Systemic corticosteroids for radicular and non-radicular low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are medications with anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant properties. Systemic corticosteroids administered through the oral, intravenous, or intramuscular routes have been used to treat various types of low back pain, including radicular back pain (not due to spinal stenosis), non-radicular back pain, and spinal stenosis. However, there is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid for radicular low back pain, non-radicular low back pain, and symptomatic spinal stenosis in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was September 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials in adults of systematic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. The major outcomes were pain, function, need for surgery, serious adverse effect, and presence of hyperglycemia. The minor outcomes were quality of life, successful outcomes, non-serious adverse events, and withdrawal due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1047 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Nine trials included participants with radicular low back pain, two trial with low back pain, and two trials with spinal stenosis. All trials blinded participants to receipt of systemic corticosteroids. Seven trials were at low risk of bias, five at unclear risk, and one at high risk of selection bias. Two trials were at high risk of attrition bias. Doses and duration of systemic corticosteroid therapy varied. Radicular low back pain For radicular low back pain, moderate-certainty evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids probably slightly decrease pain versus placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) 0.56 points better, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 0.04 on a 0 to 10 scale) and may slightly increase the likelihood of experiencing improvement in pain at short-term follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.66; absolute effect 5% better (95% CI 5% worse to 15% better). Systemic corticosteroids may not improve function at short-term follow-up (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.14 better; range 0.49 better to 0.21 worse) and probably increase the likelihood of improvement in function at short-term follow-up (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; absolute effect 19% better, 95% CI 8% better to 30% better). Systemic corticosteroids were associated with greater improvement in function versus placebo at long-term follow-up (MD -7.40, 95% CI -12.55 to -2.25 on the 0 to 100 Oswestry Disability Index) and greater likelihood of functional improvement (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.56), based on a single trial. There was no difference in likelihood of surgery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47). Evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids (administered as a single dose or as a short course of therapy) are not associated with increased risk of any adverse event, serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, or hyperglycemia, but estimates were imprecise as some trials did not report harms, and harms reporting was suboptimal in trials that did provide data. Limitations included variability across trials in interventions (e.g. corticosteroid used, dose and duration of treatment), clinical settings, and participants (e.g. duration of symptoms, methods for diagnosis); limited utility of subgroup analyses due to small numbers of trials; methodologic limitations or suboptimal reporting of methods by some trials; and too few trials to formally assess for publication bias using graphical or statistical tests for small sample effects. Non-radicular low back pain Evidence on systemic corticosteroids versus placebo for non-radicular pain was limited and suggested that systemic corticosteroids may be associated with slightly worse short-term pain but slightly better function. Spinal stenosis For spinal stenosis, limited evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids are probably no more effective than placebo for short-term pain or function. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids appear to be slightly effective at improving short-term pain and function in people with radicular low back pain not due to spinal stenosis, and might slightly improve long-term function. The effects of systemic corticosteroids in people with non-radicular low back pain are unclear and systemic corticosteroids are probably ineffective for spinal stenosis. A single dose or short course of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain does not appear to cause serious harms, but evidence is limited.

Synthesis and evaluation of the performance of a small molecule library based on diverse tropane-related scaffolds.

A unified synthetic approach was developed that enabled the synthesis of diverse tropane-related scaffolds. The key intermediates that were exploited were cycloadducts formed by reaction between 3-hydroxy-pyridinium salts and vinyl sulfones or sulfonamides. The diverse tropane-related scaffolds were formed by addition of substituents to, cyclisation reactions of, and fusion of additional ring(s) to the key bicyclic intermediates. A set of 53 screening compounds was designed, synthesised and evaluated in order to determine the biological relevance of the scaffolds accessible using the synthetic approach. Two inhibitors of Hedgehog signalling, and four compounds with weak activity against the parasite P. falciparum, were discovered. Three of the active compounds may be considered to be indotropane or pyrrotropane pseudo natural products in which a tropane is fused with a fragment from another natural product class. It was concluded that the unified synthetic approach had yielded diverse scaffolds suitable for the design of performance-diverse screening libraries.

