[Evidence-based interventions to treat chronic low back pain: treatment selection for a personalized medicine approach : German version]. / Evidenzbasierte Interventionen zur Behandlung von chronischem Schmerz im unteren Rücken ­ Therapieauswahl für einen personalisierten Behandlungsansatz : Deutsche Fassung.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is highly prevalent in the United States and globally, resulting in functional impairment and lowered quality of life. While many treatments are available for cLBP, clinicians have little information about which specific treatment(s) will work best for individual patients or subgroups of patients. The Back Pain Research Consortium, part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM (HEAL) Initiative, will conduct a collaborative clinical trial, which seeks to develop a personalized medicine algorithm to optimize patient and provider treatment selection for patients with cLBP. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this article is to provide an update on evidence-based cLBP interventions and describe the process of reviewing and selecting interventions for inclusion in the clinical trial. METHODS: A working group of cLBP experts reviewed and selected interventions for inclusion in the clinical trial. The primary evaluation measures were strength of evidence and magnitude of treatment effect. When available in the literature, duration of effect, onset time, carryover effect, multimodal efficacy, responder subgroups, and evidence for the mechanism of treatment effect or biomarkers were considered. CONCLUSION: The working group selected 4 leading, evidence-based treatments for cLBP to be tested in the clinical trial and for use in routine clinical treatment. These treatments include (1) duloxetine, (2) acceptance and commitment therapy, (3) a classification-based exercise and manual therapy intervention, and (4) a self-management approach. These interventions each had a moderate to high level of evidence to support a therapeutic effect and were from different therapeutic classes.

Psychosocial services provided by licensed cardiac rehabilitation programs.

Background: Professional health organizations recommend that outpatient cardiac rehabilitation programs include activities to optimize the physical, mental, and social well-being of patients. The study objectives were to describe among cardiac rehabilitation programs (1) mental health assessments performed; (2) psychosocial services offered; and (3) leadership's perception of barriers to psychosocial services offerings. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of North Carolina licensed outpatient cardiac rehabilitation programs on their 2018 services was conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. Thematic analysis of free text questions related to barriers to programmatic establishment or expansion of psychosocial services was performed by two team members until consensus was reached. Results: Sixty-eight programs (89%) responded to the survey. Forty-eight programs (70%) indicated offering psychosocial services; however, a majority (73%) of programs reported not directly billing for those services. At program enrollment, mental health was assessed in 94% of programs of which 92% repeated the assessment at discharge. Depression was assessed with the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire by a majority (75%) of programs. Psychosocial services included individual counseling (59%), counseling referrals (49%), and educational classes (29%). Directors reported lack of internal resources (92%) and patient beliefs (45%) as the top barriers to including or expanding psychosocial services at their facilities. Conclusions: Cardiac rehabilitation programs routinely assess mental health but lack the resources to establish or expand psychosocial services. Interventions aimed at improving patient education and reducing stigma of mental health are important public health opportunities.

Evidence-based interventions to treat chronic low back pain: treatment selection for a personalized medicine approach.

Introduction: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is highly prevalent in the United States and globally, resulting in functional impairment and lowered quality of life. While many treatments are available for cLBP, clinicians have little information about which specific treatment(s) will work best for individual patients or subgroups of patients. The Back Pain Research Consortium, part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM (HEAL) Initiative, will conduct a collaborative clinical trial, which seeks to develop a personalized medicine algorithm to optimize patient and provider treatment selection for patients with cLBP. Objective: The primary objective of this article is to provide an update on evidence-based cLBP interventions and describe the process of reviewing and selecting interventions for inclusion in the clinical trial. Methods: A working group of cLBP experts reviewed and selected interventions for inclusion in the clinical trial. The primary evaluation measures were strength of evidence and magnitude of treatment effect. When available in the literature, duration of effect, onset time, carryover effect, multimodal efficacy, responder subgroups, and evidence for the mechanism of treatment effect or biomarkers were considered. Conclusion: The working group selected 4 leading, evidence-based treatments for cLBP to be tested in the clinical trial and for use in routine clinical treatment. These treatments include (1) duloxetine, (2) acceptance and commitment therapy, (3) a classification-based exercise and manual therapy intervention, and (4) a self-management approach. These interventions each had a moderate to high level of evidence to support a therapeutic effect and were from different therapeutic classes.

Brief Educational Video plus Telecare to Enhance Recovery for Older Emergency Department Patients with Acute Musculoskeletal Pain: an update to the study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This update describes changes to the Brief Educational Tool to Enhance Recovery (BETTER) trial in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS/DESIGN: The original protocol was published in Trials. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the BETTER trial converted to remote recruitment in April 2020. All recruitment, consent, enrollment, and randomization now occur by phone within 24 h of the acute care visit. Other changes to the original protocol include an expansion of inclusion criteria and addition of new recruitment sites. To increase recruitment numbers, eligibility criteria were expanded to include individuals with chronic pain, non-daily opioid use within 2 weeks of enrollment, presenting musculoskeletal pain (MSP) symptoms for more than 1 week, hospitalization in past 30 days, and not the first time seeking medical treatment for presenting MSP pain. In addition, recruitment sites were expanded to other emergency departments and an orthopedic urgent care clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting from an orthopedic urgent care clinic and transitioning to remote operations not only allowed for continued participant enrollment during the pandemic but also resulted in some favorable outcomes, including operational efficiencies, increased enrollment, and broader generalizability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04118595 . Registered on October 8, 2019.

