Examining the Relationship Between Individual Patient Factors and Substantial Clinical Benefit From Telerehabilitation Among Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic has facilitated the emergence of telerehabilitation, but it is unclear which patients are most likely to respond to physical therapy provided this way. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between individual patient factors and substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation among a cohort of patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data collected during a prospective longitudinal cohort study. Patients with chronic LBP (N = 98) were provided with a standardized physical therapy protocol adapted for telerehabilitation. We examined the relationship between patient factors and substantial clinical benefit with telerehabilitation, defined as a ≥50% improvement in disability at 10 weeks, measured using the Oswestry Disability Index. RESULTS: Sixteen (16.3%) patients reported a substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation. Patients reporting substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation had lower initial pain intensity, lower psychosocial risk per the STarT Back Screening Tool, higher levels of pain self-efficacy, and reported higher therapeutic alliance with their physical therapist compared to other patients. CONCLUSION: Patients with lower psychosocial risk and higher pain-self efficacy experienced substantial clinical benefit from telerehabilitation for chronic LBP more often than other patients in our cohort. Therapeutic alliance was higher among patients who experienced a substantial clinical benefit compared to those who did not. IMPACT: This study indicates that psychosocial factors play an important role in the outcomes of patients receiving telerehabilitation for chronic LBP. Baseline psychosocial screening may serve as a method for identifying patients likely to benefit from this approach.

Significant Clinical Improvement Was Predicted in a Cohort of Patients With Low Back Pain Early in the Care Process.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients with low back pain who achieved clinical improvement in disability within 3 or 6 physical therapy visits, identify factors that predicted improvement, and predict the probability of improvement by the third and sixth visits. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study looked at patients (N = 6523) who completed a numeric pain scale and Modified Low Back Disability Questionnaire (MDQ) at every visit. Four prediction models were developed: 30% improvement by visit 3 and by visit 6 and 50% improvement by visit 3 and by visit 6. A logistic regression model was fit to predict patients' improvement in disability using the MDQ. Predictive models used age, disability scores, sex, symptom duration, and payer type as factors. Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve were computed for the models. Nomograms illustrate the relative impacts of the predictor variables. RESULTS: Disability improved 30% in 42.7% of patients by visit 3 and 49% by visit 6. Disability improved 50% in 26% of patients by visit 3 and 32.9% by visit 6. First visit score (MDQ1) was strongest factor to predict 30% improvement by visit 3. The visit 3 score (MDQ3) was strongest factor to predict a 30% or 50% improvement by visit 6. The combination of MDQ1 and MDQ3 scores was strongest overall predictive factor for visit 6. The area under the curve values for models using only the MDQ1 and MDQ3 scores to predict 30% or 50% improvement by the sixth visit were 0.84 and 0.85, respectively, representing excellent overall diagnostic accuracy of the prediction models. CONCLUSION: Excellent discrimination to predict patients' significant clinical improvement by visit 6 using 2 outcome scores was demonstrated. Gathering outcomes routinely enhances assessment of prognosis and clinical decision making. IMPACT: Understanding prognosis of clinical improvement supports physical therapists' contribution to value-based care.

Variation in Outcomes and Number of Visits Following Care Guideline Implementation: Part 2 of an Analysis of 12 355 Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the variation in outcomes and number of visits before and after implementing a care guideline for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) rehabilitation. DESIGN: Nonrandomized intervention study. METHODS: We compared 2558 patients with TKA who received care that was not standardized (non-care guideline [NCG] group) to 9797 patients with TKA who received care according to the care guideline (CG). We fit 2 Bayesian hierarchical linear regression models using the Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living (KOS-ADL) change score and number of physical therapy (PT) visits as the response variables, controlling for relevant predictor variables. We also compared the ratio of the standard deviations of the KOS-ADL change scores and the number of PT visits within and between clinics. RESULTS: The overall estimated mean improvement in KOS-ADL change score was 23.0 points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3, 25.7) in the NCG group and 28.7 points (95% CI: 27.5, 29.7) in the CG group; the mean difference was 5.6 (2.7-8.6). Mean KOS-ADL change scores were higher in the CG group than the NCG group in every clinic, although only 8 clinics improved significantly. The number of PT visits did not change meaningfully (NCG: mean, 10.7 [95% CI: 9.9, 11.5]; CG: mean, 10.5 [95% CI: 9.9, 10.9]). Variation in KOS-ADL change score decreased by 4% within clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.93, 0.99]) and 63% between clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.21, 0.62]). Variation in number of visits decreased by 7% within clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.90, 0.96]) and 19% between clinics (CG-NCG ratio: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.39, 1.49]). CONCLUSION: Implementing a care guideline for TKA rehabilitation may improve outcomes and reduce unwarranted variation in practice within clinics and especially between clinics within a large health care system. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(3):151-158. Epub: 12 December 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11370.

