Trends in Telerehabilitation Utilization in the United States 2020-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To examine telerehabilitation utilization in the United States (US) during the first 2 years of the pandemic. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of outpatient insurance claims from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database to identify the number and proportion of patients using telerehabilitation from 2020 to 2021. Telerehabilitation was identified based on the presence of specific code modifiers and place of service. SETTING: Retrospective claims analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals living in the United States with employer-sponsored insurance plans using outpatient physical or occupational therapy (PT/OT) (N=2,007,524). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Number and proportion of outpatient PT/OT visits completed via telerehabilitation. RESULTS: We identified 21,026,608 PT/OT visits among 2,007,524 patients. Overall, 49,974 (2.5%) patients received ≥1 telerehabilitation visit during the specified timeframe. We observed trends in utilization over time, with utilization peaking in April 2020 when 10.9% of all PT/OT visits were conducted by telerehabilitation. We also observed geographic trends with lower rates of utilization identified in rural areas. State-by-state utilization rates ranged from 10.4% (California) to 0.3% (Wyoming). CONCLUSION: Telerehabilitation may be underutilized as a means of improving access to PT/OT, especially in rural areas of the country. Further research is needed to examine contributing factors to low observed utilization rates, such as provider and patient perceptions of telerehabilitation.

The Effectiveness of a Mindfulness-Based Intervention Integrated with Physical Therapy (MIND-PT) for Postsurgical Rehabilitation After Lumbar Surgery: A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial as Part of the Back Pain Consortium (BACPAC) Research Program.

BACKGROUND: Improving pain management for persons with chronic low back pain (LBP) undergoing surgery is an important consideration in improving patient-centered outcomes and reducing the risk of persistent opioid use after surgery. Nonpharmacological treatments, including physical therapy and mindfulness, are beneficial for nonsurgical LBP through complementary biopsychosocial mechanisms, but their integration and application for persons undergoing surgery for LBP have not been examined. This study (MIND-PT) is a multisite randomized trial that compares an enriched pain management (EPM) pathway that integrates physical therapy and mindfulness vs usual-care pain management (UC) for persons undergoing surgery for LBP. DESIGN: Participants from military treatment facilities will be enrolled before surgery and individually randomized to the EPM or UC pain management pathways. Participants assigned to EPM will receive presurgical biopsychosocial education and mindfulness instruction. After surgery, the EPM group will receive 10 sessions of physical therapy with integrated mindfulness techniques. Participants assigned to the UC group will receive usual pain management care after surgery. The primary outcome will be the pain impact, assessed with the Pain, Enjoyment, and General Activity (PEG) scale. Time to opioid discontinuation is the main secondary outcome. SUMMARY: This trial is part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) initiative, which is focused on providing scientific solutions to the opioid crisis. The MIND-PT study will examine an innovative program combining nonpharmacological treatments designed to improve outcomes and reduce opioid overreliance in persons undergoing lumbar surgery.

Patients' Perceptions of Physical Therapists Addressing Opioid Misuse.

INTRODUCTION: In the US, rising numbers of patients who misuse illicit or prescribed opioids provides opportunities for physical therapists (PTs) to be engaged in their care. Prior to this engagement, it is necessary to understand the perceptions of patients who access physical therapy services about their PTs playing such a role. This project examined patients' perceptions of PTs addressing opioid misuse. METHODS: We surveyed patients, newly encountering outpatient physical therapy services in a large University-based healthcare setting, via anonymous, web-based survey. Within the survey, questions were rated on a Likert scale (1 = completely disagree to 7 = completely agree) and we evaluated responses of patients who were prescribed opioids versus those who were not. RESULTS: Among 839 respondents, the highest mean score was 6.2 (SD = 1.5) for "It is OK for physical therapists to refer their patients with prescription opioid misuse to a specialist to address the opioid misuse." The lowest mean score was 5.6 (SD = 1.9) for "It is OK for physical therapists to ask their patient why they are misusing prescription opioids." Compared to those with no prescription opioid exposure while attending physical therapy, patients with prescription opioid exposure had lower agreement that it was OK for the physical therapist to refer their patients with opioid misuse to a specialist (ß = -.33, 95% CI = -0.63 to -0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients attending outpatient physical therapy seem to support PTs addressing opioid misuse and there are differences in support based on whether the patients had exposure to opioids.

