Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention for the prevention of low back pain recurrence in Australia (WalkBack): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of low back pain is common and a substantial contributor to the disease and economic burden of low back pain. Exercise is recommended to prevent recurrence, but the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an accessible and low-cost intervention, such as walking, is yet to be established. We aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention to prevent the recurrence of low back pain. METHODS: WalkBack was a two-armed, randomised controlled trial, which recruited adults (aged 18 years or older) from across Australia who had recently recovered from an episode of non-specific low back pain that was not attributed to a specific diagnosis, and which lasted for at least 24 h. Participants were randomly assigned to an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention facilitated by six sessions with a physiotherapist across 6 months or to a no treatment control group (1:1). The randomisation schedule comprised randomly permuted blocks of 4, 6, and 8 and was stratified by history of more than two previous episodes of low back pain and referral method. Physiotherapists and participants were not masked to allocation. Participants were followed for a minimum of 12 months and a maximum of 36 months, depending on the date of enrolment. The primary outcome was days to the first recurrence of an activity-limiting episode of low back pain, collected in the intention-to-treat population via monthly self-report. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the societal perspective and expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The trial was prospectively registered (ACTRN12619001134112). FINDINGS: Between Sept 23, 2019, and June 10, 2022, 3206 potential participants were screened for eligibility, 2505 (78%) were excluded, and 701 were randomly assigned (351 to the intervention group and 350 to the no treatment control group). Most participants were female (565 [81%] of 701) and the mean age of participants was 54 years (SD 12). The intervention was effective in preventing an episode of activity-limiting low back pain (hazard ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·60-0·85], p=0·0002). The median days to a recurrence was 208 days (95% CI 149-295) in the intervention group and 112 days (89-140) in the control group. The incremental cost per QALY gained was AU$7802, giving a 94% probability that the intervention was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $28 000. Although the total number of participants experiencing at least one adverse event over 12 months was similar between the intervention and control groups (183 [52%] of 351 and 190 [54%] of 350, respectively, p=0·60), there was a greater number of adverse events related to the lower extremities in the intervention group than in the control group (100 in the intervention group and 54 in the control group). INTERPRETATION: An individualised, progressive walking and education intervention significantly reduced low back pain recurrence. This accessible, scalable, and safe intervention could affect how low back pain is managed. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.

Opioid analgesia for acute low back pain and neck pain (the OPAL trial): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioid analgesics are commonly used for acute low back pain and neck pain, but supporting efficacy data are scarce. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a judicious short course of an opioid analgesic for acute low back pain and neck pain. METHODS: OPAL was a triple-blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trial that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) presenting to one of 157 primary care or emergency department sites in Sydney, NSW, Australia, with 12 weeks or less of low back or neck pain (or both) of at least moderate pain severity. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using statistician-generated randomly permuted blocks to guideline-recommended care plus an opioid (oxycodone-naloxone, up to 20 mg oxycodone per day orally) or guideline-recommended care and an identical placebo, for up to 6 weeks. The primary outcome was pain severity at 6 weeks measured with the pain severity subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory (10-point scale), analysed in all eligible participants who provided at least one post-randomisation pain score, by use of a repeated measures linear mixed model. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000775516). FINDINGS: Between Feb 29, 2016, and March 10, 2022, 347 participants were recruited (174 to the opioid group and 173 to the placebo group). 170 (49%) of 346 participants were female and 176 (51%) were male. 33 (19%) of 174 participants in the opioid group and 25 (15%) of 172 in the placebo group had discontinued from the trial by week 6, due to loss to follow-up and participant withdrawals. 151 participants in the opioid group and 159 in the placebo group were included in the primary analysis. Mean pain score at 6 weeks was 2·78 (SE 0·20) in the opioid group versus 2·25 (0·19) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference 0·53, 95% CI -0·00 to 1·07, p=0·051). 61 (35%) of 174 participants in the opioid group reported at least one adverse event versus 51 (30%) of 172 in the placebo group (p=0·30), but more people in the opioid group reported opioid-related adverse events (eg, 13 [7·5%] of 174 participants in the opioid group reported constipation vs six [3·5%] of 173 in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Opioids should not be recommended for acute non-specific low back pain or neck pain given that we found no significant difference in pain severity compared with placebo. This finding calls for a change in the frequent use of opioids for these conditions. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, University of Sydney Faculty of Medicine and Health, and SafeWork SA.

