Running is acceptable and efficacious in adults with non-specific chronic low back pain: the ASTEROID randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Running is one of the most accessible forms of exercise, yet its suitability for adults with chronic low back pain (LBP) is unknown. This study assessed the efficacy and acceptability of running in adults with chronic LBP. METHODS: This two-arm parallel (1:1) individually randomised controlled trial allocated 40 participants (mean (SD) age: 33 (6) years, female: 50%) with non-specific chronic LBP to a 12-week intervention or waitlist control. The intervention was a progressive run-walk interval programme comprising three 30-min sessions per week that were digitally delivered and remotely supported by an exercise physiologist. Efficacy outcomes were self-reported pain intensity (100-point visual analogue scale) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index). Acceptability outcomes were attrition, adherence and adverse events. RESULTS: At 12-week follow-up, the intervention improved average pain intensity (mean net difference (95% CI): -15.30 (-25.33, -5.27) points, p=0.003), current pain intensity (-19.35 (-32.01, -6.69) points, p=0.003) and disability (-5.20 (-10.12, -0.24) points, P=0.038), compared with control. There was no attrition, and mean (SD) training adherence was 70% (20%; ie, 2.1 of 3 sessions per week). Nine non-serious adverse events deemed likely study-related were reported (lower limb injury/pain: n=7, syncope associated with an underlying condition: n=1, LBP: n=1). CONCLUSIONS: A run-walk programme was considered an acceptable intervention by the participants to improve the pain intensity and disability in individuals aged 18-45 years with non-specific chronic LBP when compared with the control. An individualised and conservative run-walk programme should be considered a suitable form of physical activity for adults with chronic LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12622001276741. Registered on 29 September 2022.

Adherence to low back pain clinical guidelines in Australian hospital emergency departments: A public and private comparison.

Managing LBP via clinical practice guidelines in healthcare settings is recommended, yet burgeoning evidence suggests adherence is suboptimal in emergency department settings. Whether adherence differs between public and private settings is unknown. A retrospective audit of two Australian emergency departments matched 86 private patients to 86 public patients by age ( ± 5 years), sex (male/female) and LBP duration (first time/history of LBP). Patient charts were reviewed according to the Australian clinical guidelines for the management of LBP. Guidelines were considered individually and via a collective guideline adherence score (GAS). Management GAS was lower in private patients compared to public patients (d [95 %CI]: -0.67 [-0.98, -0.36], P < 0.001). Public patients were more likely to have documentation of guideline-based advice (OR [95 %CI]: 4.4 [2.4, 8.4], P < 0.001) and less likely to be sent for imaging (OR [95 %CI]: 5.0 [2.6, 9.4], P < 0.001). Private patients were more likely to have documented screening for psychosocial risk factors (OR [95 %CI]: 21.8 [9.1, 52.1], P < 0.001) and more likely to receive guideline-based medication prescriptions at patient discharge (OR [95 %CI]: 2.2 [1.2, 4.2], P = 0.013). Differences exist in public and private hospital emergency department guideline adherence. Exploring barriers and facilitators underpinning these differences will assist in guiding future implementation science approaches.

Telemedicine for Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain Lacks High-Quality Evidence on Delivery Modes and Effectiveness: An Umbrella Review.

Background: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Telemedicine is of growing importance, yet impacts on treatment efficacy remain unclear. Objective: This umbrella review (CRD42022298047) examined the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions on pain intensity, disability, psychological function, quality of life, self-efficacy, and adverse events in MSK pain. Methods: PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched from inception to August 9, 2022, for systematic reviews with meta-analysis, including telemedicine-delivered exercise, education, and psychological interventions, in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). AMSTAR-2 was implemented. Standardized mean differences (SMDs; negative favors telemedicine) were extracted as effect estimates. Results: Of 1,135 records, 20 reviews (RCTs: n = 97, participants: n = 15,872) were included. Pain intensity SMDs were -0.66 to 0.10 for mixed pain (estimates: n = 16), -0.64 to -0.01 for low-back pain (n = 9), -0.31 to -0.15 for osteoarthritis (n = 7), -0.29 for knee pain (n = 1), -0.66 to -0.58 for fibromyalgia (n = 2), -0.16 for back pain (n = 1), and -0.09 for rheumatic disorders (n = 1). Disability SMDs were -0.50 to 0.10 for mixed pain (n = 14), -0.39 to 0.00 for low-back pain (n = 8), -0.41 to -0.04 for osteoarthritis (n = 7), -0.22 for knee pain (n = 1), and -0.56 for fibromyalgia (n = 1). Methodological quality was "critically low" for 17 reviews. Effectiveness tended to favor telemedicine for all secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Primary RCTs are required that compare telemedicine interventions with in-person delivery of the intervention (noninferiority trials), consider safety, assess videoconferencing, and combine different treatment approaches.

Assessing safety and treatment efficacy of running on intervertebral discs (ASTEROID) in adults with chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Poor intervertebral disc (IVD) health is associated with low back pain (LBP). This 12-week parallel randomised controlled trial will evaluate the efficacy of a progressive interval running programme on IVD health and other clinical outcomes in adults with chronic LBP. Participants will be randomised to either a digitally delivered progressive interval running programme or waitlist control. Participants randomised to the running programme will receive three individually tailored 30 min community-based sessions per week over 12 weeks. The waitlist control will undergo no formal intervention. All participants will be assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. Primary outcomes are IVD health (lumbar IVD T2 via MRI), average LBP intensity over the prior week (100-point visual analogue scale) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index). Secondary outcomes include a range of clinical measures. All outcomes will be analysed using linear mixed models. This study has received ethical approval from the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 2022-162). All participants will provide informed written consent before participation. Regardless of the results, the findings of this study will be disseminated, and anonymised data will be shared via an online repository. This will be the first study to evaluate whether a progressive interval running programme can improve IVD health in adults with chronic LBP. Identifying conservative options to improve IVD health in this susceptible population group has the potential to markedly reduce the burden of disease. This study was registered via the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on 29 September 2022 (ACTRN12622001276741).