TIDieR-telehealth: precision in reporting of telehealth interventions used in clinical trials - unique considerations for the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

BACKGROUND: Recent international health events have led to an increased proliferation of remotely delivered health interventions. Even with the pandemic seemingly coming under control, the experiences of the past year have fueled a growth in ideas and technology for increasing the scope of remote care delivery. Unfortunately, clinicians and health systems will have difficulty with the adoption and implementation of these interventions if ongoing and future clinical trials fail to report necessary details about execution, platforms, and infrastructure related to these interventions. The purpose was to develop guidance for reporting of telehealth interventions. METHODS: A working group from the US Pain Management Collaboratory developed guidance for complete reporting of telehealth interventions. The process went through 5-step process from conception to final checklist development with input for many stakeholders, to include all 11 primary investigators with trials in the Collaboratory. RESULTS: An extension focused on unique considerations relevant to telehealth interventions was developed for the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. CONCLUSION: The Telehealth Intervention guideline encourages use of the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist as a valuable tool (TIDieR-Telehealth) to improve the quality of research through a reporting guide of relevant interventions that will help maximize reproducibility and implementation.

Psychometric examination of short forms from the University of Washington pain-related self-efficacy and concerns about pain item banks in patients with low back pain.

PURPOSE: This study examined the psychometric properties of custom short forms assessing pain-related self-efficacy and catastrophizing, which are important psychosocial constructs for individuals with pain conditions. Short forms were derived from the University of Washington concerns about pain (UWCAP) and pain-related self-efficacy (UWPRSE) item banks. METHODS: Participants with low back pain (LBP) in a clinical trial (n = 241) examining nonpharmacologic treatments completed the 8-item UWCAP and 9-item UWPRSE and a numeric pain intensity rating, Oswestry Disability and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs questionnaires at baseline, 1-, 4- and 12-weeks after enrollment. Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients estimated internal consistency and test-retest reliability, respectively. Floor and ceiling effects for the UWCAP and UWPRSE were examined. Concurrent validity was evaluated with univariate correlation coefficients and predictive validity with multivariate regression models. Participants were divided into categories of treatment responsiveness based on a single-item global rating measure, and UWPRSE and UWCAP change scores and standardized effect sizes were calculated in each category. RESULTS: Both short forms had good internal consistency (α = 0.89-0.90) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.77-0.85), without substantial floor or ceiling effects. As expected, the UWCAP was positively correlated, and UWPRSE negatively correlated, with concurrent measures of pain intensity, disability and fear-avoidance beliefs. The UWCAP added to the prediction model for 4-week disability outcomes (ß = 0.25, p = 0.008). Responsiveness was supported by the mean change scores and effect sizes across treatment response categories. CONCLUSION: The UWCAP and UWPRSE short forms demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties, supporting future research on the role of these constructs in the management of persons with LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02860834. Registered on August 16, 2016.

Changes in Pain Catastrophizing and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs as Mediators of Early Physical Therapy on Disability and Pain in Acute Low-Back Pain: A Secondary Analysis of a Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The Fear-Avoidance Model (FAM) of chronic pain posits that pain catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs are prognostic for disability and chronicity. In acute low-back pain, early physical therapy (PT) is effective in reducing disability in some patients. How early PT impacts short- and long-term changes in disability for patients with acute pain is unknown. Based on the FAM, we hypothesized that early reductions in pain catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs would mediate early PT's effect on changes in disability (primary outcome) and pain intensity (secondary outcome) over 3 months and 1 year. SUBJECTS: Participants were 204 patients with low-back pain of <16 days duration, who enrolled in a clinical trial (NCT01726803) comparing early PT sessions or usual care provided over 4 weeks. METHODS: Patients completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ work and physical activity scales), and outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale) at baseline, 4 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year. We applied longitudinal mediation analysis with single and multiple mediators. RESULTS: Early PT led to improvements in disability and pain over 3 months but not 1 year. In the single mediator model, 4-week reductions in pain catastrophizing mediated early PT's effects on 3-month disability and pain intensity improvements, explaining 16% and 22% of the association, respectively, but the effects were small. Pain catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs did not jointly mediate these associations. CONCLUSIONS: In acute low-back pain, early PT may improve disability and pain outcomes at least partly through reducing patients' catastrophizing.