The Relationship between Allergic Disease and Sexual Dysfunction: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual dysfunction (SD) and allergic disease are common health concerns worldwide and bear a potential relationship. This scoping review is conducted to analyze the currently available data regarding the associations between these two health issues. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science to retrieve studies that were published before January 2023. A narrative synthesis was conducted to analyze the effects of allergic diseases on SD based on the evaluation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). RESULTS: Twelve observational studies were included after the selection process. The results generally suggested lower FSFI or IIEF scores in patients with asthma, allergic rhinitis, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and urticaria compared to the healthy control groups. The underlying factors of this relationship could be inflammation, psychological factors, hormonal changes, sleep disorders, sexual behavior-related allergic reactions, social economic status, and the use of medications. CONCLUSION: SD and allergic disease are interrelated based on the extant literature. This scoping review provides insights into the clinical implications of both entities, while more research studies are warranted to further elucidate this complex relationship.

Rehabilitation for ankle fractures in adults.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fracture is one of the most common lower limb fractures. Whilst immobilisation of the ankle can support and protect the fracture site during early healing, this also increases the risk of ankle weakness, stiffness, and residual pain. Rehabilitation aims to address the after-effects of this injury, to improve ankle function and quality of life. Approaches are wide-ranging and include strategies to improve ankle joint movement, muscle strength, or both. This is an update of a Cochrane review last published in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of rehabilitation interventions following surgical or non-surgical management of ankle fractures in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trials registers in May 2022, and conducted additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in March 2023. We also searched reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any rehabilitation intervention delivered to adults with ankle fracture. Interventions could have been given during or after the initial fracture management period (typically the first six weeks after injury), which may or may not have included surgical fixation. We excluded participants with multi-trauma, pathological fracture, or with established complications secondary to ankle fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for five outcomes: activity limitation (ankle function), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), participant satisfaction with treatment, pain, and adverse events (we focused on re-operation, defined as unplanned return to theatre). We report the findings up to six months after injury. MAIN RESULTS: We included 53 studies (45 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 4489 adults with ankle fracture. In most studies, orthopaedic management included surgical fixation but was non-surgical in five studies, and either surgical or non-surgical in six studies. Here, we summarise the findings for three common rehabilitation comparisons; these included the most data and were the most clinically relevant. Because of different intervention approaches, we sometimes included a study in more than one comparison. Data for other less common comparisons were also available but often included few participants and were imprecise. All studies were unavoidably at high risk of performance and detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of all evidence for this reason. We also downgraded for imprecision and when we noted inconsistencies between studies that precluded meta-analysis of data. Early (within 3 weeks of surgery) versus delayed weight-bearing (12 studies, 1403 participants) Early weight-bearing probably leads to better ankle function (mean difference (MD) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 5.78; 5 studies, 890 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however, this does not include a clinically meaningful difference. Early weight-bearing may offer little or no difference to HRQoL compared to delayed weight-bearing (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.30; 5 studies, 739 participants; low-certainty evidence); when translated to the EQ-5D scale (a commonly-used HRQoL questionnaire), any small difference was not clinically important. We were unsure whether there were any differences in participant satisfaction or pain because these outcomes had very low-certainty evidence. For adverse events, there may be little or no difference in re-operation (risk ratio (RR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.68; 7 studies, 1007 participants; low-certainty evidence). Removable versus non-removable ankle support (25 studies, 2206 participants) Following surgery, using a removable ankle support may lead to better ankle function (MD 6.39, 95% CI 1.69 to 11.09; 6 studies, 677 participants; low-certainty evidence). This effect included both a clinically important and unimportant difference. There is probably an improvement in HRQoL with a removable ankle support, although this difference included both a clinically important and unimportant difference when translated to the EQ-5D scale (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.50; 3 studies, 477 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 29 participants). There may be little or no difference in re-operations (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.71; 6 studies, 624 participants; low-certainty evidence). Following non-surgical management, there may be little or no difference between removable and non-removable ankle supports in ankle function (MD 1.08, 95% CI -3.18 to 5.34; 3 studies, 399 participants), and HRQoL (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.15; 3 studies, 397 participants); low-certainty evidence. No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain (2 studies, 167 participants), or re-operation because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 305 participants). Physical therapy interventions versus usual care or other physical therapy interventions (9 studies, 857 participants) Types of interventions included the use of active controlled motion, a spring-loaded ankle trainer, an antigravity treadmill, and variations of enhanced physiotherapy (e.g. additional stretching, joint mobilisation, neuromuscular exercises), delivered during or after the initial fracture management period. We were unable to pool data because of the differences in the design of interventions and their usual care comparators. Studies often included very few participants. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was very low, and therefore we were unsure of the effectiveness of these therapies. No studies in this comparison reported re-operation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Early weight-bearing may improve outcomes in the first six months after surgery for ankle fracture, but the difference is likely to be small and may not always be clinically important. A removable ankle support may also provide a better outcome, but again, the difference may not always be clinically important. It is likely that neither approach increases the re-operation risk. We assume that the findings for these comparisons are applicable to people with closed ankle fractures, and that satisfactory fracture stabilisation had been achieved with surgery. For people who have non-surgical treatment, there is no evidence that either a removable or non-removable ankle support may be superior. We were uncertain whether any physical therapy interventions were more effective than usual care or other physical therapy interventions. We encourage investigators of future studies on rehabilitation interventions for ankle fracture to use a core outcome set.