Improved Outcomes Following a Care Guideline Implementation: Part 1 of an Analysis of 12 355 Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the application and examine the influence of a continuous quality improvement intervention, which had a goal of standardizing care to reduce the proportion of patients who do not have a meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). DESIGN: Continuous quality improvement. METHODS: A physical therapy (PT) care guideline was initiated in 2013 for patients following TKA. The Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living (KOS-ADL) was measured at every visit, and scores were extracted from a clinical outcomes database to calculate the proportion of patients who did not achieve a minimal clinically important difference. Based on logistic regression analysis, we compared the proportion of patients who did not progress on the KOS-ADL in a non-care guideline group (2008-2012) to a care guideline (CG) group (2014-2019). RESULTS: This study included 12 355 patients (aged 18-92 years) following TKA incurring at least 3 PT visits from 2008 to 2019. The percentage of patients who did not progress in the non-care guideline group was 25.8% and in the care guideline group 14.3% (P<0.001). The relationship between care guideline adherence and lack of progression on the KOS-ADL was statistically significant, X2 (df = 1) = 148.7, P<.001. CONCLUSION: The percentage of patients who did not achieve meaningful progress on the KOS-ADL declined significantly in the 6 years after implementing a TKA care guideline without an increase in the number of clinical visits. The standardized care guideline was associated with meaningful improvements for patients following TKA when applied in conjunction with PT access to outcome data, feedback through audits, performance goals, and financial incentives. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(3):143-150. Epub: 12 December 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11369.

Identifying Perceptions, Experiences, and Recommendations of Telehealth Physical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Mixed Methods Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe concerns, advantages, and disadvantages encountered in an evidence-based physical therapy (PT) program for persons with chronic low back pain (CLBP) delivered by telehealth. DESIGN: Mixed methods survey and semistructured interview of persons with CLBP. SETTING: Prospective observational cohort study of persons with CLBP from 3 health care systems receiving 8 sessions of evidence-based telehealth PT. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were selected after completing week 10 (from baseline) assessment from an ongoing cohort study. We enrolled 31 of 126 participants (mean age, 42.4 years; 71.0% female) from the cohort study (N=31). INTERVENTIONS: Participants had completed 8 sessions of evidence-based telehealth PT and participated in semistructured interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline and week 10 and 26 assessments assessed psychosocial risk (StarTBack Screening Tool), working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Form), pain (Oswestry Disability Index), and health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 profile, version 2). Semistructured interviews were conducted by telephone and consisted of open-ended questions assessing perception, satisfaction, and likelihood of recommending telehealth PT. Participants identified advantages and disadvantages to telehealth PT. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using an iterative qualitative process. Statistical comparisons by experience were made using analysis of variance (continuous) and Fisher exact test (categorical). RESULTS: Compared with the negative experience group (n=5), participants in positive (n=16) and neutral (n=10) experience groups endorsed higher bond working alliance with their therapist. Participants with a positive experience were more likely to view telehealth PT as cost-saving (n=10, 62.5%) compared with those with a neutral (n=1, 10.0%) or negative (n=1, 20.0%) experience and less likely to view telehealth PT as lower quality (n=0, 0.0%; n=1, 10.0%; n=2, 40.0%, respectively). Prior to starting telehealth, based on semistructured interviews, 18 participants (58.1%) had concerns and these persisted after starting in half of this group. Concerns regarded telehealth being different from or inferior to in-person PT, lack of physical correction, and worries of not using technology appropriately. Convenience, time savings, and personalization were seen as advantages. Difficulty making a personal connection with the therapist, lack of physical correction, and problems with technology were seen as disadvantages. Many participants endorsed a hybrid approach that included in-person and telehealth PT. Providing necessary equipment and technology assistance was seen as ways to improve telehealth PT experience. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth is an acceptable modality to deliver PT for patients with CLBP with most having a positive experience and reporting advantages. Improvements could include offering a hybrid approach (in-person and telehealth combined) and providing necessary equipment and technical support. More research is needed to optimize the most effective strategies for providing telehealth PT for patients with CLBP.

