Pharmacological treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological interventions are the most used treatment for low back pain (LBP). Use of evidence from systematic reviews of the effects of pharmacological interventions for LBP published in the Cochrane Library, is limited by lack of a comprehensive overview. OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of systemic pharmacological interventions for adults with non-specific LBP. METHODS: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched from inception to 3 June 2021, to identify reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated systemic pharmacological interventions for adults with non-specific LBP. Two authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the reviews and certainty of the evidence using the AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools. The review focused on placebo comparisons and the main outcomes were pain intensity, function, and safety. MAIN RESULTS: Seven Cochrane Reviews that included 103 studies (22,238 participants) were included. There is high confidence in the findings of five reviews, moderate confidence in one, and low confidence in the findings of another. The reviews reported data on six medicines or medicine classes: paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, benzodiazepines, opioids, and antidepressants. Three reviews included participants with acute or sub-acute LBP and five reviews included participants with chronic LBP. Acute LBP Paracetamol There was high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between paracetamol and placebo for reducing pain intensity (MD 0.49 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -1.99 to 2.97), reducing disability (MD 0.05 on a 0 to 24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -0.50 to 0.60), and increasing the risk of adverse events (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.33). NSAIDs There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring NSAIDs compared to placebo at reducing pain intensity (MD -7.29 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -10.98 to -3.61), high-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference for reducing disability (MD -2.02 on a 0-24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -2.89 to -1.15), and very low-certainty evidence for no evidence of an increased risk of adverse events (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0. 63 to 1.18). Muscle relaxants and benzodiazepines There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring muscle relaxants compared to placebo for a higher chance of pain relief (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.76), and higher chance of improving physical function (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77), and increased risk of adverse events (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1. 14 to 1.98). Opioids None of the included Cochrane Reviews aimed to identify evidence for acute LBP. Antidepressants No evidence was identified by the included reviews for acute LBP. Chronic LBP Paracetamol No evidence was identified by the included reviews for chronic LBP. NSAIDs There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring NSAIDs compared to placebo for reducing pain intensity (MD -6.97 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -10.74 to -3.19), reducing disability (MD -0.85 on a 0-24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -1.30 to -0.40), and no evidence of an increased risk of adverse events (RR 1.04, 95% CI -0.92 to 1.17), all at intermediate-term follow-up (> 3 months and ≤ 12 months postintervention). Muscle relaxants and benzodiazepines There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring benzodiazepines compared to placebo for a higher chance of pain relief (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.93), and low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between muscle relaxants and placebo in the risk of adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.57). Opioids There was high-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring tapentadol compared to placebo at reducing pain intensity (MD -8.00 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -1.22 to -0.38), moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring strong opioids for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.33), low-certainty evidence for a medium between-group difference favouring tramadol for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.44) and very low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring buprenorphine for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.26). There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring strong opioids compared to placebo for reducing disability (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.15), moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring tramadol for reducing disability (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07), and low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring buprenorphine for reducing disability (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.25). There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference for an increased risk of adverse events for opioids (all types) compared to placebo; nausea (RD 0.10, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.14), headaches (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05), constipation (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.11), and dizziness (RD 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11). Antidepressants There was low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference for antidepressants (all types) compared to placebo for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.17) and reducing disability (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.29). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no high- or moderate-certainty evidence that any investigated pharmacological intervention provided a large or medium effect on pain intensity for acute or chronic LBP compared to placebo. For acute LBP, we found moderate-certainty evidence that NSAIDs and muscle relaxants may provide a small effect on pain, and high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between paracetamol and placebo. For safety, we found very low- and high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference with NSAIDs and paracetamol compared to placebo for the risk of adverse events, and moderate-certainty evidence that muscle relaxants may increase the risk of adverse events. For chronic LBP, we found low-certainty evidence that NSAIDs and very low- to high-certainty evidence that opioids may provide a small effect on pain. For safety, we found low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between NSAIDs and placebo for the risk of adverse events, and low-certainty evidence that opioids may increase the risk of adverse events.

