Preferences of patients with chronic low back pain about nonsurgical treatments: Results of a discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess patients' preferences of nonsurgical treatments for chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHOD: We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) in Quebec, Canada, in 2018. Seven attributes were included: treatment modality, pain reduction, the onset of treatment efficacy, duration effectiveness, difficulties with daily activities, sleep problems, and knowledge of the patient's body and pain location. Treatment modalities were corticosteroid injections, supervised body-mind physical activities, supervised sports physical activities, physical manipulations, self-management courses, and psychotherapy. Utility levels were estimated using a logit model, a latent class model and a Bayesian hierarchical model. RESULTS: Analyses were conducted on 424 $424$ individuals. According to the Bayesian hierarchical model, the conditional relative importance weights of attributes were as follows: (1) treatment modality (34.79%), (2) pain reduction (18.73%), (3) difficulties with daily activities (11.71%), (4) duration effectiveness (10.06%), (5) sleep problems (10.05%), (6) onset of treatment efficacy (8.60%) and (7) knowledge of the patient's body and pain location (6.06%). According to the latent class model that found six classes of respondents with different behaviours (using Akaike and Bayesian criteria), the treatment modality was the most important attribute for all classes, except for class 4 for which pain reduction was the most important. In addition, classes 2 and 5 refused corticosteroid injections, while psychotherapy was preferred only in class 3. CONCLUSION: Given the preference heterogeneity found in the analysis, it is important that patient preferences are discussed and considered by the physicians. This will help to improve the patient care pathway in a context of a patient-centred model for a disease with growing prevalence. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A small group of patients was involved in the conception, design and interpretation of data. Participants in the DCE were all CLBP patients.

How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing health equity is endorsed in the Sustainable Development Goals. The failure of systematic reviews to consider potential differences in effects across equity factors is cited by decision-makers as a limitation to their ability to inform policy and program decisions.  OBJECTIVES: To explore what methods systematic reviewers use to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up to 26 February 2021: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Methodology Register, CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center, Education Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Hein Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals, PAIS International, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Digital Dissertations and the Health Technology Assessment Database. We searched SCOPUS to identify articles that cited any of the included studies on 10 June 10 2021. We contacted authors and searched the reference lists of included studies to identify additional potentially relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included empirical studies of cohorts of systematic reviews that assessed methods for measuring effects on health inequalities. We define health inequalities as unfair and avoidable differences across socially stratifying factors that limit opportunities for health. We operationalised this by assessing studies which evaluated differences in health across any component of the PROGRESS-Plus acronym, which stands for Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender or sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital. "Plus" stands for other factors associated with discrimination, exclusion, marginalisation or vulnerability such as personal characteristics (e.g. age, disability), relationships that limit opportunities for health (e.g. children in a household with parents who smoke) or environmental situations which provide limited control of opportunities for health (e.g. school food environment). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data using a pre-tested form. Risk of bias was appraised for included studies according to the potential for bias in selection and detection of systematic reviews.  MAIN RESULTS: In total, 48,814 studies were identified and the titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate. In this updated review, we identified an additional 124 methodological studies published in the 10 years since the first version of this review, which included 34 studies. Thus, 158 methodological studies met our criteria for inclusion. The methods used by these studies focused on evidence relevant to populations experiencing health inequity (108 out of 158 studies), assess subgroup analysis across PROGRESS-Plus (26 out of 158 studies), assess analysis of a gradient in effect across PROGRESS-Plus (2 out of 158 studies) or use a combination of subgroup analysis and focused approaches (20 out of 158 studies). The most common PROGRESS-Plus factors assessed were age (43 studies), socioeconomic status in 35 studies, low- and middle-income countries in 24 studies, gender or sex in 22 studies, race or ethnicity in 17 studies, and four studies assessed multiple factors across which health inequity may exist. Only 16 studies provided a definition of health inequity. Five methodological approaches to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness were identified: 1) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in systematic reviews (140 of 158 studies used a type of descriptive method); 2) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in original trials (50 studies); 3) analytic approaches which assessed differential effects across one or more PROGRESS-Plus factors (16 studies); 4) applicability assessment (25 studies) and 5) stakeholder engagement (28 studies), which is a new finding in this update and examines the appraisal of whether relevant stakeholders with lived experience of health inequity were included in the design of systematic reviews or design and delivery of interventions. Reporting for both approaches (analytic and applicability) lacked transparency and was insufficiently detailed to enable the assessment of credibility. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for improvement in conceptual clarity about the definition of health equity, describing sufficient detail about analytic approaches (including subgroup analyses) and transparent reporting of judgments required for applicability assessments in order to consider health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness.

Development of a checklist to guide equity considerations in health technology assessment.

OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessment (HTA) can impact health inequities by informing healthcare priority-setting decisions. This paper presents a novel checklist to guide HTA practitioners looking to include equity considerations in their work: the equity checklist for HTA (ECHTA). The list is pragmatically organized according to the generic HTA phases and can be consulted at each step. METHODS: A first set of items was based on the framework for equity in HTA developed by Culyer and Bombard. After rewording and reorganizing according to five HTA phases, they were complemented by elements emerging from a literature search. Consultations with method experts, decision makers, and stakeholders further refined the items. Further feedback was sought during a presentation of the tool at an international HTA conference. Lastly, the checklist was piloted through all five stages of an HTA. RESULTS: ECHTA proposes elements to be considered at each one of the five HTA phases: Scoping, Evaluation, Recommendations and Conclusions, Knowledge Translation and Implementation, and Reassessment. More than a simple checklist, the tool provides details and examples that guide the evaluators through an analysis in each phase. A pilot test is also presented, which demonstrates the ECHTA's usability and added value. CONCLUSIONS: ECHTA provides guidance for HTA evaluators wishing to ensure that their conclusions do not contribute to inequalities in health. Several points to build upon the current checklist will be addressed by a working group of experts, and further feedback is welcome from evaluators who have used the tool.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Community Outreach Work, and Inter-professional Collaboration with Regional Partners.

Community outreach workers support individuals in accessing the health and community services they require through various forms of proximity approaches. Even though community outreach has been available in the province of Quebec (Canada) for the past 40 years, it is still difficult to implement and sustain, especially with families of young children. The aim of this study was to document barriers and facilitators to implementing community outreach practices, and to describe how such workers collaborate with sectoral (e.g. health care) and inter-sectoral (e.g. municipalities, community organizations, schools) partners. We performed a content analysis on 55 scientific and grey literature documents, and transcriptions of 24 individual interviews and 3 focus groups with stakeholders including parents, community outreach workers, health care employees, and inter-sectoral partners. This study reveals four categories of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of community outreach work (i.e. organizational factors, nature of the work and worker-related factors, family-related factors, external factors). With regards to collaboration, community outreach workers deal with various partners. Good inter-professional collaboration is achieved through positive interactions and communication, shared or co-developed activities for the families, co-intervention with families, and strategies to enhance role awareness and inter-sectoral meetings. Results highlighted that many factors interact and can either influence, positively or negatively, the opportunity to implement community outreach work. The collaborative practices identified may help to maximize facilitators and overcome barriers. Advocacy and a better understanding of how to integrate community outreach work within health services while maintaining the workers' flexibility are needed to sustain this practice.

KATP channel deficiency in mouse FDB causes an impairment of energy metabolism during fatigue.

The skeletal muscle ATP-sensitive K+ (KATP) channel is crucial in preventing fiber damage and contractile dysfunction, possibly by preventing damaging ATP depletion. The objective of this study was to investigate changes in energy metabolism during fatigue in wild-type and inwardly rectifying K+ channel (Kir6.2)-deficient (Kir6.2-/-) flexor digitorum brevis (FDB), a muscle that lacks functional KATP channels. Fatigue was elicited with one tetanic contraction every second. Decreases in ATP and total adenylate levels were significantly greater in wild-type than Kir6.2-/- FDB during the last 2 min of the fatigue period. Glycogen depletion was greater in Kir6.2-/- FDB for the first 60 s, but not by the end of the fatigue period, while there was no difference in glucose uptake. The total amount of glucosyl units entering glycolysis was the same in wild-type and Kir6.2-/- FDB. During the first 60 s, Kir6.2-/- FDB generated less lactate and more CO2; in the last 120 s, Kir6.2-/- FDB stopped generating CO2 and produced more lactate. The ATP generated during fatigue from phosphocreatine, glycolysis (lactate), and oxidative phosphorylation (CO2) was 3.3-fold greater in Kir6.2-/- than wild-type FDB. Because ATP and total adenylate were significantly less in Kir6.2-/- FDB, it is suggested that Kir6.2-/- FDB has a greater energy deficit, despite a greater ATP production, which is further supported by greater glucose uptake and lactate and CO2 production in Kir6.2-/- FDB during the recovery period. It is thus concluded that a lack of functional KATP channels results in an impairment of energy metabolism.

A discrete choice experiment on preferences of patients with low back pain about non-surgical treatments: identification, refinement and selection of attributes and levels.