Outpatient Cardiac Rehabilitation Services, Participants and Workforce in North Carolina: Results of a 2019 Survey of Cardiac Rehabilitation Program Directors.

BACKGROUND Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) can improve quality of life and reduce subsequent hospitalizations for individuals with cardiovascular disease. Nevertheless, CR is underutilized, and less is known about the current content, patient population, and workforce of CR programs in North Carolina.OBJECTIVE To describe CR services, patient participation, and workforce in North Carolina in order to characterize CR infrastructure and identify opportunities to improve CR use.METHODS We distributed an electronic survey to all certified outpatient CR programs in North Carolina in spring 2019. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize program characteristics, participant characteristics, and current workforce. Data were analyzed overall and by region.RESULTS Responding programs (89.5% response rate, n=68) had been in operation for a mean of 24 (SD: 10.4) years. Programs have similar availability across the state, operating 4 days a week with 5 sessions per day. A majority of programs offered nutrition counseling (98.5%), stress management (94.1%), aerobic exercise (86.8%), and weight training (86.8%). Patients were majority male (65%), aged 65 or older (75%), and White (75%). Nearly half of patients referred to CR attended at least 1 session, though 25% discontinued early. Most programs were staffed by a median of 2 full-time nurses (97%) and by a median of 1.5 full-time exercise physiologists (96%). Mental health and administrative professionals were less frequent in CR settings.LIMITATIONS Since this survey was primarily completed by program directors, further research is needed to understand the challenges, experiences, and needs of the frontline CR workforce, as well as the direct experiences of patients who participate in CR.CONCLUSIONS CR programs in North Carolina offer a range of services. While half of patients referred to CR initiate services, interventions are needed to improve initiation and adherence to CR.

Use of a Brief Negotiation Interview in the emergency department to reduce high-risk alcohol use among older adults: A randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a Brief Negotiation Interview (BNI) performed in the emergency department (ED) can reduce future rates of alcohol use among older adults who are high-risk drinkers. METHODS: Adults aged 65 years and older in a single academic ED were screened for high-risk alcohol use based on the National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism definition of >7 drinks per week or >3 drinks per occasion. Eligible individuals who were high-risk drinkers who passed a cognitive impairment screener and who consented to enrollment were randomly assigned to receive the BNI versus usual care. Outcomes were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months.  The primary outcome was the rate of high-risk alcohol use at 6 months. RESULTS:  Of 2250 ED patients who were screened, 183 (8%) met the criteria for high-risk alcohol use. Of those, 98 (53%) patients met full criteria and consented to participation. Of the participants, 67% were men and 83% were non-Hispanic White. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of high-risk alcohol use at 6 months between the BNI at 59.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.5%-76.8%) and the control at 49.1% (95% CI, 36.9%-65.2%). However, there was a significant time-effect reduction in alcohol consumption and rates of high-risk alcohol use for both groups. CONCLUSION: Among older adults who met the criteria for high-risk alcohol use, the BNI in the ED did not result in a reduction in high-risk alcohol use at 6 months, although both groups showed significant reductions after their ED visit. Further work is needed to determine the optimal setting and time to use the BNI to impact high-risk alcohol use in this population.

Using malnutrition and food insecurity screening to identify broader health-related social needs amongst older adults receiving emergency department care in the Southeastern United States: A cross-sectional study.

Unmet health-related social needs are common amongst older US adults and impact both quality of life and health outcomes. One of the ways that unmet health-related social needs impact health is through malnutrition, an imbalance in a person's intake of energy and/or nutrients. Lack of reliable access to a sufficient quantity of nutritious food is a specific health-related social need that can be assessed rapidly and, when unmet, is a direct risk factor for malnutrition and may be indicative of a broader range of unmet health-related social needs. We conducted a cross-sectional study to characterise malnutrition and food insecurity amongst older adults receiving emergency department (ED) care using brief, validated measures and to assess the burden of a broader range of health-related social needs amongst these patients. Patients were asked about their need for and willingness to receive a range of social services. The study was conducted in an academic ED serving a racially and socioeconomically diverse population in the Southeastern United States. A convenience sample of noncritically ill adults aged 60 years and older was approached between November 2018 and April 2019. Study patients (n = 127) were predominantly non-Hispanic white (67%), community dwelling (91%) and urban residents (66%) with 28% screening positive for malnutrition risk, 16% for food insecurity and 5% for both. Of those at risk for malnutrition, 25 (69%) reported ≥2 unmet health-related social needs and 14 (38%) were receptive to social services. Amongst food insecure patients, 18 (90%) reported additional unmet health-related social needs and 13 (65%) were receptive to receiving social services. In conclusion, a brief set of questions can identify subgroups of older ED patients who are food insecure or at risk for malnutrition. Individuals who screen positive for food insecurity have a high burden of unmet health-related social needs.