Outcomes of Telehealth Physical Therapy Provided Using Real-Time, Videoconferencing for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Longitudinal Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility of an evidence-based physical therapy (PT) program for persons with chronic low back pain (LBP) originally designed for in-person delivery, adapted for telehealth using videoconferencing. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal cohort. SETTING: Three health care systems in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Adults, aged 18-64 years (N=126), with chronic LBP recruited from August through December 2020. INTERVENTION: Up to 8 weekly sessions of telehealth PT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up assessments were 10 and 26 weeks after baseline. Participant outcomes collected were the Oswestry Disability Index, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 health domains, and pain self-efficacy. Implementation outcomes included acceptability, adoption, feasibility, and fidelity assessed using participant surveys and compliance with session attendance. RESULTS: We enrolled 126 participants (mean age, 51.5 years; 62.7% female). Baseline perceptions about telehealth were generally positive. Eighty-eight participants (69.8%) initiated telehealth PT, with a median of 5 sessions attended. Participants in telehealth PT were generally satisfied (76.3%), although only 39.5% perceived the quality equal to in-person PT. Telehealth PT participants reported significant improvement in LBP-related disability, pain intensity, pain interference, physical function, and sleep disturbance at 10- and 26-week follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings generally support the feasibility of telehealth PT using videoconferencing. Implementation and participant outcomes were similar to in-person PT as delivered in the participating health care systems. We identified barriers that may detract from the patient experience and likelihood of benefitting from telehealth PT. More research is needed to optimize and evaluate the most effective strategies for providing telehealth PT for patients with chronic LBP.

Perceptions of Telehealth Physical Therapy Among Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 prompted the rapid adoption of telehealth to provide physical therapy. Patients' perceptions about telehealth physical therapy are mostly unknown. This study describes perceptions of telehealth physical therapy among patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). Methods: This study surveyed participants in an ongoing multisite clinical trial of nonpharmacological LBP treatments. Participants were asked about their willingness to use telehealth for physical therapy and with other providers and completed the PROMIS-29. Results: Surveys were received from 102 participants (mean age = 48.5 [standard deviation; SD = 11.6]). Thirty-six (35.3%) expressed willingness to receive telehealth physical therapy, 22 were neutral (21.6%), and 44 were unwilling (43.1%). The percentage expressing willingness for telehealth physical therapy was lower than it was for family medicine (p < 0.001) or mental health (p < 0.001). Older (p = 0.049) and Black participants (p = 0.01) more likely expressed willingness to use telehealth for physical therapy. Conclusion: Education and familiarity may help patients view telehealth physical therapy more favorably. Clinical Trial Registration (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03859713).

Predicting Clinical Improvement for Patients With Low Back Pain: Keeping It Simple for Patients Seeking Physical Therapy Care.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to develop and validate an original prediction formula that estimated the probability of success for patients with low back pain (LBP) to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the Modified Low Back Disability Questionnaire (MDQ). METHODS: Patients were 10 to 90 years old in this retrospective cohort study. Data were extracted from Intermountain Healthcare's registry, Rehabilitation Outcomes Management System: 62,858 patients admitted to physical therapy from 2002 to 2013 formed the training dataset, and 15,128 patients admitted 2015 to 2016 formed the verification dataset. Predicted probability to achieve MCID was compared with the actual percentage who succeeded. Two models were developed: 6-point improvement and 30% improvement. MDQ assessed disability, and numeric pain score assessed pain intensity. Predictive models used restricted cubic splines on age, initial pain, and disability scores for non-linear effects. Sex, symptom duration, and payer type were included as indicator variables. Predicted chance of success was compared with the actual percentage of patients that succeeded. Relative change in R-squared was calculated to assess variable importance in predicting success. Odds ratios for duration of injury and payer were calculated. RESULTS: A positive trend was observed in both models between predicted and actual success achieved. Both "verification" models appear accurate and closely approximate the "training dataset." Baseline MDQ score was the most important factor to predict a 6-point improvement. Payer type and injury duration were important factors to predict 30% improvement. Best odds to achieve an MCID was having a workers compensation insurance payer and seeking care within 14 days. CONCLUSION: The 2 models demonstrated an accurate visualization of the chance of patients achieving significant improvement compared with the usual representation of the average rate of improvement for all patients. IMPACT: Enhancing physical therapists' understanding of the probability of a patient achieving significant clinical improvement can enhance decision-making processes and help physical therapists manage a patient's care more effectively.