Objectives: Hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) needs to consider all relevant data to help decision making, including patients' preferences. In this study, we comprehensively describe the process of identification, refinement and selection of attributes and levels for a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Methods: A mixed-methods design was used to identify attributes and levels explaining low back pain (LBP) patients' choice for a non-surgical treatment. This design combined a systematic literature review with a patients' focus group, one-on-one interactions with experts and patients, and discussions with stakeholder committee members. Following the patient's focus group, preference exercises were conducted. A consensus about the attributes and levels was researched during discussions with committee members. Results: The literature review yielded 40 attributes to consider in patients' treatment choice. During the focus group, one additional attribute emerged. The preference exercises allowed selecting eight attributes for the DCE. These eight attributes and their levels were discussed and validated by the committee members who helped reframe two levels in one of the attributes and delete one attribute. The final seven attributes were: treatment modality, pain reduction, onset of treatment efficacy, duration of efficacy, difficulty in daily living activities, sleep problem, and knowledge about their body and pain. Conclusion: This study is one of the few to comprehensively describe the selection process of attributes and levels for a DCE. This may help ensure transparency and judge the quality of the decision-making process. In the context of a HB-HTA unit, this strengthens the legitimacy to perform a DCE to better inform decision makers in a patient-centered care approach.

American College of Rheumatology 2012 recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies in osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and knee.

OBJECTIVE: To update the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2000 recommendations for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) and develop new recommendations for hand OA. METHODS: A list of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic modalities commonly used to manage knee, hip, and hand OA as well as clinical scenarios representing patients with symptomatic hand, hip, and knee OA were generated. Systematic evidence-based literature reviews were conducted by a working group at the Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, and updated by ACR staff to include additions to bibliographic databases through December 31, 2010. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, a formal process to rate scientific evidence and to develop recommendations that are as evidence based as possible, was used by a Technical Expert Panel comprised of various stakeholders to formulate the recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities for OA of the hand, hip, and knee. RESULTS: Both "strong" and "conditional" recommendations were made for OA management. Modalities conditionally recommended for the management of hand OA include instruction in joint protection techniques, provision of assistive devices, use of thermal modalities and trapeziometacarpal joint splints, and use of oral and topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tramadol, and topical capsaicin. Nonpharmacologic modalities strongly recommended for the management of knee OA were aerobic, aquatic, and/or resistance exercises as well as weight loss for overweight patients. Nonpharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for knee OA included medial wedge insoles for valgus knee OA, subtalar strapped lateral insoles for varus knee OA, medially directed patellar taping, manual therapy, walking aids, thermal agents, tai chi, self management programs, and psychosocial interventions. Pharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for the initial management of patients with knee OA included acetaminophen, oral and topical NSAIDs, tramadol, and intraarticular corticosteroid injections; intraarticular hyaluronate injections, duloxetine, and opioids were conditionally recommended in patients who had an inadequate response to initial therapy. Opioid analgesics were strongly recommended in patients who were either not willing to undergo or had contraindications for total joint arthroplasty after having failed medical therapy. Recommendations for hip OA were similar to those for the management of knee OA. CONCLUSION: These recommendations are based on the consensus judgment of clinical experts from a wide range of disciplines, informed by available evidence, balancing the benefits and harms of both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities, and incorporating their preferences and values. It is hoped that these recommendations will be utilized by health care providers involved in the management of patients with OA.

KATP channel deficiency in mouse flexor digitorum brevis causes fibre damage and impairs Ca2+ release and force development during fatigue in vitro.

Activation of the K(ATP) channels results in faster fatigue rates as the channels depress action potential amplitude, whereas abolishing the channel activity has no effect in whole extensor digitorum longus (EDL) and soleus muscles. In this study, we examined the effects of abolished K(ATP) channel activity during fatigue at 37 degrees C on free intracellular Ca(2+) (Ca(2+)(i)) and tetanic force using single muscle fibres and small muscle bundles from the flexor digitorum brevis (FDB). K(ATP) channel deficient muscle fibres were obtained (i) pharmacologically by exposing wild-type fibres to glibenclamide, and (ii) genetically using null mice for the Kir6.2 gene (Kir6.2(-/-) mice). Fatigue was elicited using 200 ms tetanic contractions every second for 3 min. This study demonstrated for the first time that abolishing K(ATP) channel activity at 37 degrees C resulted in faster fatigue rates, where decreases in peak Ca(2+)(i) and tetanic force were faster in K(ATP) channel deficient fibres than in control wild-type fibres. Furthermore, several contractile dysfunctions were also observed in K(ATP) channel deficient muscle fibre. They included partially or completely supercontracted single muscle fibres, greater increases in unstimulated Ca(2+)(i) and unstimulated force, and lower force recovery. We propose that the observed faster rate of fatigue in K(ATP) channel deficient fibres is because the decreases in peak Ca(2+)(i) and force caused by contractile dysfunctions prevail over the expected slower decreases when the channels do not depress action potential amplitude.