Identification and characterization of older emergency department patients with high-risk alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: High-risk alcohol use in the elderly is a common but underrecognized problem. We tested a brief screening instrument to identify high-risk individuals. METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study conducted at a single emergency department. High-risk alcohol use was defined by National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) guidelines as >7 drinks/week or >3 drinks/occasion. We assessed alcohol use in patients aged ≥ 65 years using the timeline follow back (TLFB) method as a reference standard and a new, 2-question screener based on NIAAA guidelines. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) screens were used for comparison. We collected demographic information from a convenience sample of high- and low-risk drinkers. RESULTS: We screened 2250 older adults and 180 (8%) met criteria for high-risk use. Ninety-eight high-risk and 124 low-risk individuals were enrolled. The 2-question screener had sensitivity of 98% (95% CI, 93%-100%) and specificity of 87% (95% CI, 80%-92%) using TLFB as the reference. It had higher sensitivity than the AUDIT or CAGE tools. The high-risk group was predominantly male (65% vs 35%, P < 0.001). They drank a median of 14 drinks per week across all ages from 65 to 92. They had higher rates of prior substance use treatment (17% vs 2%, P < 0.001) and current tobacco use (24% vs 9%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: A rapid, 2-question screener can identify high-risk drinkers with higher sensitivity than AUDIT or CAGE screening. It could be used in concert with more specific questionnaires to guide treatment.

Multicenter Validation of an Emergency Department-Based Screening Tool to Identify Elder Abuse.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) visits provide an important opportunity for elder abuse identification. Our objective was to assess the accuracy of the ED Senior Abuse Identification (ED Senior AID) tool for the identification of elder abuse. METHODS: We conducted a study of the ED Senior AID tool in 3 US EDs. Participants were English-speaking patients 65 years old and older who provided consent or for whom a legally authorized representative provided consent. Research nurses administered the screening tool, which includes a brief mental status assessment, questions about elder abuse, and a physical examination for patients who lack the ability to report abuse or for whom the presence or absence of abuse was uncertain. The reference standard was based on the majority opinion of a longitudinal, expert, all data (LEAD) panel following review and discussion of medical records, clinical social worker notes, and a structured social and behavioral evaluation. For the reference standard, LEAD panel members were blinded to the results of the screening tool. RESULTS: Of 916 enrolled patients, 33 (3.6%) screened positive for elder abuse. The LEAD panel reviewed 125 cases: all 33 with positive screen results and a 10% random sample of negative screen results. Of these, the panel identified 17 cases as positive for elder abuse, including 16 of the 33 cases that screened positive. The ED Senior AID tool had a sensitivity of 94.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 71.3% to 99.9%) and specificity of 84.3% (95% CI 76.0% to 90.6%). CONCLUSION: This multicenter study found the ED Senior AID tool to have a high sensitivity and specificity as a screening tool for elder abuse, albeit with wide CIs.

Leveraging emergency department visits to connect older adults at risk for malnutrition and food insecurity to community resources: design and protocol development for the BRIDGE study.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a complex and costly condition that is common among older adults in the United States (US), with up to half at risk for malnutrition. Malnutrition is associated with several non-medical (i.e., social) factors, including food insecurity. Being at risk for both malnutrition and food insecurity likely identifies a subset of older adults with complex care needs and a high burden of social vulnerability (e.g., difficulty accessing or preparing meals, lack of transportation, and social isolation). US emergency departments (EDs) are a unique and important setting for identifying older patients who may benefit from the provision of health-related social services. This paper describes the protocol development for the Building Resilience and InDependence for Geriatric Patients in the Emergency Department (BRIDGE) study. BRIDGE was designed to assess the feasibility of an ED-based screening process to systematically identify older patients who are at risk for malnutrition and food insecurity and link them to health-related social services to address unmet social needs and support their health and well-being. METHODS: Phase 1 efforts will be formative and focused on identifying screening tools, establishing screening and referral workflows, and conducting initial feasibility testing with a cohort of older patients and ED staff. In phase 2, which includes process and outcome evaluation, the screening and referral process will be piloted in the ED. A partnership will be formed with an Area Agency on Aging (AAA) identified in phase 1, to assess resource needs and identify community-based social services for older ED patients who screen positive for both malnutrition risk and food insecurity. Data on screening, referrals, linkage to community-based social services, and patient-reported quality of life and healthcare utilization will be used to assess feasibility. DISCUSSION: The tools and workflows developed and tested in this study, as well as learnings related to forming and maintaining cross-sector partnerships, may serve as a model for future efforts to utilize EDs as a setting for bridging the gap between healthcare and social services for vulnerable patients.