Development of low back pain curriculum content standards for entry-level clinical training.

BACKGROUND: The management of low back pain (LBP) is highly variable and patients often receive management that is not recommended and/or miss out on recommended care. Clinician knowledge and behaviours are strongly influenced by entry-level clinical training and are commonly cited as barriers to implementing evidence-based management. Currently there are no internationally recognised curriculum standards for the teaching of LBP content to ensure graduating clinicians have the appropriate knowledge and competencies to assess and manage LBP. We formed an international interdisciplinary working group to develop curriculum content standards for the teaching of LBP in entry-level clinical training programs. METHODS: The working group included representatives from 11 countries: 18 academics and clinicians from healthcare professions who deal with the management of LBP (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, pharmacology, and psychology), seven professional organisation representatives (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, spine societies), and one healthcare consumer. A literature review was performed, including database and hand searches of guidelines and accreditation, curricula, and other policy documents, to identify gaps in current LBP teaching and recommended entry-level knowledge and competencies. The steering group (authors) drafted the initial LBP Curriculum Content Standards (LBP-CCS), which were discussed and modified through two review rounds with the working group. RESULTS: Sixty-two documents informed the draft standards. The final LBP-CCS consisted of four broad topics covering the epidemiology, biopsychosocial contributors, assessment, and management of LBP. For each topic, key knowledge and competencies to be achieved by the end of entry-level clinical training were described. CONCLUSION: We have developed the LBP-CCS in consultation with an interdisciplinary, international working group. These standards can be used to inform or benchmark the content of curricula related to LBP in new or existing entry-level clinical training programs.

Evaluation of the efficacy of an internet-based pain education and exercise program for chronic musculoskeletal pain in comparison with online self-management booklet: a protocol of a randomised controlled trial with assessor-blinded, 12-month follow-up, and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is one of the main causes of years lived with disability and generates the highest cost of health care among chronic pain conditions. Internet-based treatments have been shown to be an alternative for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, in addition to reducing barriers such as travel, high demands on the public health system, lack of time, lack of insurance coverage for private care, and high costs for long-term treatment. The aim of this clinical trial is to develop and test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of, an internet-based self-management program based on pain education and exercise for people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: This is a prospectively registered, assessor-blinded, two-arm randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation comparing the Internet-based pain education and exercise intervention with a control group that will receive an online booklet. One hundred and sixty patients will be recruited from Sao Paulo, Brazil. Follow-ups will be conducted in post-treatment, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The conduct of the study, as well as the evaluations and follow-ups will be carried out entirely remotely, through online platforms and telephone calls. The primary outcome will be pain intensity at post-treatment (8 weeks) measured using the 11-item Pain Numerical Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes will be biopsychosocial factors presents in the chronic musculoskeletal pain condition. Costs due to chronic musculoskeletal pain will be also measured, and cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective will performed. DISCUSSION: Our hypothesis is that internet-based pain education and exercise will be better than an online booklet in reducing pain and improving biopsychosocial outcomes in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. In addition, we believe that there will be good acceptance of patients for the internet-based intervention and that internet-based intervention will be more cost effective than the online booklet. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04274439 , registered 18 February 2020).

Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute low back pain: systematic review.

Background and aims There has been no comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute low back pain (LBP). The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of TENS for acute LBP. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO (inception to May 2018) for randomised placebo controlled trials. The primary outcome measure was pain relief in the immediate term (within 2-weeks of administration) assessed using the 100 mm visual analogue scale. A mean difference of at least 10 points on the 100-point pain scale was considered clinically significant. Methodological quality of the eligible studies was assessed using the PEDro scale and overall quality assessment rating was assessed using GRADE. Results Three placebo controlled studies (n = 192) were included. One low quality trial (n = 63) provides low quality evidence that ~30 min treatment with TENS in an emergency-care setting provides clinically worthwhile pain relief for moderate to severe acute LBP in the immediate term compared with sham TENS [Mean Difference (MD) - 28.0 (95% CI - 32.7, -23.3)]. Two other studies which administered a course of TENS over 4-5 weeks, in more usual settings provide inconclusive evidence; MD -2.75 (95% CI -11.63, 6.13). There was limited data on adverse events or long term follow-up. Conclusions The current evidence is insufficient to support or dismiss the use of TENS for acute LBP. Implications There is insufficient evidence to guide the use of TENS for acute LBP. There is low quality evidence of moderate improvements in pain with a short course of TENS (~30 min) during emergency transport of patients to the hospital. Future research should evaluate whether TENS has an opioid sparing role in the management of acute LBP.

Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions.

Many clinical practice guidelines recommend similar approaches for the assessment and management of low back pain. Recommendations include use of a biopsychosocial framework to guide management with initial non-pharmacological treatment, including education that supports self-management and resumption of normal activities and exercise, and psychological programmes for those with persistent symptoms. Guidelines recommend prudent use of medication, imaging, and surgery. The recommendations are based on trials almost exclusively from high-income countries, focused mainly on treatments rather than on prevention, with limited data for cost-effectiveness. However, globally, gaps between evidence and practice exist, with limited use of recommended first-line treatments and inappropriately high use of imaging, rest, opioids, spinal injections, and surgery. Doing more of the same will not reduce back-related disability or its long-term consequences. The advances with the greatest potential are arguably those that align practice with the evidence, reduce the focus on spinal abnormalities, and ensure promotion of activity and function, including work participation. We have identified effective, promising, or emerging solutions that could offer new directions, but that need greater attention and further research to determine if they are appropriate for large-scale implementation. These potential solutions include focused strategies to implement best practice, the redesign of clinical pathways, integrated health and occupational interventions to reduce work disability, changes in compensation and disability claims policies, and public health and prevention strategies.

Physical Activity-Based Interventions Using Electronic Feedback May Be Ineffective in Reducing Pain and Disability in Patients With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of physical activity-based interventions using electronic feedback in reducing pain and disability compared to minimal or no interventions in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. DATA SOURCES: The following electronic databases were searched: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and main clinical trial registers. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of physical activity interventions using electronic feedback (eg, physical activity monitors) on pain and disability compared to minimal or no interventions in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain were considered eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: Pooled effects were calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four published randomized controlled trials and 4 registered unpublished randomized controlled trials were included. At short-term follow-up, pooled estimations showed no significant differences in pain (2 trials: n=116; SMD=-.50; 95% confidence interval, -1.91 to 0.91) and disability (2 trials: n=116; SMD=-.81; 95% confidence interval, -2.34 to 0.73) between physical activity-based interventions and minimal interventions. Similarly, nonsignificant results were found at intermediate-term follow-up. According to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, the overall quality of the evidence was considered to be of low quality. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that physical activity-based interventions using electronic feedback may be ineffective in reducing pain and disability compared to minimal interventions in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Clinicians should be cautious when implementing this intervention in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Effectiveness of Tai Chi for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Tai chi is recommended for musculoskeletal conditions; however, the evidence for its clinical effectiveness is uncertain. Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine whether tai chi is beneficial for clinical outcomes in people with musculoskeletal pain. Data Sources: Seven databases were searched: Embase, PEDro, AMED, MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials of tai chi for people with a chronic musculoskeletal condition were included. Data Extraction: Two reviewers extracted data and rated risk of bias. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for individual trials and pooled effect sizes were calculated using a random-effects model. Data Synthesis: Fifteen studies were identified; these studies included people with osteoarthritis (80%), back pain (13%), and headache (7%). Using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, moderate-quality evidence was found that tai chi was more effective than no treatment or usual care at short term on pain (SMD=-0.66 [95% CI=-0.85, -0.48]) and disability (SMD=-0.66 [95% CI=-0.85, -0.46]). The evidence for other outcomes was of low or very low quality and there was little information regarding long-term effects. Thus, although the number of publications in this area has increased, the rigor has not, hindering physical therapists' ability to provide reliable recommendations for clinical practice. Limitations: The evidence provided in this review is limited by trials with small sample sizes, low methodological quality, and lack of long-term assessment. Conclusions: In order for tai chi to be recommended as an effective intervention, more high-quality trials with large sample sizes assessing tai chi versus other evidence-based treatments at short term and at long term are needed.

Influence of clinician characteristics and operational factors on recruitment of participants with low back pain: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify factors that influence recruitment of patients to an observational study of low back pain (LBP). METHODS: From 1147 primary care (first health contact) clinicians initially contacted, 138 (physiotherapists and chiropractors) agreed to participate in a large observational study of LBP and were the focus of the current study. Data were collected pertaining to clinicians' characteristics, operational factors, and the number of patients recruited. The association of a variety of clinician characteristics and operational factors with recruitment rate was determined using a multivariate negative binomial regression analysis. RESULTS: From October 2011 to November 2012, 1585 patients were screened by 138 study clinicians with 951 eligible patients entering the observational study. Clinicians who were members of their professional association had a recruitment rate less than half that of those who were nonmembers (P < .0001). Clinicians who were trained by telephone had a recruitment rate 4.01 times higher than those trained face to face (P < .0001). Similarly, clinicians who referred a larger number of ineligible participants had a slightly higher recruitment rate with an incident rate ratio of 1.04 per ineligible patient (P < .0001). Other clinicians' characteristics and operational factors were not associated with recruitment. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that it is feasible to recruit participants from primary care practices to a simple observational study of LBP. Factors identified as influencing recruitment were professional association (negative association), training by telephone, and referring a higher number of ineligible participants.

