Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Pain Res ; 14: 1515-1524, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34093037

RESUMO

RATIONALE: Risk assessment tools can improve clinical decision-making for individuals with musculoskeletal pain, but do not currently exist for predicting reduction of pain intensity as an outcome from physical therapy. AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a tool that predicts failure to achieve a 50% pain intensity reduction by 1) determining the appropriate statistical model to inform the tool and 2) select the model that considers the tradeoff between clinical feasibility and statistical accuracy. METHODS: This was a retrospective, secondary data analysis of the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) cohort. Two hundred and seventy-nine individuals seeking physical therapy for neck, shoulder, back, or knee pain who completed 12-month follow-up were included. Two modeling approaches were taken: a longitudinal model included demographics, presence of previous episodes of pain, and regions of pain in addition to baseline and change in OSPRO Yellow Flag scores to 12 months; two comparison models included the same predictors but assessed only baseline and early change (4 weeks) scores. The primary outcome was failure to achieve a 50% reduction in pain intensity score at 12 months. We compared the area under the curve (AUC) to assess the performance of each candidate model and to determine which to inform the Personalized Pain Prediction (P3) risk assessment tool. RESULTS: The baseline only and early change models demonstrated lower accuracy (AUC=0.68 and 0.71, respectively) than the longitudinal model (0.79) but were within an acceptable predictive range. Therefore, both baseline and early change models were used to inform the P3 risk assessment tool. CONCLUSION: The P3 tool provides physical therapists with a data-driven approach to identify patients who may be at risk for not achieving improvements in pain intensity following physical therapy.

2.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther ; 50(11): 642-648, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33131393

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between health care use and the magnitude of change in patient-reported outcomes in individuals who received treatment for subacromial pain syndrome. The secondary objective was to determine the value of care, as measured by change in pain and disability per dollar spent. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial that investigated the effects of nonsurgical care for subacromial pain syndrome. METHODS: Two groups of treatment responders were created, based on 1-year change in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score (high, 46.83 points; low, 8.21 points). Regression analysis was performed to determine the association between health care use and 1-year change in SPADI score. Baseline SPADI score was used as a covariate in the regression analysis. Value was measured by comparing health care visits and costs expended per SPADI 1-point change between responder groups. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included; 38 were classified as high responders (mean 1-year SPADI change score, 46.83 points) and 60 were classified as low responders (1-year SPADI change score, 8.21 points). Neither unadjusted medical visits (5.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.35, 7.44 versus 6.30; 95% CI: 5.14, 7.46) nor medical costs ($1404.86; 95% CI: $1109.34, $1779.09 versus $1679.26; 95% CI: $1391.54, $2026.48) were significantly different between high and low responders, respectively. CONCLUSION: Neither the number of visits nor the financial cost of nonsurgical shoulder- related care was associated with improvement in shoulder pain and disability at 1 year. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(11):642-648. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9440.


Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/economia , Atenção à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Visita a Consultório Médico/estatística & dados numéricos , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Síndrome de Colisão do Ombro/terapia , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Terapia por Exercício/economia , Utilização de Instalações e Serviços , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Serviços de Saúde Militar/economia , Serviços de Saúde Militar/estatística & dados numéricos , Manipulações Musculoesqueléticas/economia , Visita a Consultório Médico/economia , Dor de Ombro/terapia
3.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 101(10): 1763-1770, 2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32599059

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) tool for longitudinal monitoring of pain associated distress with the goal of improving prediction of 50% reduction in pain intensity and disability outcomes. DESIGN: Cohort study with 12-month follow-up after initial care episode. SETTING: Ambulatory care, participants seeking care from outpatient physical therapy clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=440) were seeking care for primary complaint of neck, low back, knee, or shoulder pain. This secondary analysis included 440 subjects (62.5% female; mean age, 45.1±17y) at baseline with n=279 (63.4%) providing follow-up data at 12 months. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A 50% reduction (baseline to 12-mo follow-up) in pain intensity and self-reported disability. RESULTS: Trends for prediction accuracy were similar for all versions of the OSPRO-YF. For predicting 50% reduction in pain intensity, model fit met the statistical criterion for improvement (P<.05) with each additional time point added from baseline. Model discrimination improved statistically when the 6-month to 12-month change was added to the model (area under the curve=0.849, P=.003). For predicting 50% reduction in disability, there was no evidence of improvement in model fit or discrimination from baseline with the addition of 4-week, 6-month, or 12-month changes (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggested that longitudinal monitoring improved prediction accuracy for reduction in pain intensity but not for disability reduction. Differences in OSPRO-YF item sets (10 vs 17 items) or scoring methods (simple summary score vs yellow flag count) did not affect predictive accuracy for pain intensity, providing flexibility for implementing this tool in practice settings.