The Relationship Between Neighborhood Deprivation and Perceived Changes for Pain-Related Experiences Among US Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic could disproportionately affect the health of vulnerable populations, including patients experiencing persistent health conditions (i.e., chronic pain), along with populations living within deprived, lower socioeconomic areas. The current cross-sectional study characterized relationships between neighborhood deprivation and perceived changes in pain-related experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (early-September to mid-October 2020) for adult patients (N = 97) with nonspecific chronic low back pain. METHODS: We collected self-report perceived experiences from participants enrolled in an ongoing pragmatic randomized trial across medical centers within the Salt Lake City, Utah and Baltimore, Maryland metropolitans. The Area Deprivation Index (composite of 17 US Census deprivation metrics) reflected neighborhood deprivation based on participants' zip codes. RESULTS: Although those living in the neighborhoods with greater deprivation endorsed significantly poorer physical (pain severity, pain interference, physical functioning), mental (depression, anxiety), and social health during the pandemic, there were no significant differences for perceived changes in pain-related experiences (pain severity, pain interference, sleep quality) between levels of neighborhood deprivation since the onset of the pandemic. However, those in neighborhoods with greater deprivation endorsed disproportionately worse perceived changes in pain coping, social support, and mood since the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings offer evidence that changes in pain coping during the pandemic may be disproportionately worse for those living in deprived areas. Considering poorer pain coping may contribute to long-term consequences, the current findings suggest the need for further attention and intervention to reduce the negative effect of the pandemic for such vulnerable populations.

Stratified care to prevent chronic low back pain in high-risk patients: The TARGET trial. A multi-site pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with acute low back pain (LBP) first seek care from primary care physicians. Evidence is lacking for interventions to prevent transition to chronic LBP in this setting. We aimed to test if implementation of a risk-stratified approach to care would result in lower rates of chronic LBP and improved self-reported disability. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomized trial using 77 primary care clinics in four health care systems across the United States. Practices were randomly assigned to a stratified approach to care (intervention) or usual care (control). Using the STarTBack screening tool, adults with acute LBP were screened low, medium, and high-risk. Patients screened as high-risk were eligible. The intervention included electronic best practice alerts triggering referrals for psychologically informed physical therapy (PIPT). PIPT education was targeted to community clinics geographically close to intervention primary care clinics. Primary outcomes were transition to chronic LBP and self-reported disability at six months. Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02647658. FINDINGS: Between May 2016 and June 2018, 1207 patients from 38 intervention and 1093 from 37 control practices were followed. In the intervention arm, around 50% of patients were referred for physical therapy (36% for PIPT) compared to 30% in the control. At 6 months, 47% of patients reported transition to chronic LBP in the intervention arm (38 practices, n = 658) versus 51% of patients in the control arm (35 practices, n = 635; OR=0.83 95% CI 0.64, 1.09; p = 0.18). No differences in disability were detected (difference -2·1, 95% CI -4.9-0.6; p = 0.12). Opioids and imaging were prescribed in 22%-25% and 23%-26% of initial visits, for intervention and control, respectively. Twelve-month LBP utilization was similar in the two groups. INTERPRETATION: There were no differences detected in transition to chronic LBP among patients presenting with acute LBP using a stratified approach to care. Opioid and imaging prescribing rates were non-concordant with clinical guidelines. FUNDING: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) contract # PCS-1402-10867.