Tai chi exercise for treatment of pain and disability in people with persistent low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of tai chi exercise on persistent low back pain. METHODS: We performed a randomized controlled trial in a general community setting in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Participants consisted of 160 volunteers between ages 18 and 70 years with persistent nonspecific low back pain. The tai chi group (n = 80) consisted of 18 40-minute sessions over a 10-week period delivered in a group format by a qualified instructor. The waitlist control group continued with their usual health care. Bothersomeness of back symptoms was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and pain-related disability. Data were collected at pre- and postintervention and analyzed by intent-to-treat. RESULTS: Tai chi exercise reduced bothersomeness of back symptoms by 1.7 points on a 0-10 scale, reduced pain intensity by 1.3 points on a 0-10 scale, and improved self-report disability by 2.6 points on the 0-24 Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire scale. The followup rate was >90% for all outcomes. These results were considered a worthwhile treatment effect by researchers and participants. CONCLUSION: This is the first pragmatic randomized controlled trial of tai chi exercise for people with low back pain. It showed that a 10-week tai chi program improved pain and disability outcomes and can be considered a safe and effective intervention for those experiencing long-term low back pain symptoms.

A randomized controlled trial of tai chi for long-term low back pain (TAI CHI): study rationale, design, and methods.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain persisting for longer than 3 months is a common and costly condition for which many current treatments have low-moderate success rates at best. Exercise is among the more successful treatments for this condition, however, the type and dosage of exercise that elicits the best results is not clearly defined. Tai chi is a gentle form of low intensity exercise that uses controlled movements in combination with relaxation techniques and is currently used as a safe form of exercise for people suffering from other chronic pain conditions such as arthritis. To date, there has been no scientific evaluation of tai chi as an intervention for people with back pain. Thus the aim of this study will be to examine the effects of a tai chi exercise program on pain and disability in people with long-term low back pain. METHODS AND DESIGN: The study will recruit 160 healthy individuals from the community setting to be randomised to either a tai chi intervention group or a wait-list control group. Individuals in the tai chi group will attend 2 tai chi sessions (40 minutes)/week for 8 weeks followed by 1 tai chi session/week for 2 weeks. The wait-list control will continue their usual health care practices and have the opportunity to participate in the tai chi program once they have completed the follow-up assessments. The primary outcome will be bothersomeness of back symptoms measured with a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Secondary outcomes include, self-reports of pain-related disability, health-related quality of life and global perceived effect of treatment. Statistical analysis of primary and secondary outcomes will be based on the intention to treat principle. Linear mixed models will be used to test for the effect of treatment on outcome at 10 weeks follow up. This trial has received ethics approval from The University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee. HREC Approval No.10452 DISCUSSION: This study will be the first trial in this area and the information on its effectiveness will allow patients, clinicians and treatment funders to make informed choices regarding this treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. ACTRN12608000270314.

Systematic review of conservative interventions for subacute low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of conservative interventions on clinically relevant outcome measures for patients with subacute low back pain. This is particularly important because effective treatment for subacute low back pain will prevent the transition to chronic low back pain, a condition that is largely responsible for the high health care costs of low back pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Methodological quality of each trial was assessed. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for pain and disability and risk ratios for return to work. RESULTS: Thirteen trials were located, evaluating the following interventions: manipulation, back school, exercise, advice, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), hydrotherapy, massage, corset, cognitive behavioural treatment and co-ordination of primary health care. Most studies were of low quality and did not show a statistically significant effect of intervention. For the strict duration of low back pain (six weeks to three months), no evidence of high internal validity was found but when other methodological criteria were considered, evidence was found for the efficacy of advice. Furthermore, there is evidence that when a broader view is taken of the duration of subacute low back pain (seven days to six months), other treatments (e.g. manipulation, exercise, TENS) may be effective. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identified a major gap in the evidence for interventions that are currently recommended in clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of subacute low back pain. Lack of a uniform definition of subacute low back pain further limited current evidence.