Outcomes of Telehealth Physical Therapy Provided Using Real-Time, Videoconferencing for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Longitudinal Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility of an evidence-based physical therapy (PT) program for persons with chronic low back pain (LBP) originally designed for in-person delivery, adapted for telehealth using videoconferencing. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal cohort. SETTING: Three health care systems in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Adults, aged 18-64 years (N=126), with chronic LBP recruited from August through December 2020. INTERVENTION: Up to 8 weekly sessions of telehealth PT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up assessments were 10 and 26 weeks after baseline. Participant outcomes collected were the Oswestry Disability Index, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 health domains, and pain self-efficacy. Implementation outcomes included acceptability, adoption, feasibility, and fidelity assessed using participant surveys and compliance with session attendance. RESULTS: We enrolled 126 participants (mean age, 51.5 years; 62.7% female). Baseline perceptions about telehealth were generally positive. Eighty-eight participants (69.8%) initiated telehealth PT, with a median of 5 sessions attended. Participants in telehealth PT were generally satisfied (76.3%), although only 39.5% perceived the quality equal to in-person PT. Telehealth PT participants reported significant improvement in LBP-related disability, pain intensity, pain interference, physical function, and sleep disturbance at 10- and 26-week follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings generally support the feasibility of telehealth PT using videoconferencing. Implementation and participant outcomes were similar to in-person PT as delivered in the participating health care systems. We identified barriers that may detract from the patient experience and likelihood of benefitting from telehealth PT. More research is needed to optimize and evaluate the most effective strategies for providing telehealth PT for patients with chronic LBP.

Identifying Perceptions, Experiences, and Recommendations of Telehealth Physical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Mixed Methods Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe concerns, advantages, and disadvantages encountered in an evidence-based physical therapy (PT) program for persons with chronic low back pain (CLBP) delivered by telehealth. DESIGN: Mixed methods survey and semistructured interview of persons with CLBP. SETTING: Prospective observational cohort study of persons with CLBP from 3 health care systems receiving 8 sessions of evidence-based telehealth PT. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were selected after completing week 10 (from baseline) assessment from an ongoing cohort study. We enrolled 31 of 126 participants (mean age, 42.4 years; 71.0% female) from the cohort study (N=31). INTERVENTIONS: Participants had completed 8 sessions of evidence-based telehealth PT and participated in semistructured interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline and week 10 and 26 assessments assessed psychosocial risk (StarTBack Screening Tool), working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Form), pain (Oswestry Disability Index), and health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 profile, version 2). Semistructured interviews were conducted by telephone and consisted of open-ended questions assessing perception, satisfaction, and likelihood of recommending telehealth PT. Participants identified advantages and disadvantages to telehealth PT. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using an iterative qualitative process. Statistical comparisons by experience were made using analysis of variance (continuous) and Fisher exact test (categorical). RESULTS: Compared with the negative experience group (n=5), participants in positive (n=16) and neutral (n=10) experience groups endorsed higher bond working alliance with their therapist. Participants with a positive experience were more likely to view telehealth PT as cost-saving (n=10, 62.5%) compared with those with a neutral (n=1, 10.0%) or negative (n=1, 20.0%) experience and less likely to view telehealth PT as lower quality (n=0, 0.0%; n=1, 10.0%; n=2, 40.0%, respectively). Prior to starting telehealth, based on semistructured interviews, 18 participants (58.1%) had concerns and these persisted after starting in half of this group. Concerns regarded telehealth being different from or inferior to in-person PT, lack of physical correction, and worries of not using technology appropriately. Convenience, time savings, and personalization were seen as advantages. Difficulty making a personal connection with the therapist, lack of physical correction, and problems with technology were seen as disadvantages. Many participants endorsed a hybrid approach that included in-person and telehealth PT. Providing necessary equipment and technology assistance was seen as ways to improve telehealth PT experience. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth is an acceptable modality to deliver PT for patients with CLBP with most having a positive experience and reporting advantages. Improvements could include offering a hybrid approach (in-person and telehealth combined) and providing necessary equipment and technical support. More research is needed to optimize the most effective strategies for providing telehealth PT for patients with CLBP.

