Use of implementation strategies to promote the uptake of knee osteoarthritis practice guidelines and improve patient outcomes: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Translation of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to practice remains suboptimal. The primary purpose of this systematic review was to describe the use of implementation strategies to promote KOA CPG recommended care. METHODS: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 23, 2023, and subsequently updated and expanded on January 16, 2024. Implementation strategies were mapped per the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care criteria. The review was registered prospectively (CRD42023402383). RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the final review. All (100% (n=4) studies that included the domains of provide interactive assistance, train and educate stakeholders (89%(n=18)), engage consumers (87%(n=15)) and support clinicians (79%(n=14)) reported change to provider adherence. Studies that reported a change to disability included train and educate stakeholders, engage consumers and adapt and tailor to context. Studies that used train and educate stakeholders, engage consumers, and support clinicians reported a change in pain and quality of life. Most studies had a low to moderate RoB. CONCLUSION: Implementation strategies have the potential to impact clinician uptake of CPG's and patient reported outcomes (PROs). The implementation context, using an active learning strategy with a patient partner, restructuring funding models, and integrating taxonomies to tailor multifaceted strategies should be prioritized. Further experimental research is recommended to determine which implementation strategies are most effective.

Ventral Hernia Reconstruction with GORE ENFORM Biomaterial.

Introduction: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is one of the most common surgeries performed in the United States. Degradable mesh is the recommended choice for patients presenting with high-risk co-morbidities or increased risk for infection. GORE® ENFORM BiomaterialTM is a biosynthetic degradable mesh that has recently been approved for use in ventral hernia reconstruction with no reports of its clinical outcomes. Methods: This study was a single surgeon case series. Patients were included in the study if they underwent VHR with GORE® ENFORM BiomaterialTM. The decision to use GORE® ENFORM BiomaterialTM was the senior surgeon's decision based on the patient's center for disease control classification. Patient comorbidities, hernia characteristics, postoperative hernia recurrence, and surgical site occurrences (SSOs) were collected at in-patient follow-up appointments and chart review. Patients were asked to complete preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity short form 3a and the hernia-specific quality of life (HerQLes) survey. Results: A total of 15 patients were included in this study. The average length of follow-up was 315 days. Postoperatively, 26.7% of patients had an SSO with 4 surgical site infections. Two patients required an operative washout with mesh removal. One patient experienced hernia recurrence. Eight of the 15 patients completed preoperative and postoperative PROs. Conclusion: This is the first clinical study to report the outcomes of ventral hernia repair using ENFORM mesh. These results show that Enform mesh is an option to consider in complex ventral hernia reconstruction.

Introduction: La réparation d'une hernie ventrale (RHV) est l'une des opérations les plus fréquentes aux États-Unis. Le treillis dégradable est le choix recommandé pour les patients ayant des affections connexes à haut risque ou qui sont vulnérables aux infections. Le biomatériau GORE® ENFORM est un treillis biosynthétique dégradable qui a récemment été approuvé pour la reconstruction des hernies ventrales et dont les résultats cliniques n'ont fait l'objet d'aucun rapport. Méthodologie : La présente étude était constituée d'une série de cas réalisée par un seul chirurgien. Les patients étaient inclus dans l'étude s'ils avaient subi une RHV à l'aide de biomatériau GORE® ENFORM. Le chirurgien en chef prenait la décision d'utiliser ce biomatériau d'après la classification du contrôle des maladies au centre du patient. Les chercheurs ont colligé les affections connexes du patient, les caractéristiques de la hernie, les récurrences de hernie postopératoire et les occurrences au foyer de l'opération (OFO) lors des rendez-vous de suivi et de l'examen des dossiers. Les patients ont été invités à préciser leurs résultats préopératoires et postopératoires (RPP) au moyen du formulaire court 3a sur l'intensité de la douleur tiré du système d'information des mesures de résultats déclarés par le patient (PROMIS) et du sondage sur la qualité de vie propre à la hernie (HerQLes). Résultats : Au total, 15 patients ont participé à l'étude et ont été suivis pendant une durée moyenne de 315 jours. Après l'opération, 26,7% des patients ont présenté une OFO ainsi que quatre infections au foyer de l'opération. Deux patients ont eu besoin d'un lessivage opératoire et du retrait du treillis. Un patient a subi une récurrence de la hernie. Huit des 15 patients ont rempli les RDP avant et après l'opération. Conclusion : Il s'agit de la première étude clinique à déclarer les résultats cliniques de la réparation d'une hernie ventrale à l'aide du treillis ENFORM. Ces résultats démontrent que le treillis Enform peut être envisagé pour la reconstruction d'une hernie ventrale complexe.

Facets of physical function assessed by patient-reported outcome measures in oncology research.