A Systematic Review of the Reporting Quality of Observational Studies That Use Mediation Analyses.

Mediation analysis is a common statistical method used to investigate mechanisms of health exposure and interventions. The reporting quality of mediation studies used in randomised controlled trials has been considered heterogeneous and incomplete. The reporting quality of mediation analysis in observational studies is unknown. We conducted a systematic review to describe the reporting standards of recently published observational studies that used mediation analysis to understand the mechanism of health exposures. We searched for studies published between June 2017 and June 2019 indexed in EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. Two reviewers screened articles and selected a random sample of 50 eligible studies for inclusion. We included studies across 13 healthcare fields and ten different health conditions. Most studies (74%) collected data on healthy individuals to assess their risk of developing a health disorder. Psychosocial and behavioural factors (self-control, self-esteem, alcohol consumption, pain) were the most prevalent exposures (n = 30, 60%), outcomes (n = 23, 46%) and mediators (n = 29, 58%). Most studies used a cross-sectional design (64%, n = 32), and a few studies reported sample size calculations (4%, n = 8). In 20% (n = 10) of the studies, adjustment for confounders was reported. Only 10% (n = 5) of studies reported the assumptions underlying the mediation analysis, and 14% (n = 7) of studies conducted some sensitivity analysis to assess the degree which unmeasured confounders would affect the estimate of the mediation effect. Mediation analysis is a common method used to investigate mechanisms in prevention research. The reporting of mediation analysis in observational studies is incomplete and may impact reproducibility, evidence synthesis and implementation.

Effect of Graded Sensorimotor Retraining on Pain Intensity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effects of altered neural processing, defined as altering neural networks responsible for perceptions of pain and function, on chronic pain remains unclear. Objective: To estimate the effect of a graded sensorimotor retraining intervention (RESOLVE) on pain intensity in people with chronic low back pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-group, randomized clinical trial recruited participants with chronic (>3 months) nonspecific low back pain from primary care and community settings. A total of 276 adults were randomized (in a 1:1 ratio) to the intervention or sham procedure and attention control groups delivered by clinicians at a medical research institute in Sydney, Australia. The first participant was randomized on December 10, 2015, and the last was randomized on July 25, 2019. Follow-up was completed on February 3, 2020. Interventions: Participants randomized to the intervention group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training designed to educate them about and assist them with movement and physical activity while experiencing lower back pain. Participants randomized to the control group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training that required similar time as the intervention but did not focus on education, movement, and physical activity. The control group included sham laser and shortwave diathermy applied to the back and sham noninvasive brain stimulation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was pain intensity at 18 weeks, measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]) for which the between-group minimum clinically important difference is 1.0 point. Results: Among 276 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 46 [14.3] years; 138 [50%] women), 261 (95%) completed follow-up at 18 weeks. The mean pain intensity was 5.6 at baseline and 3.1 at 18 weeks in the intervention group and 5.8 at baseline and 4.0 at 18 weeks in the control group, with an estimated between-group mean difference at 18 weeks of -1.0 point ([95% CI, -1.5 to -0.4]; P = .001), favoring the intervention group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial conducted at a single center among patients with chronic low back pain, graded sensorimotor retraining, compared with a sham procedure and attention control, significantly improved pain intensity at 18 weeks. The improvements in pain intensity were small, and further research is needed to understand the generalizability of the findings. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12615000610538.

The psychophysiology of music-based interventions and the experience of pain.