Risk Factors Associated With Transition From Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in US Patients Seeking Primary Care.

Importance: Acute low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent, with a presumed favorable prognosis; however, once chronic, LBP becomes a disabling and expensive condition. Acute to chronic LBP transition rates vary widely owing to absence of standardized operational definitions, and it is unknown whether a standardized prognostic tool (ie, Subgroups for Targeted Treatment Back tool [SBT]) can estimate this transition or whether early non-guideline concordant treatment is associated with the transition to chronic LBP. Objective: To assess the associations between the transition from acute to chronic LBP with SBT risk strata; demographic, clinical, and practice characteristics; and guideline nonconcordant processes of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This inception cohort study was conducted alongside a multisite, pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Adult patients with acute LBP stratified by SBT risk were enrolled in 77 primary care practices in 4 regions across the United States between May 2016 and June 2018 and followed up for 6 months, with final follow-up completed by March 2019. Data analysis was conducted from January to March 2020. Exposures: SBT risk strata and early LBP guideline nonconcordant processes of care (eg, receipt of opioids, imaging, and subspecialty referral). Main Outcomes and Measures: Transition from acute to chronic LBP at 6 months using the National Institutes of Health Task Force on Research Standards consensus definition of chronic LBP. Patient demographic characteristics, clinical factors, and LBP process of care were obtained via electronic medical records. Results: Overall, 5233 patients with acute LBP (3029 [58%] women; 4353 [83%] White individuals; mean [SD] age 50.6 [16.9] years; 1788 [34%] low risk; 2152 [41%] medium risk; and 1293 [25%] high risk) were included. Overall transition rate to chronic LBP at six months was 32% (1666 patients). In a multivariable model, SBT risk stratum was positively associated with transition to chronic LBP (eg, high-risk vs low-risk groups: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.45; 95% CI, 2.00-2.98; P < .001). Patient and clinical characteristics associated with transition to chronic LBP included obesity (aOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.28-1.80; P < .001); smoking (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.29-1.89; P < .001); severe and very severe baseline disability (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.48-2.24; P < .001 and aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.60-2.68; P < .001, respectively) and diagnosed depression/anxiety (aOR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.28-2.15; P < .001). After controlling for all other variables, patients exposed to 1, 2, or 3 nonconcordant processes of care within the first 21 days were 1.39 (95% CI, 1.21-2.32), 1.88 (95% CI, 1.53-2.32), and 2.16 (95% CI, 1.10-4.25) times more likely to develop chronic LBP compared with those with no exposure (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the transition rate to chronic LBP was substantial and increased correspondingly with SBT stratum and early exposure to guideline nonconcordant care.

Study protocol for targeted interventions to prevent chronic low back pain in high-risk patients: A multi-site pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (TARGET Trial).

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent and potentially disabling conditions for which people seek health care. Patients, providers, and payers agree that greater effort is needed to prevent acute LBP from transitioning to chronic LBP. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: The TARGET (Targeted Interventions to Prevent Chronic Low Back Pain in High-Risk Patients) Trial is a primary care-based, multisite, cluster randomized, pragmatic trial comparing guideline-based care (GBC) to GBC + referral to Psychologically Informed Physical Therapy (PIPT) for patients presenting with acute LBP and identified as high risk for persistent disabling symptoms. Study sites include primary care clinics within each of five geographical regions in the United States, with clinics randomized to either GBC or GBC + PIPT. Acute LBP patients at all clinics are risk stratified (high, medium, low) using the STarT Back Tool. The primary outcomes are the presence of chronic LBP and LBP-related functional disability determined by the Oswestry Disability Index at 6 months. Secondary outcomes are LBP-related processes of health care and utilization of services over 12 months, determined through electronic medical records. Study enrollment began in May 2016 and concluded in June 2018. The trial was powered to include at least 1860 high-risk patients in the randomized controlled trial cohort. A prospective observational cohort of approximately 6900 low and medium-risk acute LBP patients was enrolled concurrently. DISCUSSION: The TARGET pragmatic trial aims to establish the effectiveness of the stratified approach to acute LBP intervention targeting high-risk patients with GBC and PIPT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02647658 Registered Jan. 6, 2016.