PURPOSE: The U.S. Food & Drug Administration has identified physical functioning (PF) as a core patient-reported outcome (PRO) in cancer clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to identify PF PRO measures (PROMs) in adult cancer populations and classify the PROMs by content covered (facets of PF) in each measure. METHODS: As part of the Patient Reports of Physical Functioning Study (PROPS) research program, we conducted a targeted literature review to identify PROMs that could be used in clinical trials to evaluate PF from the patient perspective. Next, we convened an advisory panel to conduct a modified, reactive, Delphi study to reach consensus on which PF facets are assessed by PROMs identified in the review. The panel engaged in a "card sort" activity to classify PROM items by PF facets. Consensus was reached when 80% of panel members agreed that at least one facet was being measured by each PROM item. RESULTS: The literature review identified 13 PROMs that met inclusion criteria. Eight facets of PF were identified for classification in the Delphi study: ability, completion, difficulty, limitation, quality, frequency, bother, and satisfaction. Through two rounds, the panel documented and classified conceptual approaches for each PRO item presented. The most prevalent PF facets were ability, difficulty, and limitation. CONCLUSION: Classifying PF PROMs by PF facets will promote more consistent communication regarding the aspects of PF represented in each PROM, helping researchers prioritize measures for inclusion in cancer clinical trials.

What facets of physical function are most important to adults diagnosed with cancer?

PURPOSE: Successful patient-focused drug development involves selecting and measuring outcomes in clinical trials that are important to patients. The U.S. Food & Drug Administration's definition of clinical benefit includes how patients feel, function, or survive. Patients are considered the experts in describing how they feel and function. In cancer trials, patient-reported measures of physical function provide insight into how patients function at baseline, benefit from the interventions being studied, and the impact of treatment side effects. We conducted a qualitative study with adults diagnosed with cancer to describe facets of physical function from their perspective and to identify which facets are most important to this patient population. METHODS: Using concept elicitation and cognitive interviewing techniques, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 72 adults ≥ 22 years of age with cancer who received treatment with an anticancer drug or biologic within six months of the interview. We selected participants using purposive sampling with the aim to elicit diverse experiences regarding how they may interpret and respond to questions related to physical function. Participants were presented with patient-reported outcome (PRO) items representative of PRO measures used in cancer and general populations. RESULTS: Five facets of how physical function relates to activities were defined from the patient perspective: ability, difficulty, limitation, satisfaction, and completion. More than half of the participants indicated that ability was the most important facet of physical function. The next most important were satisfaction (18.3%), limitation (14.1%), difficulty (5.6%), and completion (2.8%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that we must be more specific about the facets of physical function that we set out to assess when we use PRO measures to describe the patient experience. These results have implications for the specificity of physical function facets when measured in cancer clinical trials.

Transition from Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in a Community-Based Cohort.

The transition from acute to chronic low back pain (LBP) in community settings has yet to be well understood. We recruited n=131 participants with acute LBP from the community and followed them for 3 and 6-month outcomes. Acute LBP was defined by a duration of < 4 weeks, and participants must have reported a 30-day LBP-free period before the current acute episode. Chronic LBP was defined as pain most or every day over the past 3 months. Baseline psychological, social, and demographic factors were examined as predictors of transition to chronic LBP at 3 months or continuation of chronic LBP at 6 months. The transition from acute to chronic LBP at 3 months was 32.2% ( 38/118). At 6 months, 80.7% (25/111) of participants who transitioned at 3 months continued to have chronic LBP. At 6 months, participants who identified as Black or African American were more likely than white participants to transition to chronic LBP (RR=1.76, 95% CI 1.05, 2.95) and more likely to continue to have chronic LBP (RR=2.19, 95% CI 1.14, 4.21). Those classified at baseline by both LBP most or every day and intensity of at least 30/100 were more likely to transition to chronic LBP (RR=3.13, 95% CI 1.84, 5.30) and continue to have chronic LBP at 6 months (RR=2.58, 95% CI 1.43, 4.16). The STarT Back Screening Tool and the OSPRO-YF were associated with the transition to chronic LBP at 3 months and continuation at 6 months. Participants with higher PROMIS General Health and PROMIS Physical Health scores were less likely to transition to chronic LBP or continue to have chronic LBP at 6 months. These findings identify factors of acute LBP in the community that may predict the transition to chronic LBP. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and better understand the mechanisms driving the transition to chronic LBP.

Characterizing Acute Low Back Pain in a Community-Based Cohort.