Initial presentation for acute low back pain: is early physical therapy associated with healthcare utilization and spending? A retrospective review of a National Database.

BACKGROUND: Early initiation of physical therapy (PT) has been associated with lower healthcare costs and utilization; however, these studies have been limited to single institutions or healthcare systems. Our goal was to assess healthcare utilization and spending among patients who present for the first time with low back pain (LBP), according to whether they received early physical therapy (PT), using a large, nationwide sample; and geographic variation in rates of early PT and 30-day LBP-related spending. METHODS: Using the Truven MarketScan database, we identified nearly 980,000 US adults ages 18-64 years who initially presented with acute LBP from 2010 through 2014 and did not have nonmusculoskeletal causes of LBP. Approximately 110,000 patients (11%) received early PT (≤2 weeks after presentation). We compared healthcare utilization and spending at 30 days and 1 year after presentation between patients who received early PT and those who did not. Alpha = 0.05. RESULTS: At 30 days, early PT was associated with lower odds of chiropractor visits (odds ratio [OR] = 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.40-0.42), pain specialist visits (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.47-0.51), emergency department visits (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.49-0.54), advanced imaging (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.56-0.58), orthopaedist visits (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.66-0.69), and epidural steroid injections (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.65-0.70). At 1 year, early PT was associated with less healthcare utilization. At 30 days, patients with early PT had lower mean LBP-related spending ($1180 ± $1500) compared with those without early PT ($1250 ± $2560) (P < 0.001). At 1 year, LBP-related spending was significantly less among patients who did not receive early PT ($2510 ± $3826) versus those who did ($2588 ± $3704). Early PT rates (range, 4-25%; P < 0.001) and 30-day LBP-related spending differed by state (range, $421 to -$410; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Early PT for acute LBP was associated with less 30-day and 1-year healthcare utilization and less 30-day LBP-related spending. Early PT rates and 30-day spending differed by US state. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Physical Therapy Referral From Primary Care for Acute Back Pain With Sciatica : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined primary care management for acute sciatica, including referral to physical therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether early referral to physical therapy reduced disability more than usual care (UC) alone for patients with acute sciatica. DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02391350). SETTING: 2 health care systems in Salt Lake City, Utah. PATIENTS: 220 adults aged 18 to 60 years with sciatica of less than 90 days' duration who were making an initial primary care consultation. INTERVENTION: All participants received imaging and medication at the discretion of the primary care provider before enrollment. A total of 110 participants randomly assigned to UC were provided 1 session of education, and 110 participants randomly assigned to early physical therapy (EPT) were provided 1 education session and then referred for 4 weeks of physical therapy, including exercise and manual therapy. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (OSW) score after 6 months. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity, patient-reported treatment success, health care use, and missed workdays. RESULTS: Participants in the EPT group had greater improvement from baseline to 6 months for the primary outcome (relative difference, -5.4 points [95% CI, -9.4 to -1.3 points]; P = 0.009). The OSW and several secondary outcomes favored EPT after 4 weeks. After 1 year, between-group differences favored EPT for the OSW (relative difference, -4.8 points [CI, -8.9 to -0.7 points]) and back pain intensity (relative difference, -1.0 points [CI, -1.6 to -0.4 points]). The EPT group was more likely to self-report treatment success after 1 year (45.2%) than the UC group (27.6%) (relative risk, 1.6 [CI, 1.1 to 2.4]). There were no significant differences in health care use or missed workdays. LIMITATION: The patients and providers were unblinded, and specific physical therapy interventions responsible for effects could not be determined. CONCLUSION: Referral from primary care to physical therapy for recent-onset sciatica improved disability and other outcomes compared with UC. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Physical therapists' attitudes are associated with their confidence in and the frequency with which they engage in prescription opioid medication misuse management practices with their patients. A cross-sectional study.

