ABSTRACT
Background: Wait times at Canadian multidisciplinary pain clinics have been reported as excessive for nearly 2 decades. Aims: The aim of this study was to gain insight into the patient experience of waiting for chronic pain specialty care. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of new patients waiting for an appointment was conducted in six multidisciplinary pain clinics, including one pediatric clinic, in Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba between February 2020 and October 2022. Participants were asked about the length of time they waited for their appointment since being referred, their quality of life, health care professionals seen while waiting, and an open-ended question, "Is there anything else you'd like to tell us?" Results: Among the 493 adult and 100 pediatric respondents, 53% of adults and 82% of children reported wait times under 6 months, whereas 22% of adults and 4% of children waited longer than a year. Between 52% and 63% of adults and 29% to 48% of children reported being affected by chronic pain "quite a bit" or "extremely" on measures of quality of life. The most visited health care professionals while waiting for a pain clinic appointment were family doctors/nurse practitioners for adults and physiotherapists for children. Qualitative analysis of open-ended question responses revealed eight themes: system navigation issues, administrative issues, decreased quality of life, distress, self-advocacy, coping strategies, communication, and distrust. Conclusions: Our findings provide real-time regional snapshots into the impact of long wait times experienced by Canadians living with chronic pain. There is an urgent need to better support patients during the waiting period. Expanding technologies such as electronic consultation hold great promise.
Contexte: Les temps d'attente dans les cliniques multidisciplinaires de traitement de la douleur au Canada sont jugés excessifs depuis près de deux décennies.Objectifs: L'objectif de cette étude était de mieux comprendre l'expérience des patients en attente de soins spécialisés pour la douleur chronique.Méthodes: Une enquête transversale sur les nouveaux patients en attente d'un rendez-vous a été menée dans six cliniques multidisciplinaires de traitement de la douleur, dont une clinique pédiatrique, en Ontario, au Québec et au Manitoba, entre février 2020 et octobre 2022. Les participants ont été interrogés sur le temps d'attente pour leur rendez-vous depuis qu'ils avaient été référés, sur leur qualité de vie, sur les professionnels de la santé qu'ils avaient consultés pendant qu'ils attendaient, et sur une question ouverte : « Y a-t-il autre chose que vous aimeriez nous dire? ¼Résultats: Parmi les 493 adultes et les 100 enfants interrogés, 53 % des adultes et 82 % des enfants ont déclaré des temps d'attente inférieurs à six mois, tandis que 22 % des adultes et 4 % des enfants ont attendu plus d'un an. Entre 52 % et 63 % des adultes et 29 % à 48 % des enfants ont déclaré être affectés par la douleur chronique « assez ¼ ou « extrêmement ¼ sur les mesures de la qualité de vie. Les professionnels de la santé les plus consultés pendant l'attente d'un rendez-vous à la clinique de la douleur étaient les médecins de famille/infirmières praticiennes pour les adultes et les physiothérapeutes pour les enfants. L'analyse qualitative des réponses aux questions ouvertes a révélé huit thèmes : les problèmes de navigation dans le système; les problèmes administratifs; la diminution de la qualité de vie; la détresse; l'autonomie; les stratégies d'adaptation; la communication et la méfiance.Conclusions: Nos résultats offrent des instantanés régionaux en temps réel des répercussions des longs temps d'attente sur les Canadiens souffrant de douleur chronique. Il est urgent de mieux soutenir les patients pendant la période d'attente. Les technologies en expansion, telles que la consultation électronique, sont très prometteuses.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of diagnostic imaging (DI) tests may be unnecessary, leading to increased healthcare costs and the possibility of patient harm. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effect of audit and feedback (AF) interventions directed at healthcare providers on reducing image ordering. The secondary objective was to examine the effect of AF on the appropriateness of DI ordering. METHODS: Studies were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov registry on December 22nd, 2022. Studies were included if they were randomized control trials (RCTs), targeted healthcare professionals, and studied AF as the sole intervention or as the core component of a multi-faceted intervention. Risk of bias for each study was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analyses were completed using RevMan software and results were displayed in forest plots. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs enrolling 4311 clinicians or practices were included. AF interventions resulted in 1.5 fewer image test orders per 1000 patients seen than control interventions (95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference -2.6 to -0.4, p-value = 0.009). The effect of AF on appropriateness was not statistically significant, with a 3.2% (95% CI -1.5 to 7.7%, p-value = 0.18) greater likelihood of test orders being considered appropriate with AF vs control interventions. The strength of evidence was rated as moderate for the primary objective but was very low for the appropriateness outcome because of risk of bias, inconsistency in findings, indirectness, and imprecision. CONCLUSION: AF interventions are associated with a modest reduction in total DI ordering with moderate certainty, suggesting some benefit of AF. Individual studies document effects of AF on image order appropriateness ranging from a non-significant trend toward worsening to a highly significant improvement, but the weighted average effect size from the meta-analysis is not statistically significant with very low certainty.