The First National Institutes of Health Institutional Training Program in Emergency Care Research: Productivity and Outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We assess the productivity, outcomes, and experiences of participants in the National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded K12 institutional research training programs in emergency care research. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods study design to evaluate the 6 K12 programs, including 2 surveys, participant interviews, scholar publications, grant submissions, and funded grants. The training program lasted from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2017. We tracked scholars for a minimum of 3 years and up to 5 years, beginning with date of entry into the program. We interviewed program participants by telephone using open-ended prompts. RESULTS: There were 94 participants, including 43 faculty scholars, 13 principal investigators, 30 non-principal investigator primary mentors, and 8 program administrators. The survey had a 74% overall response rate, including 95% of scholars. On entry to the program, scholars were aged a median of 37 years (interquartile range [IQR] 34 to 40 years), with 16 women (37%), and represented 11 disciplines. Of the 43 scholars, 40 (93%) submitted a career development award or research project grant during or after the program; 26 (60%) have secured independent funding as of August 1, 2017. Starting with date of entry into the program, the median time to grant submission was 19 months (IQR 11 to 27 months) and time to funding was 33 months (IQR 27 to 39 months). Cumulative median publications per scholar increased from 7 (IQR 4 to 15.5) at program entry to 21 (IQR 11 to 33.5) in the first post-K12 year. We conducted 57 semistructured interviews and identified 7 primary themes. CONCLUSION: This training program produced 43 interdisciplinary investigators in emergency care research, with demonstrated productivity in grant funding and publications.

Health Care Utilization Rates After Oregon's 2008 Medicaid Expansion: Within-Group and Between-Group Differences Over Time Among New, Returning, and Continuously Insured Enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Although past research demonstrated that Medicaid expansions were associated with increased emergency department (ED) and primary care (PC) utilization, little is known about how long this increased utilization persists or whether postcoverage utilization is affected by prior insurance status. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess changes in ED, PC, mental and behavioral health care, and specialist care visit rates among individuals gaining Medicaid over 24 months postinsurance gain; and (2) to evaluate the association of previous insurance with utilization. METHODS: Using claims data, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of adults insured for 24 months following Oregon's 2008 Medicaid expansion. Utilization rates among 1124 new and 1587 returning enrollees were compared with those among 5126 enrollees with continuous Medicaid coverage (≥1 y preexpansion). Visit rates were adjusted for propensity score classes and geographic region. RESULTS: PC visit rates in both newly and returning insured individuals significantly exceeded those in the continuously insured in months 4 through 12, but were not significantly elevated in the second year. In contrast, ED utilization rates were significantly higher in returning insured compared with newly or continuously insured individuals and remained elevated over time. New visits to PC and specialist care were higher among those who gained Medicaid compared with the continuously insured throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Predicting the effect of insurance expansion on health care utilization should account for the prior coverage history of new enrollees. In addition, utilization of outpatient services changes with time after insurance, so expansion evaluations should allow for rate stabilization.

Emergency department visits for nontraumatic dental problems: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: We documented emergency department (ED) visits for nontraumatic dental problems and identified strategies to reduce ED dental visits. METHODS: We used mixed methods to analyze claims in 2010 from a purposive sample of 25 Oregon hospitals and Oregon's All Payer All Claims data set and interviewed 51 ED dental visitors and stakeholders from 6 communities. RESULTS: Dental visits accounted for 2.5% of ED visits and represented the second-most-common discharge diagnosis in adults aged 20 to 39 years, were associated with being uninsured (odds ratio [OR] = 5.2 [reference: commercial insurance]; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.8, 5.5) or having Medicaid insurance (OR = 4.0; 95% CI = 3.7, 4.2), resulted in opioid (56%) and antibiotic (56%) prescriptions, and generated $402 (95% CI = $396, $408) in hospital costs per visit. Interviews revealed health system, community, provider, and patient contributors to ED dental visits. Potential solutions provided by interviewees included Medicaid benefit expansion, care coordination, water fluoridation, and patient education. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department dental visits are a significant and costly public health problem for vulnerable individuals. Future efforts should focus on implementing multilevel interventions to reduce ED dental visits.

Simplifying Direct Composite Veneer Placement.

Several clinical uses for the Uveneer system have been described in the case examples presented herein, demonstrating how this technique can help the dentist more easily create aesthetic facial surfaces of maxillary anterior teeth. This template system can be used to create direct composite veneers as definitive restorations, and in a variety of diagnostic situations that help the dentist and patient get on the "same page" when designing an aesthetic restorative case to meet a patient's individual goals.

Comparison of presenting complaint vs discharge diagnosis for identifying " nonemergency" emergency department visits.