Background: In the US, prescription opioid medication misuse (POMM) necessitates engagement of physical therapists (PTs). We (1) evaluated the attitudes of (PT) related to their management of patients with POMM and (2) examined the association between these attitudes and PTs confidence in POMM-related management abilities and the frequency with which they engaged in POMM-related management practices. Methods: We conducted a national survey of PTs that included a modified Drug and Drug Problems Perception Questionnaire (DDPPQ). Confidence in POMM-related abilities and the frequency of engaging in POMM-related management practices were measured. Logistic regression evaluated the association between the DDPPQ subscales (role adequacy, role legitimacy, role self-esteem, role support, job satisfaction) and confidence and frequency outcomes. Results: The analysis included 402 respondents. Role adequacy and legitimacy subscales were associated with confidence and frequency outcomes (p<.05), indicating that more favorable role adequacy and legitimacy attitudes are associated with greater odds of having more confidence in POMM-related management abilities and of engaging in more frequent POMM-related management practices. Conclusions: PTs with a greater sense of preparedness to engage in POMM-related management were more likely to report greater confidence in POMM-related management abilities and engage in POMM-related management practices with greater frequency.

Move to health-a holistic approach to the management of chronic low back pain: an intervention and implementation protocol developed for a pragmatic clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic pain conditions is growing. Low back pain was the primary cause of disability worldwide out of 156 conditions assessed between 1990 and 2016, according to the Global Burden of Disease Study. Conventional medical approaches have failed to identify effective and long-lasting approaches for the management of chronic pain, and often fail to consider the multiple domains that influence overall health and can contribute to the pain experience. Leading international organizations that focus on pain research have stated the importance of considering these other domains within holistic and multidisciplinary frameworks for treating pain. While the research behind the theoretical link between these domains and chronic pain outcomes has expanded greatly over the last decade, there have been few practical and feasible methods to implement this type of care in normal clinical practice. METHODS: The purpose of this manuscript is to describe an implementation protocol that is being used to deliver a complex holistic health intervention at multiple sites within a large government health system, as part of a larger multisite trial for patients with chronic low back pain. The Move to Health program developed by the US Army Medical Command was tailored for specific application to patients with low back pain and begins by providing an empirical link between eight different health domains (that include physical, emotional, social, and psychological constructs) and chronic low back pain. Through a six-step process, a health coach leverages motivational interviewing and information from a personal health inventory to guide the patient through a series of conversations about behavioral lifestyle choices. The patient chooses which domains they want to prioritize, and the health coach helps implement the plan with the use of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound) goals and a series of resources for every domain, triaged from self-management to specialist referral. DISCUSSION: Complex interventions described in clinical trials are often challenging to implement because they lack sufficient details. Implementation protocols can improve the ability to properly deliver trial interventions into regular clinical practice with increased fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Implementation of this intervention protocol was developed for a clinical trial that was registered a priori (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT04172038).

The Relationship Between Neighborhood Deprivation and Perceived Changes for Pain-Related Experiences Among US Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic could disproportionately affect the health of vulnerable populations, including patients experiencing persistent health conditions (i.e., chronic pain), along with populations living within deprived, lower socioeconomic areas. The current cross-sectional study characterized relationships between neighborhood deprivation and perceived changes in pain-related experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (early-September to mid-October 2020) for adult patients (N = 97) with nonspecific chronic low back pain. METHODS: We collected self-report perceived experiences from participants enrolled in an ongoing pragmatic randomized trial across medical centers within the Salt Lake City, Utah and Baltimore, Maryland metropolitans. The Area Deprivation Index (composite of 17 US Census deprivation metrics) reflected neighborhood deprivation based on participants' zip codes. RESULTS: Although those living in the neighborhoods with greater deprivation endorsed significantly poorer physical (pain severity, pain interference, physical functioning), mental (depression, anxiety), and social health during the pandemic, there were no significant differences for perceived changes in pain-related experiences (pain severity, pain interference, sleep quality) between levels of neighborhood deprivation since the onset of the pandemic. However, those in neighborhoods with greater deprivation endorsed disproportionately worse perceived changes in pain coping, social support, and mood since the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings offer evidence that changes in pain coping during the pandemic may be disproportionately worse for those living in deprived areas. Considering poorer pain coping may contribute to long-term consequences, the current findings suggest the need for further attention and intervention to reduce the negative effect of the pandemic for such vulnerable populations.