In modern times there is increasing acceptance that music-based interventions are useful aids in the clinical treatment of a range of neurological and psychiatric conditions, including helping to reduce the perception of pain. Indeed, the belief that music, whether listening or performing, can alter human pain experiences has a long history, dating back to the ancient Greeks, and its potential healing properties have long been appreciated by indigenous cultures around the world. The subjective experience of acute or chronic pain is complex, influenced by many intersecting physiological and psychological factors, and it is therefore to be expected that the impact of music therapy on the pain experience may vary from one situation to another, and from one person to another. Where pain persists and becomes chronic, aberrant central processing is a key feature associated with the ongoing pain experience. Nonetheless, beneficial effects of exposure to music on pain relief have been reported across a wide range of acute and chronic conditions, and it has been shown to be effective in neonates, children and adults. In this comprehensive review we examine the various neurochemical, physiological and psychological factors that underpin the impact of music on the pain experience, factors that potentially operate at many levels - the periphery, spinal cord, brainstem, limbic system and multiple areas of cerebral cortex. We discuss the extent to which these factors, individually or in combination, influence how music affects both the quality and intensity of pain, noting that there remains controversy about the respective roles that diverse central and peripheral processes play in this experience. Better understanding of the mechanisms that underlie music's impact on pain perception together with insights into central processing of pain should aid in developing more effective synergistic approaches when music therapy is combined with clinical treatments. The ubiquitous nature of music also facilitates application from the therapeutic environment into daily life, for ongoing individual and social benefit.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Review and Recommendations for Outcome Measures for Use With Adults and Children After Moderate-to-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) aims to select a set of measures to comprehensively predict and assess outcomes following moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) across Australia. The aim of this article was to report on the implementation and findings of an evidence-based consensus approach to develop AUS-TBI recommendations for outcome measures following adult and pediatric moderate-to-severe TBI. Following consultation with a panel of expert clinicians, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representatives and a Living Experience group, and preliminary literature searches with a broader focus, a decision was made to focus on measures of mortality, everyday functional outcomes, and quality of life. Standardized searches of bibliographic databases were conducted through March 2022. Characteristics of 75 outcome measures were extracted from 1485 primary studies. Consensus meetings among the AUS-TBI Steering Committee, an expert panel of clinicians and researchers and a group of individuals with lived experience of TBI resulted in the production of a final list of 11 core outcome measures: the Functional Independence Measure (FIM); Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E); Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (adult); mortality; EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ5D); Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI); Return to Work /Study (adult and pediatric); Functional Independence Measure for Children (WEEFIM); Glasgow Outcome Scale Modified for Children (GOS-E PEDS); Paediatric Quality of Life Scale (PEDS-QL); and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (pediatric). These 11 outcome measures will be included as common data elements in the AUS-TBI data dictionary. Review Registration PROSPERO (CRD42022290954).

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Statement of Working Principles and Rapid Review of Methods to Define Data Dictionaries for Neurological Conditions.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) aims to develop a health informatics approach to collect data predictive of outcomes for persons with moderate-severe TBI across Australia. Central to this approach is a data dictionary; however, no systematic reviews of methods to define and develop data dictionaries exist to-date. This rapid systematic review aimed to identify and characterize methods for designing data dictionaries to collect outcomes or variables in persons with neurological conditions. Database searches were conducted from inception through October 2021. Records were screened in two stages against set criteria to identify methods to define data dictionaries for neurological conditions (International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision: 08, 22, and 23). Standardized data were extracted. Processes were checked at each stage by independent review of a random 25% of records. Consensus was reached through discussion where necessary. Thirty-nine initiatives were identified across 29 neurological conditions. No single established or recommended method for defining a data dictionary was identified. Nine initiatives conducted systematic reviews to collate information before implementing a consensus process. Thirty-seven initiatives consulted with end-users. Methods of consultation were "roundtable" discussion (n = 30); with facilitation (n = 16); that was iterative (n = 27); and frequently conducted in-person (n = 27). Researcher stakeholders were involved in all initiatives and clinicians in 25. Importantly, only six initiatives involved persons with lived experience of TBI and four involved carers. Methods for defining data dictionaries were variable and reporting is sparse. Our findings are instructive for AUS-TBI and can be used to further development of methods for defining data dictionaries.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Single Data Dictionary to Predict Outcome for People With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