Subject(s)
Diagnostic Imaging , Humans , Diagnostic Imaging/methods , Feedback , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Medical AuditABSTRACT
Introduction: Localized provoked vulvodynia (LPV) is a prevalent sexual health condition with significant negative impacts on quality of life. There is a lack of consensus regarding effective management. Methods: We used Arksey and O'Malley's five-step method to identify, collate, and evaluate literature published between 2010 and 2023. The scoping review investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of interventions in the management of LPV. The aim of this paper is to map the literature on the efficacy or effectiveness of physical interventions. Results: The review produced 19 primary studies of physical interventions for LPV. These include acupuncture, laser therapy, physiotherapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, low-intensity shockwave therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation, and vestibulectomy. Conclusion: Published studies that investigated a range of physical treatments for LPV showed some positive effects, except for transcranial direct-current stimulation. The remaining modalities demonstrated improved sexual pain and treatment satisfaction, when measured. Findings were mixed for non-sexual pain. There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions regarding other outcomes. Researchers are encouraged to conduct larger, high-quality studies that sample more diverse patient populations and use patient-oriented outcomes to assess effectiveness of physical modalities.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Preoperative state anxiety (PSA) is distress and anxiety directly associated with perioperative events. PSA is associated with negative postoperative outcomes such as longer hospital length of stay, increased pain and opioid use, and higher rates of rehospitalization. Psychological prehabilitation, such as education, exposure to hospital environments, and relaxation strategies, has been shown to mitigate PSA; however, there are limited skilled personnel to deliver such interventions in clinical practice. Immersive virtual reality (VR) has the potential for greater accessibility and enhanced integration into an immersive and interactive experience. VR is rarely used in the preoperative setting, but similar forms of stress inoculation training involving exposure to stressful events have improved psychological preparation in contexts such as military deployment. OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to develop and investigate a targeted PSA intervention in patients undergoing oncological surgery using a single preoperative VR exposure. The primary objectives are to (1) develop a novel VR program for patients undergoing oncological surgery with general anesthesia; (2) assess the feasibility, including acceptability, of a single exposure to this intervention; (3) assess the feasibility, including acceptability, of outcome measures of PSA; and (4) use these results to refine the VR content and outcome measures for a larger trial. A secondary objective is to preliminarily assess the clinical utility of the intervention for PSA. METHODS: This study comprises 3 phases. Phase 1 (completed) involved the development of a VR prototype targeting PSA, using multidisciplinary iterative input. Phase 2 (data collection completed) involves examining the feasibility aspects of the VR intervention. This randomized feasibility trial involves assessing the novel VR preoperative intervention compared to a VR control (ie, nature trek) condition and a treatment-as-usual group among patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Phase 3 will involve refining the prototype based on feasibility findings and input from people with lived experience for a future clinical trial, using focus groups with participants from phase 2. RESULTS: This study was funded in March 2019. Phase 1 was completed in April 2020. Phase 2 data collection was completed in January 2024 and data analysis is ongoing. Focus groups were completed in February 2024. Both the feasibility study and focus groups will contribute to further refinement of the initial VR prototype (phase 3), with the final simulation to be completed by mid-2024. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this work will contribute to the limited body of research examining feasible and broadly accessible interventions for PSA. Knowledge gained from this research will contribute to the final development of a novel VR intervention to be tested in a large population of patients with cancer before surgery in a randomized clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04544618; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04544618. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/55692.