Videofluoroscopy dysphagia severity scale is predictive of subsequent remote pneumonia in dysphagia patients.

Introduction: Dysphagia-associated pneumonia is a critical health issue especially in the elders and stroke patients which carries a poorer prognosis. Therefore, we aim to identify methods with the potentials to predict subsequent pneumonia in dysphagia patients, which will be of great value in the prevention and early management of pneumonia. Methods: One-hundred dysphagia patients were enrolled and measurements including Dysphagia Severity Scale (DSS), Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS), Ohkuma Questionnaire, and Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) were assessed by either videofluoroscopy (VF), videoendoscopy (VE), or the study nurse. The patients were categorized into mild or severe groups based on each screening method. All the patients were assessed for pneumonia at 1, 3, 6, and 20 months after the examinations. Results: VF-DSS (p=0.001) is the only measurement being significantly associated with subsequent pneumonia with sensitivity and specificity of 0.857 and 0.486. The Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that significant differences between the mild/severe groups start to emerge 3 months after VF-DSS (p=0.013). Cox regression models used for adjusted hazard ratio of severe VF-DSS in association with subsequent pneumonia of different timepoints after controlling the important covariates showed the following results: 3 months, p=0.026, HR=5.341, 95%CI=1.219-23.405; 6 months, p=0.015, HR=4.557, 95%CI=1.338-15.522; 20 months, p=0.004, HR=4.832, 95%CI=1.670-13.984. Conclusions: Dysphagia severity evaluated by VE-DSS, VE-FOIS, VF-FOIS, Ohkuma Questionnaire, and EAT-10 is not associated with subsequent pneumonia. Only VF-DSS is associated with both short-term and long-term subsequent pneumonia. In patients with dysphagia, VF-DSS is predictive of subsequent pneumonia.