In this series of eight articles, the Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) consortium describes the Australian approach used to select the common data elements collected acutely that have been shown to predict outcome following moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) across the lifespan. This article presents the unified single data dictionary, together with additional measures chosen to facilitate comparative effectiveness research and data linkage. Consultations with the AUS-TBI Lived Experience Expert Group provided insights on the merits and considerations regarding data elements for some of the study areas, as well as more general principles to guide the collection of data and the selection of meaningful measures. These are presented as a series of guiding principles and themes. The AUS-TBI Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Group identified a number of key points and considerations for the project approach specific to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, including key issues of data sovereignty and community involvement. These are outlined in the form of principles to guide selection of appropriate methodologies, data management, and governance. Implementation of the AUS-TBI approach aims to maximize ongoing data collection and linkage, to facilitate personalization of care and improved outcomes for people who experience moderate-severe TBI.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Systematic Review and Consensus Process to Determine the Predictive Value of Pre-existing Health Conditions for People with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

The first aim of the Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) encompasses development of a set of measures that comprehensively predict outcomes for people with moderate-severe TBI across Australia. This process engaged diverse stakeholders and information sources across six areas: social, health, and clinical factors; biological markers; treatments; and longer-term outcomes. Here, we report the systematic review of pre-existing health conditions as predictors of outcome for people with moderate-severe TBI. Standardized searches were implemented across databases until March 31, 2022. English-language reports of studies evaluating association between pre-existing health conditions and clinical outcome in at least 10 patients with moderate-severe TBI were included. A predefined algorithm was used to assign a judgement of predictive value to each observed association. The list of identified pre-existing health conditions was then discussed with key stakeholders during a consensus meeting to determine the feasibility of incorporating them into standard care. The searches retrieved 22,217 records, of which 47 articles were included. The process led to identification of 88 unique health predictors (homologized to 21 predictor categories) of 55 outcomes (homologized to 19 outcome categories). Only pre-existing health conditions with high and moderate predictive values were discussed during the consensus meeting. Following the consensus meeting, 5 out of 11 were included (migraine, mental health conditions, ≥4 pre-existing health conditions, osteoporosis, and body mass index [BMI]) as common data elements in the AUS-TBI data dictionary. Upon further discussion, 3 additional pre-existing health conditions were included. These are pre-existing heart disease, frailty score, and previous incidence of TBI.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Systematic Review of Predictive Value of Biological Markers for People With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) aims to co-design a data resource to predict outcomes for people with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) across Australia. Fundamental to this resource is the data dictionary, which is an ontology of data items. Here, we report the systematic review and consensus process for inclusion of biological markers in the data dictionary. Standardized database searches were implemented from inception through April 2022. English-language studies evaluating association between a fluid, tissue, or imaging marker and any clinical outcome in at least 10 patients with moderate-severe TBI were included. Records were screened using a prioritization algorithm and saturation threshold in Research Screener. Full-length records were then screened in Covidence. A pre-defined algorithm was used to assign a judgement of predictive value to each observed association, and high-value predictors were discussed in a consensus process. Searches retrieved 106,593 records; 1,417 full-length records were screened, resulting in 546 included records. Two hundred thirty-nine individual markers were extracted, evaluated against 101 outcomes. Forty-one markers were judged to be high-value predictors of 15 outcomes. Fluid markers retained following the consensus process included ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1), S100, and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). Imaging markers included computed tomography (CT) scores (e.g., Marshall scores), pathological observations (e.g., hemorrhage, midline shift), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification (e.g., diffuse axonal injury). Clinical context and time of sampling of potential predictive indicators are important considerations for utility. This systematic review and consensus process has identified fluid and imaging biomarkers with high predictive value of clinical and long-term outcomes following moderate-severe TBI.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Systematic Review of the Effect of Acute Interventions on Outcome for People With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative (AUS-TBI) is developing a data resource to enable improved outcome prediction for people with moderate-severe TBI (msTBI) across Australia. Fundamental to this resource is the collaboratively designed data dictionary. This systematic review and consultation aimed to identify acute interventions with potential to modify clinical outcomes for people after msTBI, for inclusion in a data dictionary. Standardized searches were implemented across bibliographic databases from inception through April 2022. English-language reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating any association between any acute intervention and clinical outcome in at least 100 patients with msTBI, were included. A predefined algorithm was used to assign a value to each observed association. Consultation with AUS-TBI clinicians and researchers formed the consensus process for interventions to be included in a single data dictionary. Searches retrieved 14,455 records, of which 124 full-length RCTs were screened, with 35 studies included. These studies evaluated 26 unique acute interventions across 21 unique clinical outcomes. Only 4 interventions were considered to have medium modifying value for any outcome from the review, with an additional 8 interventions agreed upon through the consensus process. The interventions with medium value were tranexamic acid and phenytoin, which had a positive effect on an outcome; and decompressive craniectomy surgery and hypothermia, which negatively affected outcomes. From the systematic review and consensus process, 12 interventions were identified as potential modifiers to be included in the AUS-TBI national data resource.