IMPORTANCE: Reduction in emergency department (ED) use is frequently viewed as a potential source for cost savings. One consideration has been to deny payment if the patient's diagnosis upon ED discharge appears to reflect a "nonemergency" condition. This approach does not incorporate other clinical factors such as chief complaint that may inform necessity for ED care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ED presenting complaint and ED discharge diagnosis correspond sufficiently to support use of discharge diagnosis as the basis for policies discouraging ED use. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The New York University emergency department algorithm has been commonly used to identify nonemergency ED visits. We applied the algorithm to publicly available ED visit data from the 2009 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) for the purpose of identifying all "primary care-treatable" visits. The 2009 NHAMCS data set contains 34,942 records, each representing a unique ED visit. For each visit with a discharge diagnosis classified as primary care treatable, we identified the chief complaint. To determine whether these chief complaints correspond to nonemergency ED visits, we then examined all ED visits with this same group of chief complaints to ascertain the ED course, final disposition, and discharge diagnoses. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and disposition associated with chief complaints related to nonemergency ED visits. RESULTS: Although only 6.3% (95% CI, 5.8%-6.7%) of visits were determined to have primary care-treatable diagnoses based on discharge diagnosis and our modification of the algorithm, the chief complaints reported for these ED visits with primary care-treatable ED discharge diagnoses were the same chief complaints reported for 88.7% (95% CI, 88.1%-89.4%) of all ED visits. Of these visits, 11.1% (95% CI, 9.3%-13.0%) were identified at ED triage as needing immediate or emergency care; 12.5% (95% CI, 11.8%-14.3%) required hospital admission; and 3.4% (95% CI, 2.5%-4.3%) of admitted patients went directly from the ED to the operating room. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among ED visits with the same presenting complaint as those ultimately given a primary care-treatable diagnosis based on ED discharge diagnosis, a substantial proportion required immediate emergency care or hospital admission. The limited concordance between presenting complaints and ED discharge diagnoses suggests that these discharge diagnoses are unable to accurately identify nonemergency ED visits.

National study of barriers to timely primary care and emergency department utilization among Medicaid beneficiaries.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare the association between barriers to timely primary care and emergency department (ED) utilization among adults with Medicaid versus private insurance. METHODS: We analyzed 230,258 adult participants of the 1999 to 2009 National Health Interview Survey. We evaluated the association between 5 specific barriers to timely primary care (unable to get through on telephone, unable to obtain appointment soon enough, long wait in the physician's office, limited clinic hours, lack of transportation) and ED utilization (≥1 ED visit during the past year) for Medicaid and private insurance beneficiaries. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, socioeconomic status, health conditions, outpatient care utilization, and survey year. RESULTS: Overall, 16.3% of Medicaid and 8.9% of private insurance beneficiaries had greater than or equal to 1 barrier to timely primary care. Compared with individuals with private insurance, Medicaid beneficiaries had higher ED utilization overall (39.6% versus 17.7%), particularly among those with barriers (51.3% versus 24.6% for 1 barrier and 61.2% versus 28.9% for ≥2 barriers). After adjusting for covariates, Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to have barriers (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30 to 1.52) and higher ED utilization (adjusted OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.56). ED utilization was even higher among Medicaid beneficiaries with 1 barrier (adjusted OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.44 to 1.92) or greater than or equal to 2 barriers (adjusted OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.72 to 2.35) compared with that for individuals with private insurance and barriers. CONCLUSION: Compared with individuals with private insurance, Medicaid beneficiaries were affected by more barriers to timely primary care and had higher associated ED utilization. Expansion of Medicaid eligibility alone may not be sufficient to improve health care access.

Outcomes of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute K12 program in emergency care research: 7-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up for clinician-scientist training programs is sparse. We describe the outcomes of clinician-scientist scholars in the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) K12 program in emergency care research up to 8.7 years after matriculation in the program. METHODS: This was a cohort study of faculty clinician-scientist scholars enrolled in a NHLBI K12 research training program at 6 sites across the US, with median follow-up 7.7 years (range 5.7-8.7 years) from the date of matriculation. Scholars completed electronic surveys in 2017 and 2019, with the 2019 survey collecting information for their current work setting, percent time for research, and grant funding from all sources. We used NIH RePorter and online resources to verify federal grants through March 2021. The primary outcome was a funded career development award (CDA) or research project grant (RPG) where the scholar was principal investigator. We included funding from all federal sources and national foundations. RESULTS: There were 43 scholars, including 16 (37%) women. Over the follow-up period, 32 (74%) received an individual CDA or RPG, with a median of 36 months (range 9-83 months) after entering the program. Of the 43 scholars, 23 (54%) received a CDA and 22 (51%) received an RPG, 7 (16%) of which were R01s. Of the 23 scholars who received a CDA, 13 (56%) subsequently had an RPG funded. Time to CDA or RPG did not differ by sex (women vs. men log-rank test p = 0.27) or specialty training (emergency medicine versus other specialties, p = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: After 7 years of follow-up for this NHLBI K12 emergency care research training program, three quarters of clinician-scientist scholars had obtained CDA or RPG funding, with no notable differences by sex or clinical training.