The McKenzie method for (sub)acute non-specific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread agreement amongst clinicians that people with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) comprise a heterogeneous group and that their management should be individually tailored. One treatment known by its tailored design is the McKenzie method (e.g. an individualized program of exercises based on clinical clues observed during assessment). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in people with (sub)acute non-specific low back pain. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers up to 15 August 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in adults with (sub)acute (less than 12 weeks) NSLBP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: This review included five RCTs with a total of 563 participants recruited from primary or tertiary care. Three trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Scotland. Three trials received financial support from non-commercial funders and two did not provide information on funding sources. All trials were at high risk of performance and detection bias. None of the included trials measured adverse events. McKenzie method versus minimal intervention (educational booklet; McKenzie method as a supplement to other intervention - main comparison) There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may result in a slight reduction in pain in the short term (MD -7.3, 95% CI -12.0 to -2.56; 2 trials, 377 participants) but not in the intermediate term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -14.3 to 4.3; 1 trial, 180 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -2.5, 95% CI -7.5 to 2.0; 2 trials, 328 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD -0.9, 95% CI -7.3 to 5.6; 1 trial, 180 participants). McKenzie method versus manual therapy There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce pain in the short term (MD -8.7, 95% CI -27.4 to 10.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) and may result in a slight increase in pain in the intermediate term (MD 7.0, 95% CI 0.7 to 13.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -15.0 to 5.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 4.3, 95% CI -0.7 to 9.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). McKenzie method versus other interventions (massage and advice) There is very low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD 4.0, 95% CI -15.4 to 23.4; 1 trial, 30 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 10.0, 95% CI -8.9 to 28.9; 1 trial, 30 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low- to very low-certainty evidence, the treatment effects for pain and disability found in our review were not clinically important. Thus, we can conclude that the McKenzie method is not an effective treatment for (sub)acute NSLBP.

Effectiveness of Opioid Analgesic Medicines Prescribed in or at Discharge From Emergency Departments for Musculoskeletal Pain : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The comparative benefits and harms of opioids for musculoskeletal pain in the emergency department (ED) are uncertain. PURPOSE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and harms of opioids for musculoskeletal pain in the ED setting. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases and registries from inception to 7 February 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials of any opioid analgesic compared with placebo or a nonopioid analgesic administered or prescribed to adults in or on discharge from the ED. DATA EXTRACTION: Pain and disability were rated on a scale of 0 to 100 and pooled using a random-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: Forty-two articles were included (n = 6128). In the ED, opioids were statistically but not clinically more effective in reducing pain in the short term (about 2 hours) than placebo and paracetamol (acetaminophen) but were not clinically or statistically more effective than nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or local or systemic anesthetics. Opioids may carry higher risk for harms than placebo, paracetamol, or NSAIDs, although evidence is very uncertain. There was no evidence of difference in harms associated with local or systemic anesthetics. LIMITATIONS: Low or very low GRADE ratings for some outcomes, unexplained heterogeneity, and little information on long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: The risk-benefit balance of opioids versus placebo, paracetamol, NSAIDs, and local or systemic anesthetics is uncertain. Opioids may have equivalent pain outcomes compared with NSAIDs, but evidence on comparisons of harms is very uncertain and heterogeneous. Although factors such as route of administration or dosage may explain some heterogeneity, more work is needed to identify which subgroups will have a more favorable benefit-risk balance for one analgesic over another. Longer-term pain management once dose thresholds are reached is also uncertain. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None. (PROSPERO: CRD42021275293).

