included. Several areas were identified that require more research and investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of both lifestyle modification and bariatric surgery to assist appropriate patients in losing weight.

ACOEM practice guidelines: opioids for treatment of acute, subacute, chronic, and postoperative pain.

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's guidelines have been updated to develop more detailed guidance for treatment of acute, subacute, chronic, and postoperative pain with opioids. METHODS: Literature searches were performed using PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Review, and Google Scholar without publication date limits. Of 264,617 articles' titles screened and abstracts reviewed, 263 articles met inclusion criteria. Of these, a total of 157 were of high and moderate quality addressing pain treatment. Comprehensive literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel to develop evidence-based guidance. RECOMMENDATIONS: No quality evidence directly supports histories, physical examinations, and opioid treatment agreements, although they are thought to be important. No quality trials were identified showing superiority of opioids, compared with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory and other medications for treatment of chronic, noncancer pain. The use of opioid-sparing treatments associated with lower doses of postoperative opioids is also associated with better long-term functional outcomes. Selective use of opioids is recommended for patients with acute and postoperative pain. Consensus recommendations also include consideration of carefully conducted trials of chronic opioid treatment for highly select patients with subacute and chronic pain and to maintenance opioid prescriptions only if documented objective functional gain(s) results. A strong and reproducible dose-response relationship identifies a recommended morphine equivalent dose limit of no more than 50 mg/day. Higher doses should be prescribed only with documented commensurately greater functional benefit(s), comprehensive monitoring for adverse effects, informed consent, and careful consideration of risk versus benefit of such treatment. Chronic opioid use should be accompanied by informed consent, a treatment agreement, tracking of functional benefits, drug screening, and attempts at tapering.

ACOEM practice guidelines: opioids and safety-sensitive work.

OBJECTIVE: ACOEM has updated the treatment guidelines concerning opioids. This report highlights the safety-sensitive work recommendation that has been developed. METHODS: Comprehensive literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel to develop evidence-based guidance. A total of 12 moderate-quality studies were identified to address motor vehicle crash risk, and none regarding other work among opioid-using patients. RESULTS: Acute or chronic opioid use is not recommended for patients who perform safety-sensitive jobs. These jobs include operating motor vehicles, other modes of transportation, forklift driving, overhead crane operation, heavy equipment operation and tasks involving high levels of cognitive function and judgment. CONCLUSION: Quality evidence consistently demonstrates increased risk of vehicle crashes and is recommended as the surrogate for other safety-sensitive work tasks.

Transparency matters: Kaiser Permanente's National Guideline Program methodological processes.

INTRODUCTION: The practice-guideline process of collecting, critically appraising, and synthesizing available evidence, then developing expert panel recommendations based on appraised evidence, makes it possible to provide high-quality care for patients. Unwanted variability in the quality and rigor of evidence summaries and Clinical Practice Guidelines has been a long-standing challenge for clinicians seeking evidence-based guidance to support patient care decisions. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of stakeholders, with representation from all eight Kaiser Permanente Regions, is responsible for creating National Guidelines. Conducting high-quality systematic reviews and creating clinical guidelines are time-, labor-, and resource-intensive processes, which raises challenges for an organization striving to balance rigor with efficiency. For these reasons, the National Guideline Program elected to allow for the identification, assessment, and possible adoption of existing evidence-based guidelines and systematic reviews using the ADAPTE; Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation; Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR); and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) frameworks. If no acceptable external guidelines are identified, the Guideline Development Team then systematically searches for relevant high-quality systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original studies. Existing systematic reviews are assessed for quality using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (the AMSTAR systematic review checklist). STUDY APPRAISAL: Following the screening and selection process, the included studies (the "body of evidence") are critically appraised for quality, using the GRADE methodology, which focuses on four key factors that must be considered when assigning strength to a recommendation: balance between desirable and undesirable effects, quality of evidence, values and preferences, and cost. The evidence is then used to create preliminary clinical recommendations. The strength of these recommendations is graded to reflect the extent to which a guideline panel is confident that the desirable effects of an intervention outweigh undesirable effects (or vice versa) across the range of patients for whom the recommendation is intended. DISSEMINATION: The Care Management Institute disseminates all KP national guidelines to its eight Regions via postings on its Clinical Library Intranet site, a Web-based internal information resource.

Methodology to update the practice recommendations in the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Occupational Medicine Practice Guidelines, second edition.

OBJECTIVE: To ensure that revisions to the second edition of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) guidelines are as valid and useful as possible. METHODS: The ACOEM Guideline Methodology Committee searched and synthesized the evidence-based medicine literature on systematic review and guideline development. The resulting process and tools were tested during guideline revision, and changes were made to the tools and process. RESULTS: The methodology specifies problem formulation, literature search methods, screening of studies, quality rating, summarization of the body of literature, recommendation drafting and rating, "first principles" of medical logic and ethics, training, expert panel review, stakeholder input, external review, pilot testing and Board of Directors approval. CONCLUSIONS: The process and tools developed are consistent with international guideline assessment criteria, robust, and internally and externally valid.

Evidence-based clinical occupational medicine: updating the ACOEM occupational medicine practice guidelines.

In this article, we review the evolution and application of evidence based medicine and the results of the literature reviews and syntheses incorporated in the second edition of the guidelines. Our intent is to disseminate this information to practitioners treating injured workers and those managing and financing such care and disability management. Use of proven diagnostic, causality, testing,and treatment methods should markedly improve the quality of occupational medical care and make that care more cost effective.