Assuntos
Avaliação da Deficiência , Indicadores Básicos de Saúde , Dor/complicações , Dor/psicologia , Angústia Psicológica , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Comorbidade , Feminino , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Encaminhamento e Consulta/estatística & dados numéricos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Fatores de Tempo
4.
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med ; 13(3): 247-263, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32388726

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the current literature in patients undergoing spine surgery in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine to determine the available risk assessment tools to predict the patient-centered outcomes of pain, disability, physical function, quality of life, psychological disposition, and return to work after surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Risk assessment tools can assist surgeons and other healthcare providers in identifying the benefit-risk ratio of surgical candidates. These tools gather demographic, medical history, and other pertinent patient-reported measures to calculate a probability utilizing regression or machine learning statistical foundations. Currently, much is still unknown about the use of these tools to predict quality of life, disability, and other factors following spine surgery. A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines that identified risk assessment tools that utilized patient-reported outcome measures as part of the calculation. From 8128 identified studies, 13 articles met inclusion criteria and were accepted into this review. The range of c-index values reported in the studies was between 0.63 and 0.84, indicating fair to excellent model performance. Post-surgical patient-reported outcomes were identified in the following categories (n = total number of predictive models): return to work (n = 3), pain (n = 9), physical functioning and disability (n = 5), quality of life (QOL) (n = 6), and psychosocial disposition (n = 2). Our review has synthesized the available evidence on risk assessment tools for predicting patient-centered outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery and described their findings and clinical utility.

5.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 18(1): 887, 2018 Nov 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30477480

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients seek care from physical therapists for neck pain but it is unclear what the association of the timing of physical therapy (PT) consultation is on 1-year healthcare utilization and costs. The purpose of this study was to compare the 1-year healthcare utilization and costs between three PT timing groups: patients who consulted a physical therapist (PT) for neck pain within 14 days (early PT consultation), between 15 and 90 days (delayed PT consultation) or between 91 and 364 days (late PT consultation). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 308 patients (69.2% female, ages 48.7[±14.5] years) were categorized into PT timing groups. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each group. In adjusted regression models, 1-year healthcare utilization of injections, imaging, opioids and costs were compared between groups. RESULTS: Compared to early PT consultation, the odds of receiving an opioid prescription (aOR = 2.79, 95%CI: 1.35-5.79), spinal injection (aOR = 4.36, 95%CI:2.26-8.45), undergoing an MRI (aOR = 4.68, 95%CI:2.25-9.74), X-ray (aOR = 2.97, 95%CI:1.61-5.47) or CT scan (aOR = 3.36, 95%CI: 1.14-9.97) were increased in patients in the late PT consultation group. Similar increases in risk were found in the delayed group (except CT and Opioids). Compared to the early PT consultation group, mean costs were $2172 ($557, $3786) higher in the late PT contact group and $1063 (95%CI: $ 138 - $1988) higher in the delayed PT consultation group. DISCUSSION: There was an association with the timing of physical therapy consultation on healthcare utilization and costs, where later consultation was associated with increases costs and healthcare utilization. This study examined the association of timing of physical therapy consultation on costs and healthcare utilization, but not the association of increased access to physical therapy consultation. Therefore, the findings warrant further investigation to explore the effects of increased access to physical therapy consultation on healthcare utilization and costs in a prospective study.


Assuntos
Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Cervicalgia/reabilitação , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/economia , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cervicalgia/tratamento farmacológico , Cervicalgia/economia , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tempo para o Tratamento , Estados Unidos
6.
Eval Health Prof ; 39(4): 421-434, 2016 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25917458

RESUMO

In efforts to decrease practice variation, clinical practice guidelines for neck pain have been published. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of receiving guideline adherent physical therapy (PT) on clinical outcomes, health care utilization, and charges for health care services in patients with neck pain. A retrospective review of 298 patients with neck pain receiving PT from 2008 to 2011 was performed. Clinical outcomes, utilization, and charges were compared between patients who received guideline adherent care and nonadherent care. Patients in the adherent care group experienced a lower percentage improvement in pain score compared to nonadherent care group (p = .01), but groups did not significantly differ on percentage improvement in disability (p = .32). However, patients receiving adherent care had an average 3.6 fewer PT visits (p < .001) and less charges for PT (p < .001). Additionally, patients receiving adherent care had 7.3 fewer visits to other health care providers (p < .001), one less prescription medication (p = .02) and 43% fewer diagnostic images (p = .02) but did not differ in their charges to other health care providers (p = .68) during the calendar year of undergoing PT. Although receiving guideline adherent care demonstrated positive effects on health care utilization and financial outcomes, there appears to be a trade-off with clinical outcomes.


Assuntos
Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Cervicalgia/reabilitação , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/normas , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Humanos , Masculino , Cervicalgia/economia , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Modalidades de Fisioterapia/economia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA