Prospective Back Pain Trajectories or Retrospective Recall-Which Tells Us Most About the Patient?

In patients with low back pain (LBP), a visually identified retrospective pain trajectory often mismatches with a trajectory derived from prospective repeated measures. To gain insight into the clinical relevance of the 2 trajectory types, we investigated which showed a higher association with clinical outcomes. Participants were 724 adults seeking care for LBP in Danish chiropractic primary care. They answered weekly short-message-services on pain intensity and frequency over 52 weeks, which we translated into 8 trajectory classes. After 52 weeks, participants selected a retrospective visual pain trajectory from the same 8 trajectory classes. Clinical outcomes included disability, back/leg pain intensity, back beliefs, and work ability. The patient-selected pain trajectory classes were more strongly associated with clinical outcomes than the short-message-service trajectory classes at baseline, at follow-up, and with outcome changes between baseline and follow-up. This held across all 5 clinical outcomes, with the strongest associations observed at week 52 and the weakest at baseline. Patients' retrospective assessment of their LBP is more strongly associated with their clinical status than their prospective assessments translated into trajectory classes. This suggests that retrospective assessments of pain trajectories may provide valuable information not captured by prospective assessments. Researchers collecting prospective pain data should know that the captured pain trajectories are not strongly reflected in patients' perceptions of clinical status. Patients' retrospective assessments seem to offer an interpretation of their pain course that is likely more clinically relevant in understanding the perceived impact of their condition than trajectories based on repeated measures. PERSPECTIVE: Prospective pain data inadequately reflect patients' clinical status. Retrospective assessments provide a more clinically valuable understanding of the impact of their condition.

Goal setting in people with low back pain attending an education and exercise program (GLA:D Back) and the impact of demographic factors.

BACKGROUND: Individual goal setting is a fundamental element in self-management supportive interventions, serving to guide actions and enhance motivation for engagement. Despite this, little is known about the goals people with back pain have and to what extent these differ across genders, age groups and geographical location. This study aimed to elucidate this by first describing individual goals set by Danish and Canadian participants in a self-management intervention for people with back pain using the ICF framework; then, determining what proportion of these goals met criteria for being specific, measurable, acceptable, and time bound, and finally, by investigating differences between countries, sexes, and age groups. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study conducted August 2018 to June 2020, 394 Danish and 133 Canadian (Alberta Province) participants defined their individual goals of participating in a self-management programme involving patient education and supervised exercises. The goals were linked to the ICF framework. Distribution of goals was compared between countries, sexes, and age groups. RESULTS: Goals most often related to the ICF component of 'Activity and Participation'. The most prevalent goals were "Walking" (DK: 20%; CA: 15%) and "Maintaining a body position" (DK: 17%; CA: 22%). Only few goals differed between populations, age and sex. All elements of SMART goal setting were recorded for 88% of Danish and 94% of Alberta participants. CONCLUSIONS: People with low back pain attending a self-management programme established goals according to the SMART criteria and focused primarily on activity. Goals were similar across countries and showed few differences across sex and age groups. The high number of different goals points to the need for individualised person-centred care.

What gets measured gets managed: A scoping review of musculoskeletal research conducted within practice-based research networks.

ABSTRACT: Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions are often managed in primary care settings. To facilitate research and health care quality, practice-based research networks (PBRNs) offer sustained collaborations between clinicians and researchers. A scoping review was conducted to describe characteristics of PBRNs used for MSK research and MSK research conducted through PBRNs. PBRNs were identified from 1) MSK-studies identified In OVID Medline, CINAHL, and Embase databases from inception to 05 February 2023 and in ClinicalTrials.gov; and 2) from PBRN registries and websites. Among active MSK-focused PBRNs (i.e., currently recruiting and conducting research), an assessment of PBRN research good practices was performed. After screening 3025 records, 85 studies from 46 unique PBRNs met our eligibility criteria. Common conditions studied were low back pain (28%), MSK conditions not otherwise specified (25%), and osteoarthritis (19%). 32 PBRNs (70%) were deemed to be active. Among active MSK-focused PBRNs, best practice data management information was retrievable for most (53%). Due to the scarcity of publicly available information, a large proportion of PBRN research good practice items was not assessable. PBRNs have provided an avenue to assess clinical practice and patient outcomes related to MSK conditions. Further work to increase the transparency of MSK PBRN research practices is warranted.

Swiss chiropractic cohort (Swiss ChiCo) pilot study: feasibility for a musculoskeletal cohort study conducted within a nationwide practice-based research network.

PURPOSE: Practice-based research networks are collaborations between clinicians and researchers to advance primary care research. This study aims to assess the feasibility for longitudinal data collection within a newly established chiropractic PBRN in Switzerland. METHODS: A prospective observational cohort feasibility study was performed. PBRN participating chiropractors were asked to recruit patients seeking new conservative health care for musculoskeletal pain from March 28, 2022, to September 28, 2022. Participants completed clinically oriented survey questions and patient-reported outcome measures before the initial chiropractic assessment as well as 1 h, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks thereafter. Feasibility was assessed through a variety of process, resource, and management metrics. Patient clinical outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 76 clinicians from 35 unique primary care chiropractic clinics across Switzerland participated. A total of 1431 patients were invited to participate, of which 573 (mean age 47 years, 51% female) were enrolled. Patient survey response proportions were 76%, 64%, 61%, and 56%, at the 1-h, 2-, 6-, and 12-week survey follow-ups, respectively. Evidence of an association was found between increased patient age (OR = 1.03, 95%CI 1.01-1.04), patient from a German-speaking region (OR = 1.81, 95%CI 1.17-2.86), non-smokers (OR = 1.89, 95%CI 1.13-3.17), and increased pain impact score at baseline (OR = 1.18, 95%CI 1.01-1.38) and response to all surveys. CONCLUSION: The Swiss ChiCo pilot study exceeded its prespecified feasibility objectives. Nationwide longitudinal data capture was highly feasible. Similar to other practice-based cohorts, participant retention remains a challenge. Trial registration Swiss chiropractic cohort (Swiss ChiCo) pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05116020).

What do people believe to be the cause of low back pain? A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how causal beliefs regarding non-specific low back pain (LBP) have been quantitatively investigated. METHODS: A scoping review based on the guidelines by the JBI (former Joanna Briggs Institute) was conducted. We searched Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, and CINAHL for relevant studies and included peer-reviewed original articles that measured causal beliefs about non-specific LBP among adults and reported results separate from other belief domains. RESULTS: A total of 81 studies were included, of which 62 (77%) had cross sectional designs, 11 (14%) were cohort studies, 3 (4%) randomized controlled trials, 4 (5%) non-randomized controlled trials, and 1 (1%) case control. Only 15 studies explicitly mentioned cause, triggers, or etiology in the study aim. We identified the use of 6 questionnaires from which a measure of causal beliefs could be obtained. The most frequently used questionnaire was the Illness Perception Questionnaire which was used in 8 of the included studies. The studies covered 308 unique causal belief items which we categorized into 15 categories, the most frequently investigated being causal beliefs related to "structural injury or impairment", which was investigated in 45 (56%) of the studies. The second and third most prevalent categories were related to "lifting and bending" (26 studies [32%]) and "mental or psychological" (24 studies [30%]). CONCLUSION: There is a large variation in how causal beliefs are measured and a lack of studies designed to investigate causal beliefs, and of studies determining a longitudinal association between such beliefs and patient outcomes. This scoping review identified an evidence gap and can inspire future research in this field.

Similar improvements in patient-reported outcomes for non-specific low back pain patients with and without lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms following a structured education and exercise therapy program.