COVID-related dysphonia and persistent long-COVID voice sequelae: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Dysphonia is a common symptom due to the coronavirus disease of the 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Nonetheless, it is often underestimated for its impact on human's health. We conducted this first study to investigate the global prevalence of COVID-related dysphonia as well as related clinical factors during acute COVID-19 infection, and after a mid- to long-term follow-up following the recovery. METHODS: Five electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for relevant articles until Dec, 2022, and the reference of the enrolled studies were also reviewed. Dysphonia prevalence during and after COVID-19 infection, and voice-related clinical factors were analyzed; the random-effects model was adopted for meta-analysis. The one-study-removal method was used for sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was determined with funnel plots and Egger's tests. RESULTS: Twenty-one articles comprising 13,948 patients were identified. The weighted prevalence of COVID-related dysphonia during infection was 25.1 % (95 % CI: 14.9 to 39.0 %), and male was significantly associated with lower dysphonia prevalence (coefficients: -0.116, 95 % CI: -0.196 to -0.036; P = .004) during this period. Besides, after recovery, the weighted prevalence of COVID-related dysphonia declined to 17.1 % (95 % CI: 11.0 to 25.8 %). 20.1 % (95 % CI: 8.6 to 40.2 %) of the total patients experienced long-COVID dysphonia. CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of the COVID-19 patients, especially female, suffered from voice impairment during infection, and approximately 70 % of these dysphonic patients kept experiencing long-lasting voice sequelae, which should be noticed by global physicians.

Consistencies among miscellaneous scales for evaluation of post-stroke dysphagia.

PURPOSE: Post-stroke dysphagia (PSD) is the most common type of dysphagia. Stroke patients with sustained dysphagia have poorer outcomes. The severity of PSD is assessed using miscellaneous scales with unknown consistencies. We aim to investigate the consistencies among miscellaneous scales, which could aid in the assessment of PSD. METHODS: A total of 49 PSD patients were enrolled. Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS), Dysphagia Severity Scale (DSS), Ohkuma Questionnaire, Eating Assessment Tool-10, and Repetitive Saliva Swallowing Test were performed. FOIS was performed by physicians, and DSS was conducted by both the physicians and nurses; the physicians used either videofluoroscopy (VF) or videoendoscopy (VE) for evaluation; while, the nurses assessed PSD by observation and subjective judgment. RESULTS: When using VF (VF-DSS and VF-FOIS) as the gold standard for the evaluation, VE-FOIS (κ = 0.625, 95% CI 0.300-0.950, p < 0.001) has a substantial agreement with VF-FOIS, and VE-DSS (κ = 0.381, 95% CI 0.127-0.636, p = 0.007) has a fair agreement with VF-DSS. The weighted kappa of FOIS to DSS in VE (weighted κ = 0.577, 95% CI 0.414-0.740, p < 0.001) is not lower than that in VF (weighted kappa = 0.249, 95% CI 0.136-0.362, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: For both DSS and FOIS, only VE has a statistically significant agreement with VF. Though VF has been viewed as the traditional gold standard of dysphagia screening, it has the limitations of being invasive and equipment dependent. For PSD, VE could be considered as a substitution when VF is not available or suitable.

Minimally invasive, single-stage, multilevel surgery for obstructive sleep apnoea: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive, single-staged multilevel surgery (MISS MLS) could be an optimal treatment for selected patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). We aim to systematically review the efficacy of MISS MLS for patients with OSA, as well as the clinical outcomes and possible complications in OSA patients before and after MISS MLS. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Six databases were searched, and the PRISMA guideline was followed. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with OSA receiving MISS MLS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The random-effects model was adopted for the statistical synthesis. The percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI) were adopted as the effect measurements of MISS MLS for OSA. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed to identify the heterogeneity among the studies. RESULTS: There were initially 154 articles for identification. Eventually, six studies with a total of 848 OSA patients completely met the inclusion criteria and were further enrolled for analysis. The pooled analysis showed statistically significant lower AHI (apnea/hypopnea index, /hr.; mean difference: -8.931, 95% CI: -11.591 to -6.271, I2 = 87.4%), ESS (mean difference: -2.947, 95% CI: -4.465 to -1.429, I2 = 94.9%), and snoring severity with 0-10 visual analog scale after surgery (mean difference: -4.966, 95% CI: -5.804 to -4.128, I2 = 96.4%). The success rate was 46% in mild/moderate OSA; however, 18% in severe OSA. There were no major complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The acceptable surgical outcomes, esp. in mild/moderate OSA, and rare complications are the major advantages of MISS MLS. The evidence of this study could aid the decision making in selecting suitable treatment programs for OSA patients.