Identifying patients who access musculoskeletal physical therapy: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal conditions are common and cause high levels of disability and costs. Physical therapy is recommended for many musculoskeletal conditions. Past research suggests that referral rates appear to have increased over time, but the rate of accessing a physical therapist appears unchanged. OBJECTIVE: Our retrospective cohort study describes the rate of physical therapy use after referral for a variety of musculoskeletal diagnoses while comparing users and non-users of physical therapy services after referral. METHODS: The study sample included patients in the University of Utah Health system who received care from a medical provider for a musculoskeletal condition. We included a comprehensive set of variables available in the electronic data warehouse possibly associated with attending physical therapy. Our primary analysis compared differences in patient factors between physical therapy users and non-users using Poisson regression. RESULTS: 15 877 (16%) patients had a referral to physical therapy, and 3812 (24%) of these patients accessed physical therapy after referral. Most of the factors included in the model were associated with physical therapy use except for sex and number of comorbidities. The receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.63 suggesting poor predictability of the model but it is likely related to the heterogeneity of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: We found that obesity, ethnicity, public insurance and urgent care referrals were associated with poor adherence to physical therapy referral. However, the limited predictive power of our model suggests a need for a deeper examination into factors that influence patients access to a physical therapist.

The influence of a MOBile-based video Instruction for Low back pain (MOBIL) on initial care decisions made by primary care providers: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guidelines for back pain continues to be a challenge, prompting strategies focused on improving education around biopsychosocial frameworks. OBJECTIVE: Assess the influence of an interactive educational mobile app for patients on initial care decisions made for low back pain by the primary care provider. The secondary aim was to compare changes in self-reported pain and function between groups. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial involving patients consulting for an initial episode of low back pain. The intervention was a mobile video-based education session (Truth About Low Back Pain) compared to usual care. The app focused on addressing maladaptive beliefs typically associated with higher risk of receiving low-value care options. The primary outcome was initial medical utilization decisions made by primary care practitioners (x-rays, MRIs, opioid prescriptions, injections, procedures) and secondary outcomes included PROMIS pain interference and physical function subscales at 1 and 6 months, and total medical costs. RESULTS: Of 208 participants (71.2% male; mean age 35.4 years), rates of opioid prescriptions, advanced imaging, analgesic patches, spine injections, and physical therapy use were lower in the education group, but the differences were not significant. Total back-related medical costs for 1 year (mean diff = $132; P = 0.63) and none of the 6-month PROMIS subscales were significantly different between groups. Results were no different in opioid-naïve subjects. Instead, prior opioid use and high-risk of poor prognosis on the STarT Back Screening Tool predicted 1-year back pain-related costs and healthcare utilization, regardless of intervention. CONCLUSION: Factors that influence medical treatment decisions and guideline-concordant care are complex. This particular patient education approach directed at patients did not appear to influence healthcare decisions made by primary care providers. Future studies should focus on high-risk populations and/or the impact of including the medical provider as an active part of the educational process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02777983 .

Physical therapists should play a greater role in managing patients with opioid use and opioid misuse.

The U.S. opioid crisis necessitates that health care providers of all types work collaboratively to manage patients taking prescription opioid medications and manage those who may be misusing prescription opioids. Musculoskeletal conditions are the most common diagnoses associated with an opioid prescription. Physical therapists commonly manage patients with musculoskeletal conditions and chronic pain. Some patients who attend physical therapy for pain management take prescription opioid medications for pain and some of these patients may be misusing prescription opioids. Physical therapists who manage patients with musculoskeletal conditions are well-positioned to help address the opioid crisis. Historically, physical therapists have not been adequately engaged in efforts to manage persons with co-occurring musculoskeletal pain and opioid misuse or OUD. The American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has emphasized physical therapy over the use of prescription opioids for the management of painful conditions. The APTA, however, does not highlight the important role that physical therapists could play in monitoring opioid use among patients receiving treatment for pain, nor the role that physical therapists should play in screening for opioid misuse. Such screening could facilitate referral of patients suspected misuse to an appropriate provider for formal assessment and treatment. This commentary presents simulated musculoskeletal patient presentations depicting 2 common opioid use states; chronic opioid use and opioid misuse. The cases highlight and interactions that physical therapists could have with these patients and actions that the physical therapist could take when working inter-disciplinarily. Recommendations are provided that aim to increase physical therapists' knowledge and skills related to managing patients taking prescription opioid medications for pain.