Subject(s)
Anxiety , Feasibility Studies , Neoplasms , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Anxiety/prevention & control , Anxiety/therapy , Neoplasms/surgery , Preoperative Care/methods , Psychological Distress , Stress, Psychological , Virtual Reality , Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
Introduction: Localized provoked vulvodynia (LPV) is a chronic condition characterized by pain in the vulvar vestibule, which can be provoked by pressure or touch and which is not tied to a clear underlying cause. Research into the etiology of and most appropriate treatment strategy for LPV is still limited. Methods: Using Arksey and O'Malley's model for scoping reviews, we evaluated the research question: what is the current evidence regarding the efficacy/effectiveness of multimodal or interdisciplinary interventions for the treatment of LPV? We collated and analyzed articles from 2010 to 2023 to capture the current research landscape. Results: Our review identified 27 studies, which either compared treatments between classes (eg pharmacologic versus psychologic modalities) or described interdisciplinary treatment programs. We identify several trends in the literature. First, outcome measures are inconsistent between studies, often unvalidated, and may not adequately mirror patient concerns. Second, the absence of appropriate comparator groups in many studies restricts providers' ability to appraise which treatments may be most efficacious. Third, selection bias and demographic homogeneity limit generalizability. Finally, we highlight the need for head-to-head trials of vestibulectomy with other treatments considered first line for vulvodynia management. Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to suggest the superiority of one treatment modality for LPV relative to others or to recommend a particular interdisciplinary management strategy. Future research should use a head-to-head design where sham control is impossible, incorporate patient-centered outcome measures, and investigate impacts of treatment among diverse samples of LPV patients.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Localized provoked vulvodynia (LPV) is a chronic pain condition without an identifiable cause that is localized to a portion of the vulva and provoked by pressure or touch. LPV is a commonly occurring but poorly understood condition lacking consensus on management. Method: This scoping review used Arksey and O'Malley's approach to identify and evaluate literature published between 2010 and 2023 that addressed the question: What is the current evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of pharmacological treatments in the management of LPV? Results: This review evaluated 18 papers reporting on the efficacy or effectiveness of oral, topical, and injectable medications. Seven of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Oral gabapentin and oral desipramine showed some improvement in sexual function compared to placebo. Small sample sizes and methodological issues limited confidence in interpreting findings. Pain was reduced in descriptive studies of tricyclic antidepressants, milnacipran, injectable anesthetics, and botulinum toxin. Where pain did not improve with treatment, some oral medications improved participants' mood and sexual function. Some topical agents may be effective in reducing peripherally mediated neuropathic pain. Botulinum toxin was the most well-studied injectable but yielded mixed outcomes related to pain, quality of life, and sexual function. Conclusion: There is a lack of convincing evidence to draw conclusions about the efficacy or effectiveness of pharmacological therapies for LPV. The breadth of therapies for treating LPV warrants the development of evidence-based, consensus guidelines for measuring treatment outcomes and improving comparisons across studies. Recommendations for research include addressing methodological shortcomings and diversifying the participant pool to increase the generalizability of findings.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Postoperative neurologic symptoms (PONS) in the operative arm are important complications of shoulder surgery and interscalene blockade (ISB). This systematic review aimed to compare the risk of PONS between ISB and other techniques, and the relative safety of different agents used in ISB. METHODS: Our systematic review followed Cochrane review methodology and was registered in PROSPERO. A search of MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and CENTRAL (Wiley) from inception to June 2020 was completed. We included randomized or quasi-randomized trials of patients (> five years old) undergoing shoulder surgery with any ISB technique as an intervention, compared with any other nonregional or regional technique, or ISB of alternate composition or technique. The primary outcome was PONS (study author defined) assessed a minimum of one week after surgery. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies totalling 6,236 participants (median, 69; range, 30-910) were included. Another 422 otherwise eligible trials were excluded because PONS was not reported. Heterogeneity in when PONS was assessed (from one week to one year) and the diagnostic criteria used precluded quantitative meta-analysis. The most common PONS definition, consisting of one or more of paresthesia, sensory deficit, or motor deficit, was only used in 16/55 (29%) trials. Risk of bias was low in 5/55 (9%) trials and high in 36/55 (65%) trials, further limiting any inferences. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the need for a standardized PONS outcome definition and follow-up time, along with routine, rigorous measurement of PONS in trials of ISB. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42020148496); registered 10 February 2020.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les symptômes neurologiques postopératoires (SNPO) dans le bras opéré sont une complication importante des chirurgies de l'épaule sous bloc interscalénique (BIS). Cette revue systématique visait à comparer le risque de SNPO entre le BIS et d'autres techniques, ainsi que l'innocuité relative de divers agents utilisés pour réaliser un BIS. MéTHODE: Notre revue systématique a suivi la méthodologie de révision Cochrane et a été enregistrée dans le registre PROSPERO. Une recherche a été menée dans les bases de données MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid) et CENTRAL (Wiley) de leur création à juin 2020. Nous avons inclus les études randomisées ou quasi-randomisées de patients (> cinq ans) bénéficiant d'une chirurgie de l'épaule avec n'importe quelle technique de BIS en tant qu'intervention, comparée à toute autre technique régionale ou non régionale, ou à un BIS de composition ou de technique alternative. Le critère d'évaluation principal était les SNPO (définis par l'auteur de l'étude) évalué au moins une semaine après la chirurgie. RéSULTATS: Cinquante-cinq études totalisant 6236 participants (médiane, 69; intervalle, 30-910) ont été incluses. Quatre cent vingt-deux autres études autrement admissibles ont été exclues parce que les SNPO n'y étaient pas rapportés. L'hétérogénéité du moment auquel les SNPO ont été évalués (d'une semaine à un an) et les critères diagnostiques utilisés ont empêché la réalisation d'une méta-analyse quantitative. La définition la plus courante des SNPO, consistant en la présence de paresthésie, de déficit sensoriel et/ou de déficit moteur, n'a été utilisée que dans 16/55 (29 %) des études. Le risque de biais était faible dans 5/55 (9 %) des études et élevé dans 36/55 (65 %) des études, limitant davantage toute autre inférence. CONCLUSION: Ces résultats soulignent la nécessité d'une définition normalisée du critère de SNPO et du temps de suivi, ainsi que la nécessité d'une mesure systématique et rigoureuse des SNPO dans les études portant sur les blocs interscaléniques. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42020148496); enregistrée le 10 février 2020.
Subject(s)
Brachial Plexus Block , Shoulder Joint , Anesthetics, Local , Arm , Arthroscopy , Brachial Plexus Block/adverse effects , Brachial Plexus Block/methods , Child, Preschool , Humans , Pain, Postoperative , Shoulder/surgery , Shoulder Joint/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: CT Imaging is often requested for patients with low back pain (LBP) by their general practitioners. It is currently unknown what reasons are common for these referrals and if CT images are ordered according to guidelines in one province in Canada, which has high rates of CT imaging. The objective of this study is to categorise lumbar spine CT referrals into serious spinal pathology, radicular syndrome, and non-specific LBP and evaluate the appropriateness of CT imaging referrals from general practitioners for patients with LBP. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review of electronic health records was performed in one health region in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Inclusion criteria were lumbar spine CT referrals ordered by general practitioners for adults ≥18 years, and performed between January 1st-December 31st, 2016. Each CT referral was identified from linked databases (Meditech and PACS). To the study authors' knowledge, guidelines regarding when to refer patients with low back pain for CT imaging had not been actively disseminated to general practitioners or implemented at clinics/hospitals during this time period. Data were manually extracted and categorised into three groups: red flag conditions (judged to be an appropriate referral), radicular syndrome (judged be unclear appropriateness), or nonspecific LBP (determined to be inappropriate). RESULTS: Three thousand six hundred nine lumbar spine CTs were included from 2016. The mean age of participants was 54.7 (SD 14 years), with females comprising 54.6% of referrals. 1.9% of lumbar CT referrals were missing/unclear, 6.5% of CTs were ordered on a red-flag suspicion, 75.6% for radicular syndromes, and 16.0% for non-specific LBP; only 6.5% of referrals were clearly appropriate. Key information including patient history and clinical exams performed at appointment were often missing from referrals. CONCLUSION: This audit found high proportions of inappropriate or questionable referrals for lumbar spine CT and many were missing information needed to categorise. Further research to understand the drivers of inappropriate imaging and cost to the healthcare system would be beneficial.