The Prevalence of Opioid Analgesic Use in People with Chronic Noncancer Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

OBJECTIVE: To review studies examining the proportion of people with chronic noncancer pain who report consuming opioids and characteristics associated with their use. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: We searched databases from inception to February 8, 2020, and conducted citation tracking. We included observational studies reporting the proportion of adults with chronic noncancer pain who used opioid analgesics. Opioids were categorized as weak (e.g., codeine) or strong (e.g., oxycodone). Study risk of bias was assessed, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations provided a summary of the overall quality. Results were pooled using a random-effects model. Meta-regression determined factors associated with opioid use. RESULTS: Sixty studies (N=3,961,739) reported data on opioid use in people with chronic noncancer pain from 1990 to 2017. Of these 46, 77% had moderate risk of bias. Opioid use was reported by 26.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.1-30.8; moderate-quality evidence) of people with chronic noncancer pain. The use of weak opioids (17.3%; 95% CI 11.9-24.4; moderate-quality evidence) was more common than the use of strong opioids (9.8%; 95% CI, 6.8-14.0; low-quality evidence). Meta-regression determined that opioid use was associated with geographic region (P=0.02; lower in Europe than North America), but not sampling year (P=0.77), setting (P=0.06), diagnosis (P=0.34), or disclosure of funding (P=0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Our review summarized data from over 3.9 million people with chronic noncancer pain reporting their opioid use. Between 1990 and 2017, one-quarter of people with chronic noncancer pain reported taking opioids, and this proportion did not change over time.

Healthcare expenditure and its predictors in a cohort of Australians living with sciatica.

PURPOSE: To estimate the healthcare resource utilisation of an Australian cohort of people with sciatica and explore individual-level factors associated with expenditure. METHODS: Healthcare utilisation (services and medication) data from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pregabalin in patients with sciatica (n = 185) were analysed to estimate healthcare expenditure of participants over 12 months. Associations between key baseline socio-economic, pain and quality of life characteristics and healthcare expenditure were examined using generalised linear imputation models. RESULTS: On average, participants accessed AUD$1,134 of healthcare over the year, predominantly made up of $114 of medication and $914 of health services, which included $418 of physiotherapy services. Participants randomised to receive pregabalin incurred higher expenditure ($1,263 compared to $1,001 for placebo), which was largely driven by pregabalin ($158) and greater health services ($107). Healthcare expenditure was significantly higher for participants prescribed pregabalin, earning greater than $1,700 per week ($88,400 per year) and reporting poorer quality of life (physical and mental). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest inefficiency in the use of healthcare resources due to increased healthcare resource utilisation in people with sciatica treated with pregabalin, compared to placebo. Costs of treating sciatica varied based on individual quality of life and socio-economic characteristics.

Percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression under 3D real-time image-guided navigation for spinal stenosis in degenerative lumbar kyphoscoliosis patients: an innovative preliminary study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to introduce a new method of percutaneous endoscopic decompression under 3D real-time image-guided navigation for spinal stenosis in degenerative kyphoscoliosis patients without instability or those who with multiple comorbidities. Decompression alone using endoscope for kyphoscoliosis patient is technical demanding and may result in unnecessary bone destruction leading to further instability. The O-arm/StealthStation system is popular for its ability to provide automated registration with intraoperative, postpositioning computed tomography (CT) which results in superior accuracy in spine surgery. METHODS: In this study, we presented four cases. All patients were over seventy years old female with variable degrees of kyphoscoliosis and multiple comorbidities who could not endure major spine fusion surgery. Percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression under 3D real-time image-guided navigation were successfully performed. Patients' demographics, image study parameters, and outcome measurements including pre- and post-operative serial Visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were well documented. The follow-up time was 1 year. RESULTS: Pre- and post-operative MRI showed average dural sac cross sectional area (DSCSA) improved from 81.62 (range 67.34-89.07) to 153.27 (range 127.96-189.73). Preoperative neurological symptoms including radicular leg pain improved postoperatively. The mean ODI (%) were 85 (range 82.5-90) at initial visit, 35.875 (range 25-51) at 1 month post-operatively, 26.875 (range 22.5-35) at 6 months post-operatively and 22.5 (range 17.5-30) at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.05). The mean VAS score were 9 (range 8-10) at initial visit, 2.25 (range 2-3) at 1 month post-operatively, 1.75 (range 1-2) at 6 months post-operatively and 0.25 (range 0-1) at 12 months post-operatively (p < 0.05). There was no surgery-related complication. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first preliminary study of percutaneous endoscopic laminotomy under O-arm navigation with successful outcomes. The innovative technique may serve as a promising solution in treating spinal stenosis patients with lumbar kyphoscoliosis and multiple comorbidities.

Band alignment in quantum wells from automatically tuned DFT+U.

Band alignment between two materials is of fundamental importance for a multitude of applications. However, density functional theory (DFT) either underestimates the bandgap - as is the case with the local density approximation (LDA) or generalized gradient approximation (GGA) - or is highly computationally demanding, as is the case with hybrid-functional methods. The latter can become prohibitive in electronic-structure calculations of supercells which describe quantum wells. We propose to apply the DFT+U method, with U for each atomic shell being treated as set of tuning parameters, to automatically fit the bulk bandgap and the lattice constant, and then use the thus obtained U parameters in large supercell calculations to determine the band alignment. We apply this procedure to InP/In0.5Ga0.5As, In0.5Ga0.5As/In0.5Al0.5As and InP/In0.5Al0.5As quantum wells, and obtain good agreement with experimental results. Although this procedure requires some experimental input, it provides both meaningful valence and conduction band offsets while, crucially, lattice relaxation is taken into account. The computational cost of this procedure is comparable to that of LDA. We believe that this is a practical procedure that can be useful for providing accurate estimates of band alignments between more complicated alloys.

Cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in the treatment of non-specific neck pain and low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy in the treatment of patients with non-specific neck pain and low back pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of economic evaluations. DATA SOURCES: The search was performed in 5 clinical and 3 economic electronic databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included economic evaluations performed alongside randomised controlled trials. Differences in costs and effects were pooled in a meta-analysis, if possible, and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were descriptively analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included. On average, exercise therapy was associated with lower costs and larger effects for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in comparison with usual care for subacute and chronic low back pain from a healthcare perspective (based on ICUR). Exercise therapy had similar costs and effect for QALY in comparison with other interventions for neck pain from a societal perspective, and subacute and chronic low back pain from a healthcare perspective. There was limited or inconsistent evidence on the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with usual care for neck pain and acute low back pain, other interventions for acute low back pain and different types of exercise therapy for neck pain and low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise therapy seems to be cost-effective compared with usual care for subacute and chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was not (more) cost-effective compared with other interventions for neck pain and low back pain. The cost-utility estimates are rather uncertain, indicating that more economic evaluations are needed. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42017059025.

Worsening trends in analgesics recommended for spinal pain in primary care.