Chairside resin-based provisional restorative materials for fixed prosthodontics.

Provisional restorations are vital to fixed prosthodontics treatment, providing an important diagnostic function while in place. In addition to protecting the prepared teeth, provisionalization enables clinicians to refine biologic and biomechanical issues before the final restoration is fabricated. Adjustments can be made in the provisional restoration to achieve both the clinician's and patient's desired results. The fabrication of temporary restorations requires that clinicians be proficient with a variety of materials and techniques that can be used to make well-adapted and functional provisionals. There are many material choices available to temporize a single crown as well as multi-unit fixed partial dentures, and the selection of provisional materials should be made based on a case-by-case evaluation. This article provides a review of polymeric resin provisional materials.

Impact of policy changes on emergency department use by Medicaid enrollees in Oregon.

OBJECTIVE: In 2003, Oregon's Medicaid expansion program, the Oregon Health Plan (OHP), implemented premiums and copayments and eliminated outpatient behavioral health services. We ascertained whether these changes, including $50 copayments for emergency department (ED) visits, affected ED use. METHODS: This study used statewide administrative data on 414,009 adult OHP enrollees to compare ED utilization rates (adjusted for patient characteristics) in 3 time periods: (1) before the cutbacks, (2) after the cutbacks, and (3) after partial restoration of benefits. We examined overall ED visits and several subsets of ED visits: visits requiring hospital admission, injury-related, drug-related, alcohol-related, and other psychiatric visits. Because the policy changes affected only the expansion program (OHP Standard), we ascertained the impact of these changes compared with a control group of categorically eligible Medicaid enrollees (OHP Plus). RESULTS: Compared with the control group, case-mix-adjusted ED utilization rates fell 18% among OHP Standard enrollees after the cutbacks. The rate of ED visits leading to hospitalization fell 24%. Injury-related visits and psychiatric visits excluding chemical dependency exhibited a similar pattern to overall ED visits. Drug-related ED visits increased 32% in the control group, perhaps reflecting the closure of drug treatment programs after the cutbacks reduced their revenue. CONCLUSION: The policy changes were followed by a substantial reduction in ED use. That ED visits requiring hospital admission fell to about the same extent as overall ED use suggests that OHP enrollees may have been discouraged from using EDs for emergencies as well as less-serious problems.

Community characteristics affecting emergency department use by Medicaid enrollees.

OBJECTIVES: In seeking to identify modifiable, system-level factors affecting emergency department (ED) use, we used a statewide Medicaid database to study community variation in ED use and ascertain community characteristics associated with higher use. METHODS: This historical cohort study used administrative data from July 1, 2003 to December 31, 2004. Residence ZIP codes were used to assign all 555,219 Medicaid enrollees to 130 primary care service areas (PCSAs). PCSA characteristics studied included rural/urban status, presence of hospital(s), driving time to hospital, and several measures of primary care capacity. Statistical analyses used a 2-stage model. In the first stage (enrollee level), ED utilization rates adjusted for enrollee demographics and medical conditions were calculated for each PCSA. In the second stage (community level), a mixed effects linear model was used to determine the association between PCSA characteristics and ED use. RESULTS: ED utilization rates varied more than 20-fold among the PCSAs. Compared with PCSAs with primary care capacity less than need, PCSAs with capacity 1 to 2 times the need had 0.12 (95% CI: -0.044, -0.20) fewer ED visits/person/yr. Compared with PCSAs with the nearest hospital accessible within 10 minutes, PCSAs with the nearest hospital >30 minutes' drive had 0.26 (95% CI: -0.38, -0.13) fewer ED visits/person/yr. CONCLUSIONS: Within this Medicaid population, ED utilization was determined not only by patient characteristics but by community characteristics. Better understanding of system-level factors affecting ED use can enable communities to improve their health care delivery systems-augmenting access to care and reducing reliance on EDs.