Responsiveness to Change of Functional Limitation Reporting: Cross-sectional Study Using the Intermountain ROMS Scale in Outpatient Rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require physical therapists document patients' functional limitations. The process is not standardized. A systematic approach to determine a patient's functional limitations and responsiveness to change is needed. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) responsiveness to change using 7-level severity/complexity modifier scale proposed by Medicare to a derived scale implemented by Intermountain Healthcare's Rehabilitation Outcomes Management System (ROMS). DESIGN: This was a retrospective, observational cohort design. METHODS: 165,183 PROs prior to July 1, 2013, were compared to 46,334 records from July 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015. Histograms and ribbon plots illustrate distribution and change of patients' scores. ROMS raw score ranges were calculated and compared to CMS' severity/complexity levels based on score percentage. Distribution of the population was compared based on the 2 methods. Sensitivity and specificity were compared for responsiveness to change based on minimal clinically important difference (MCID). RESULTS: Histograms demonstrated few patient scores placed in CMS scale levels at the extremes, whereas the majority of scores placed in 2 middle levels (CJ, CK). ROMS distributed scores more evenly across levels. Ribbon plots illustrated advantage of ROMS' using narrower score ranges. Greater chance for patients to change levels was observed with ROMS when an MCID was achieved. ROMS narrower scale levels resulted in greater sensitivity and good specificity. LIMITATIONS: Geographic representation for the United States was limited. Without patients' global rating of change, a reference standard to gauge validation of improvement could not be provided. CONCLUSIONS: ROMS provides a standard approach to identify accurately functional limitation modifier levels and to detect improvement more accurately than a straight across transposition using the CMS scale.

Do preoperative fear avoidance model factors predict outcomes after lumbar disc herniation surgery? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) surgery is usually recommended when conservative treatments fail to manage patients' symptoms. However, many patients undergoing LDH surgery continue to report pain and disability. Preoperative psychological factors have shown to be predictive for postoperative outcomes. Our aim was to systematically review studies that prospectively examined the prognostic value of factors in the Fear Avoidance Model (FAM), including back pain, leg pain, catastrophizing, anxiety, fear-avoidance, depression, physical activity and disability, to predict postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing LDH surgery. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review of prospective studies that measured any FAM factors preoperatively to predict postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing LDH surgery. Our search databases included PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We assessed the quality of each included study using a certain quality assessment list. Degree of agreement between reviewers on quality assessment was examined. Results related to FAM factors in the included studies were summarized. RESULTS: Thirteen prospective studies met our inclusion criteria. Most studies were considered high quality. Heterogeneity was present between the included studies in many aspects. The most common FAM factors examinered were baseline pain, disability and depression. In, general, depression, fear-avoidance behaviors, passive pain coping, and anxiety FAM factors appeared to have negative influence on LDH surgical outcome. Baseline back pain and leg pain appeared to have differing prognostic value on LDH surgical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: FAM factors seem to influence LDH surgical outcomes. Patients with high levels of depression, anxiety and fear-avoidance behaviors are more likely to have poor outcomes following LDH surgery. Conversely, high levels of leg pain, but not back pain seem to be predictor for favorable LDH surgery outcome. More research is needed to determine the exact role of FAM factors on LDH surgical outcome and the value for screening for these factors.

Interrater reliability of the functional movement screen.

The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) is a series of 7 tests that categorize fundamental movement. Each test is scored on an ordinal scale with 4 categories. The purpose of this study was to determine the interrater reliability of the FMS. Forty healthy subjects were videotaped while performing the FMS. The videos were independently scored by 4 raters, including 2 experts who instruct FMS training courses and 2 novices who completed a standardized training course on the FMS. Interrater reliability was analyzed using the weighted kappa statistic. The novice raters demonstrated excellent or substantial agreement on 14 of the 17 tests, whereas the expert raters did the same on 13 of the 17 tests. When the novice raters were paired with the expert raters, all 17 components demonstrated excellent or substantial agreement. These data indicate that the FMS can confidently be applied by trained individuals. This would suggest that the FMS can be confidently used to assess the movement patterns of athletes and to make decisions related to interventions for performance enhancement, and the FMS may assist in identifying athletes at risk for injury.