PURPOSE: Limited evidence exists on secular trends of analgesics for spinal pain. We investigated general practitioner's (GP) recommendations of analgesic medicines for spinal pain and investigated characteristics associated with their recommendation. METHODS: We accessed data on spinal pain consultations from the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) database, a nationally representative database on GP activity in Australia. Data extracted included consultation details and management provided. Medicines recommended were grouped as simple analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioid analgesics or neuropathic pain medicines. Multivariate logistic regression determined if patient characteristics and GP characteristics were associated with medication recommendations. RESULTS: We analysed BEACH data for 9100 GPs who managed 39,303 patients with spinal pain between 2004 and 2014. Over the decade, analgesic recommendations increased. After accounting for patient and GP characteristics, there was a significant increase in the rate single-ingredient opioid analgesics [annual relative increase of 6% (RR 1.06 (95% CI 1.05-1.07), P < 0.001)] and neuropathic pain medicines [annual relative increase of 19% (RR 1.19 (95% CI 1.16-1.22), P < 0.001)] were recommended; and a significant decrease in the rate NSAIDs were recommended [annual relative decrease of 4% (RR 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97), P < 0.001)]. Logistic regression identified several patient and GP characteristics associated with medicine recommendations, e.g. stronger opioids were less likely recommended for Indigenous patients [odds ratio 0.15 (95% CI 0.04-0.56)]. CONCLUSIONS: GP's analgesic recommendations for spinal pain have become increasingly divergent from guideline recommendations over time.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain in primary care: an updated overview.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the recommendations regarding the diagnosis and treatment contained in current clinical practice guidelines for patients with non-specific low back pain in primary care. We also aimed to examine how recommendations have changed since our last overview in 2010. METHOD: The searches for clinical practice guidelines were performed for the period from 2008 to 2017 in electronic databases. Guidelines including information regarding either the diagnosis or treatment of non-specific low back pain, and targeted at a multidisciplinary audience in the primary care setting, were considered eligible. We extracted data regarding recommendations for diagnosis and treatment, and methods for development of guidelines. RESULTS: We identified 15 clinical practice guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care. For diagnosis of patients with non-specific low back pain, the clinical practice guidelines recommend history taking and physical examination to identify red flags, neurological testing to identify radicular syndrome, use of imaging if serious pathology is suspected (but discourage routine use), and assessment of psychosocial factors. For treatment of patients with acute low back pain, the guidelines recommend reassurance on the favourable prognosis and advice on returning to normal activities, avoiding bed rest, the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and weak opioids for short periods. For treatment of patients with chronic low back pain, the guidelines recommend the use of NSAIDs and antidepressants, exercise therapy, and psychosocial interventions. In addition, referral to a specialist is recommended in case of suspicion of specific pathologies or radiculopathy or if there is no improvement after 4 weeks. While there were a few discrepancies across the current clinical practice guidelines, a substantial proportion of recommendations was consistently endorsed. In the current review, we identified some differences compared to the previous overview regarding the recommendations for assessment of psychosocial factors, the use of some medications (e.g., paracetamol) as well as an increasing amount of information regarding the types of exercise, mode of delivery, acupuncture, herbal medicines, and invasive treatments. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The economic burden of guideline-recommended first line care for acute low back pain.

PURPOSE: To report health care costs and the factors associated with such costs in people with acute low back pain receiving guideline-recommended first line care. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a trial which found no difference in clinical outcomes. Participants with acute low back pain received reassurance and advice, and either paracetamol (taken regularly or as needed) or placebo for up to 4 weeks and followed up for 12 weeks. Data on health service utilisation were collected by self-report. A health sector perspective was adopted to report all direct costs incurred (in 2015 AUD, 1 AUD = 0.53 Euro). Costs were reported for the entire study cohort and for each group. Various baseline clinical, demographic, work-related and socioeconomic factors were investigated for their association with increased costs using generalised linear models. RESULTS: The mean cost per participant was AUD167.74 (SD = 427.24) for the entire cohort (n = 1365). Most of these costs were incurred in primary care through visits to a general practitioner or physiotherapist. Compared to the placebo group, there was an increase in cost when paracetamol was taken. Multivariate analysis showed that disability, symptom duration and compensation were associated with costs. Receiving compensation was associated with a twofold increase compared to not receiving compensation. CONCLUSIONS: Taking paracetamol as part of first line care for acute low back pain increased the economic burden. Higher disability, longer symptom duration and receiving compensation were independently associated with increased health care costs.