Subject(s)
General Practitioners , Low Back Pain , Adult , Female , Humans , Low Back Pain/diagnostic imaging , Low Back Pain/epidemiology , Medical Records , Newfoundland and Labrador/epidemiology , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , Routinely Collected Health DataABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Reducing computed tomography (CT) examinations of the lumbar spine is one of Choosing Wisely Canada's initial top 10 recommendations. This study's objective was to report the age- and-sex standardized rates of lumbar spine CT ordered by family physicians in 1 health region in Newfoundland and Labrador. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using local health data from Meditech, an electronic health record system, from 2013 to 2016 for the Eastern Health Region of Newfoundland and Labrador, the largest health region in the province. Records were included if the referral was for an adult aged 20 years or more, and CT was ordered by a family physician. Lumbar spine CT rates were contextualized with age- and sex-stratified estimates. Population estimates were provided by the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information to calculate age- and sex-standardized rates per 100 000 people. We calculated rate ratios to test for statistical significance in differences in rates between years. RESULTS: A total of 14 370 records were examined. The age- and sex-standardized rates of lumbar spine CT per 100 000 were 1225 in 2013, 1393 in 2014, 1556 in 2015 and 1395 in 2016. The rate ratio was 1.137 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.084-1.194) for the comparison between 2014 and 2013, 1.117 (95% CI 1.067-1.169) between 2015 and 2014, and 0.896 (95% CI 0.857-0.938) between 2016 and 2015. INTERPRETATION: The age- and sex-standardized rates suggest that there was a steady rate of lumbar spine CT examinations being ordered by family physicians in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2013-2016. Although all rate ratios were statistically significant, the magnitude of the difference between years is likely not clinically relevant. These rates are important because they serve as a benchmark for future initiatives to reduce unnecessary referrals for lumbar spine CT.
Subject(s)
Lumbar Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Physicians, Family , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Newfoundland and Labrador/epidemiology , Sex Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Since 2000, guidelines have been consistent in recommending when diagnostic imaging for low back pain should be obtained to ensure patient safety and reduce unnecessary tests. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the pooled proportion of CT and x-ray imaging of the lumbar spine that were considered appropriate in primary and emergency care. METHODS: Pubmed, CINAHL, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Embase were searched for synonyms of "low back pain", "guidelines", and "adherence" that were published after 2000. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed for inclusion with forward and backward tracking on included studies. Included studies had data extracted and synthesized. Risk of bias was performed on all studies, and GRADE was performed on included studies that provided data on CT and x-ray separately. A random effect, single proportion meta-analysis model was used. RESULTS: Six studies were included in the descriptive synthesis, and 5 studies included in the meta-analysis. Five of the 6 studies assessed appropriateness of x-rays; two of the six studies assessed appropriateness of CTs. The pooled estimate for appropriateness of x-rays was 43% (95% CI: 30%, 56%) and the pooled estimate for appropriateness of CTs was 54% (95% CI: 51%, 58%). Studies did not report adequate information to fulfill the RECORD checklist (reporting guidelines for research using observational data). Risk of bias was high in 4 studies, moderate in one, and low in one. GRADE for x-ray appropriateness was low-quality and for CT appropriateness was very-low-quality. CONCLUSION: While this study determined a pooled proportion of appropriateness for both x-ray and CT imaging for low back pain, there is limited confidence in these numbers due to the downgrading of the evidence using GRADE. Further research on this topic is needed to inform our understanding of x-ray and CT appropriateness in order to improve healthcare systems and decrease patient harms.
Subject(s)
Low Back Pain/diagnostic imaging , Lumbosacral Region/diagnostic imaging , Radiography , Emergency Medical Services , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Medical Records , Primary Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People at risk of developing hereditary cancers associated with Lynch Syndrome (LS) can be identified through universal screening of colorectal tumors. However, tumor screening practices are variable across Canada and few studies explore the perspectives of genetic counselors and pathologists about tumor screening. This study was conducted to better understand the barriers and facilitators of implementing universal tumor screening in health centers across Canada. METHODS: An online survey about tumor screening programs was administered to genetic counselors and pathologists across Canada through communication channels of professional organizations. It was hosted on SurveyMonkey and accessible from October 2016 to March 2017. RESULTS: Barriers to tumor screening included a lack of sustainable resources, including funding and genetic counselors. Respondents strongly identified the need for a coordinated, interdisciplinary approach to program planning with the "right people at the table." Respondents currently with a screening program provided advice such as carefully designing the program structure, developing patient and family follow-up protocols, and ensuring adequate resources (funding, staff, training for providers) were available prior to program initiation. CONCLUSION: There is no national approach to universal tumor screening in Canada. However, future efforts can be informed by the experiences of those centers that have already created a universal tumor screening program for LS. These data suggest the need for an interdisciplinary approach, initial and sustained funding, and careful advanced planning of program structures and policies.