The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury Initiative: Systematic Review and Consensus Process to Determine the Predictive Value of Demographic, Injury Event, and Social Characteristics on Outcomes for People With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

The objective of the Australian Traumatic Brain Injury (AUS-TBI) Initiative is to develop a data dictionary to inform data collection and facilitate prediction of outcomes of people who experience moderate-severe TBI in Australia. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence of the association between demographic, injury event, and social characteristics with outcomes, in people with moderate-severe TBI, to identify potentially predictive indicators. Standardized searches were implemented across bibliographic databases to March 31, 2022. English-language reports, excluding case series, which evaluated the association between demographic, injury event, and social characteristics, and any clinical outcome in at least 10 patients with moderate-severe TBI were included. Abstracts and full text records were independently screened by at least two reviewers in Covidence. A pre-defined algorithm was used to assign a judgement of predictive value to each observed association. The review findings were discussed with an expert panel to determine the feasibility of incorporation of routine measurement into standard care. The search strategy retrieved 16,685 records; 867 full-length records were screened, and 111 studies included. Twenty-two predictors of 32 different outcomes were identified; 7 were classified as high-level (age, sex, ethnicity, employment, insurance, education, and living situation at the time of injury). After discussion with an expert consensus group, 15 were recommended for inclusion in the data dictionary. This review identified numerous predictors capable of enabling early identification of those at risk for poor outcomes and improved personalization of care through inclusion in routine data collection.

Treatment classifications and interventions for neck pain: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim is to provide an overview of how neck pain is classified in the literature, define and group conservative interventions into 'nodes', and develop draft networks of interventions in preparation for a network meta-analysis (NMA). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS: We performed a scoping review. For feasibility reasons, we searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) via neck pain clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) published from 2014. We used standardized data extraction forms to extract data about classification of neck pain and interventions evaluated in the included RCTs. We calculated frequencies of neck pain classifications and grouped interventions into nodes based on the definitions used in Cochrane reviews. Draft network graphs comparing interventions were constructed using the online Shiny R application CINEMA. RESULTS: We included 242 RCTs from seven CPGs, evaluating 28,581 patients. We found three different classification systems of which The Neck Pain Task Force classification was used most often. We defined and grouped all interventions into 19 discrete potential nodes. CONCLUSION: We found a wide variation in neck pain classifications and conservative interventions. Grouping the interventions was challenging and needs further evaluation before conducting a final NMA.

The Fit-for-Purpose Model: Conceptualizing and Managing Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain as an Information Problem.

Chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) is a complex and multifaceted problem. The following Perspective piece tries to help make sense of this complexity by describing a model for the development and maintenance of persistent LBP that integrates modifiable factors across the biopsychosocial spectrum. The Fit-for-Purpose model posits the view that chronic nonspecific LBP represents a state in which the person in pain holds strong and relatively intransient internal models of an immutably damaged, fragile, and unhealthy back, and information that supports these models is more available and trustworthy than information that counters them. This Perspective proposes a corresponding treatment framework for persistent pain that aims to shift internal models of a fragile, damaged, unhealthy, and unchangeable self toward the formulation of the back as healthy, strong, adaptable, and fit for purpose and to provide the system with precise and trustworthy evidence that supports this supposition while minimizing information that works against it.