Acute low back pain (LBP) is a common experience, however, the associated pain severity, pain frequency, and characteristics of individuals with acute LBP in community settings have yet to be well understood. In this manuscript, three acute LBP severity categorization definitions were used based on LBP frequency combined with either 1) pain impact frequency (impact-based) or 2) pain intensity (intensity-based), as well as LBP pain interference frequency (interference only-based) severity categories. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe and then compare these acute LBP severity groups in the following characteristics: 1) sociodemographic, 2) general and physical health, and 3) psychological. This cross-sectional study used baseline data from 131 community-based participants with acute LBP (<4 weeks duration before screening and ≥30 pain-free days before acute LBP onset). Descriptive associations were calculated as prevalence ratios for categorical variables and Hedges' g for continuous variables. Our analyses identified several large associations for impact-based and intensity-based categories with global mental health, global physical health, STarT Back Screening Tool risk category, and general health. Larger associations were found with social constructs (racially and ethnically minoritized, performance of social roles, and isolation) when using the intensity-based versus impact-based categorization. The interference-based category did not capture as much variability between acute LBP severity categories. This study adds to the literature by providing standard ways to characterize community-based individuals experiencing acute LBP. The robust differences observed between these categorization approaches suggest that how we define acute LBP severity is consequential; these different approaches may be used to improve the early identification of factors potentially contributing to the development of chronic LBP.

Association of Biomarkers with Individual and Multiple Body Sites of Pain: The Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project.

Introduction: Biochemical biomarkers may provide insight into musculoskeletal pain reported at individual or multiple body sites. The purpose of this study was to determine if biomarkers or pressure-pain threshold (PPT) were associated with individual or multiple sites of pain. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis included 689 community-based participants. Self-reported symptoms (ie, pain, aching, or stiffness) were ascertained about the neck, upper back/thoracic, low back, shoulders, elbows, wrist, hands, hips, knees, ankles, and feet. Measured analytes included CXCL-6, RANTES, HA, IL-6, BDNF, OPG and NPY. A standard dolorimeter measured PPT. Logistic regression was used determine the association between biomarkers and PPT with individual and summed sites of pain. Results: Increased IL-6 and HA were associated with knee pain (OR=1.30, 95% CI 1.03, 1.64) and (OR=1.32, 95% CI 1.01, 1.73) respectively; HA was also associated with elbow/wrist/hand pain (OR=1.60, 95% CI 1.22, 2.09). Those with increased NPY levels were less likely to have shoulder pain (OR=0.56, 95% CI 0.33, 0.93). Biomarkers HA (OR=1.50, 95% CI 1.07, 2.10), OPG (OR=1.74, 95% CI 1.00, 3.03), CXCL-6 (OR=1.75, 95% CI 1.02, 3.01) and decreased PPT (OR=3.97, 95% CI 2.22, 7.12) were associated with multiple compared to no sites of pain. Biomarker HA (OR=1.57, 95% CI 1.06, 2.32) and decreased PPT (OR=3.53, 95% CI 1.81, 6.88) were associated with multiple compared to a single site of pain. Conclusion: Biomarkers of inflammation (HA, OPG, IL-6 and CXCL-6), pain (NPY) and PPT may help to understand the etiology of single and multiple pain sites.

Does the implementation of clinical practice guidelines for low back and neck pain by physical therapists improve patient outcomes? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Physical therapy for neck and low back pain is highly variable despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPG). This review aimed to determine the impact of CPG implementation on patient-level outcomes for spinal pain. Implementation strategies were also examined to determine prevalence and potential impact. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched through April 2021 for studies assessing CPG implementation in physical therapy for neck and low back pain. Articles were screened for eligibility. The Modified Downs and Black checklist was utilized to determine study quality. Due to the heterogeneity between studies, a meta-analysis was not performed. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included in this review. Implementation strategies were significantly varied between studies. Outcomes pertaining to healthcare utilization, pain, and physical functioning were assessed in relation to the implementation of CPGs. Multiple implementation strategies were identified, with Managing Quality as the most frequently utilized key implementation process. Findings indicate CPG implementation decreased healthcare utilization, but inconsistent results were found with physical functioning and pain outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: CPG implementation appears to have a beneficial effect on healthcare utilization outcomes, but may not impact pain and physical functioning outcomes. Effective CPG implementation strategies remain unknown, though utilizing implementation framework may improve outcomes. More research is needed to determine the most effective implementation strategies and effects on pain and physical function outcomes.

Reducing Opioid Use for Patients With Chronic Pain: An Evidence-Based Perspective.

The implementation of recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations to move away from opioids and toward nonpharmacological therapies for the treatment of chronic pain could involve a difficult transition period for patients and practitioners. The focus of treatment should shift from eliminating pain completely to minimizing the impact of pain on quality of life. Many patients with chronic pain take opioids either because opioids were previously prescribed as a first-line treatment for chronic pain, on the basis of old standards of care, or because opioids were initially prescribed for acute pain. Patients currently taking opioids will need a tapering period during which they transition their pain management to interdisciplinary care and nonpharmacological treatments. To provide useful treatment options, physical therapists need to have a good understanding of the neuroscientific mechanisms of chronic pain, biopsychosocial components of chronic pain management, issues related to opioid use, and pain management strategies used by other health care professionals. Armed with knowledge and good communication skills, physical therapists can work within an interdisciplinary team to adapt care to each patient's needs and abilities. This perspective article provides guidance for physical therapists to effectively treat patients with chronic pain during the opioid tapering process. A framework has been created to help health care providers structure their reasoning as they collaborate to develop a unique approach for each patient.