Effect of Patient Use of Physical Therapy After Referral for Musculoskeletal Conditions on Future Medical Utilization: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether physical therapy use influenced subsequent use of musculoskeletal-related surgeries, injections, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and other imaging. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 18 to 64 years who had an ambulatory care visit at the University of Utah system, after implementation of the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems with adequate data collection in the system at the time of the data pull, between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2018. We identified patients (n = 85 186) who received care for a musculoskeletal condition (lower back pain, cervical, knee, shoulder, hip, elbow, ankle, wrist/hand, thoracic, and arthritis diagnoses). Regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between physical therapy use and medical care use while controlling for relevant factors. RESULTS: In patients referred to physical therapy (n = 15 870), physical therapy use (n = 3812) was associated with increased MRI use (incidence rate ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.33; P < .001) and surgery use (incidence rate ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.23; P < .001). Several other factors were also associated with increased health care use, including being referred by an orthopedic provider, obesity, non-lower back pain diagnoses, and having 1 or more comorbidities. CONCLUSION: Outpatient physical therapy use for musculoskeletal conditions in adult patients younger than 65 years at the University of Utah system, a mountain west United States academic health care system, was associated with increased rates of MRI and surgery. This finding is contrary to prior research suggesting that physical therapy improves outcomes in some diagnosis groups. A referral from an orthopedic provider, non-lower back pain diagnoses, and obesity were also associated with increased medical care utilization.

A Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) for Stepped Care Management of Low Back Pain in the Military Health System: A Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Defense Health Agency has prioritized system-level pain management initiatives within the Military Health System (MHS), with low back pain as one of the key focus areas. A stepped care model focused on nonpharmacologic treatment to promote self-management is recommended. Implementation of stepped care is complicated by lack of information on the most effective nonpharmacologic strategies and how to sequence and tailor the various available options. The Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomization Trial for Low Back Pain (SMART LBP) is a multisite pragmatic trial using a SMART design to assess the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic treatments for chronic low back pain. DESIGN: This SMART trial has two treatment phases. Participants from three military treatment facilities are randomized to 6 weeks of phase I treatment, receiving either physical therapy (PT) or Army Medicine's holistic Move2Health (M2H) program in a package specific to low back pain. Nonresponders to treatment in phase I are again randomized to phase II treatment of combined M2H + PT or mindfulness-based treatment using the Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) program. The primary outcome is the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference computer-adapted test score. SUMMARY: This trial is part of an initiative funded by the National Institutes of Health, Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Defense to establish a national infrastructure for effective system-level management of chronic pain with a focus on nonpharmacologic treatments. The results of this study will provide important information on nonpharmacologic care for chronic LBP in the MHS embedded within a stepped care framework.

The OPTIMIZE study: protocol of a pragmatic sequential multiple assessment randomized trial of nonpharmacologic treatment for chronic, nonspecific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is a prevalent condition that causes a substantial health burden. Despite intensive and expensive clinical efforts, its prevalence is growing. Nonpharmacologic treatments are effective at improving pain-related outcomes; however, treatment effect sizes are often modest. Physical therapy (PT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) have the most consistent evidence of effectiveness. Growing evidence also supports mindfulness-based approaches. Discussions with providers and patients highlight the importance of discussing and trying options to find the treatment that works for them and determining what to do when initial treatment is not successful. Herein, we present the protocol for a study that will evaluate evidence-based, protocol-driven treatments using PT, CBT, or mindfulness to examine comparative effectiveness and optimal sequencing for patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: The Optimized Multidisciplinary Treatment Programs for Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain (OPTIMIZE) Study will be a multisite, comparative effectiveness trial using a sequential multiple assessment randomized trial design enrolling 945 individuals with chronic low back pain. The co-primary outcomes will be disability (measured using the Oswestry Disability Index) and pain intensity (measured using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale). After baseline assessment, participants will be randomly assigned to PT or CBT. At week 10, participants who have not experienced at least 50% improvement in disability will be randomized to cross-over phase-1 treatments (e.g., PT to CBT) or to Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE). Treatment will consist of 8 weekly sessions. Long-term outcome assessments will be performed at weeks 26 and 52. DISCUSSION: Results of this study may inform referring providers and patients about the most effective nonoperative treatment and/or sequence of nonoperative treatments to treat chronic low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered on March 1, 2019, with Clinicaltrials.gov under the registration number NCT03859713 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03859713).