BACKGROUND: People with nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) can also experience overlapping symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but the impact on treatment outcomes is unknown. This study investigated differences in treatment outcomes for disability, back pain intensity, and leg pain intensity following an education and exercise therapy program for NSLBP patients with and without comorbid LSS symptoms. METHODS: This was a longitudinal analysis of 655 Danish participants in the GLA:D® Back program; an education and exercise therapy program for people with persistent NSLBP. Participants were classified as having comorbid LSS symptoms based on self-report. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences in change in disability (Oswestry Disability Index [0-100]) and back and leg pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale [0-10]) at 3-, 6-, and 12-months between those with and without LSS symptoms. RESULTS: 28% of participants reported LSS symptoms. No certain differences in change in disability or back pain intensity improvement were observed at any time-point between those with and without LSS symptoms. Participants with LSS symptoms had slightly greater improvement in leg pain intensity at 6- (-0.7, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.2) and 12-months (-0.6, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1). CONCLUSION: Compared to those without LSS symptoms, patients with persistent NSLBP and LSS symptoms can expect similar improvements in disability and back pain intensity, and slightly greater improvements in leg pain intensity with treatment. Therefore, education and exercise therapy programs designed for NSLBP are likely helpful for those also experiencing LSS symptoms.

A new paradigm for musculoskeletal pain care: moving beyond structural impairments. Conclusion of a chiropractic and manual therapies thematic series.

This commentary closes the thematic series "A new paradigm for musculoskeletal pain care: moving beyond structural impairments". The papers published in the series point to key aspects of shifting the paradigm of musculoskeletal care from clinician-led management often focused on addressing presumed structural anomalies to partnering with patients to find individual strategies that empower patients towards self-management. Several papers in the series highlighted the need for developing patient-centred models of care that respect individual patient's needs and preferences. Also, the series pointed to different options for modes of delivery including mHealth and the challenges and opportunities they present for developing person-centred strategies. For health care to provide effective support for people with musculoskeletal pain conditions, there is a need to recognise that contextual factors, including a strong patient-provider alliance, clearly play an important, perhaps primary, role. Health care professions dealing with musculoskeletal pain conditions should engage in research to investigate effective ways to move this understanding into practice including how to train providers. We hope the work collected in this series will stimulate further questions and more research as musculoskeletal pain providers seek to make their care more person-centred.

The GLA:D BACK self-management adherence and competence checklist (SMAC Checklist)-Development, content validity and feasibility.

OBJECTIVES: To unpack the complexity and impact of self-management interventions targeting musculoskeletal health conditions, we need to learn more about treatment delivery in clinical settings. Fidelity evaluation can illuminate how complex treatments are delivered and help understand the elements that lead to the effect. The objective of this study was to develop a checklist for the evaluation of the clinicians' delivery of structured patient education and exercise intervention for people with persistent back pain, the GLA:D Back intervention. The intent was to provide a checklist adaptable for the general delivery of self-management interventions for musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: We derived items for the treatment delivery fidelity checklist from behaviour change techniques and theory about communication style. We applied a three-step developmental process covering developing a preliminary fidelity intervention framework, validating checklist content and piloting and refining the checklist. RESULTS: We developed the adaptable fidelity checklist, The GLA:D BACK Self-management Adherence and Competence Checklist (SMAC Checklist). Evaluation of clinical practice using the checklist was feasible and acceptable by clinicians. Preliminary results indicate satisfactory observer agreement during pilot testing of the checklist. CONCLUSION: The GLA:D BACK Self-management Adherence and Competence Checklist is a fidelity measurement tool for the assessment of the delivery of a self-management supportive intervention for people with persistent back pain. The intention is that it can be useful as an adaptable tool for use across self-management interventions for musculoskeletal pain.

Do Visual Pain Trajectories Reflect the Actual Course of Low Back Pain? A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Different trajectories of low back pain (LBP) have been identified prospectively using repeated measures. For these trajectories to inform clinical practice, they must be available in the clinical consultation. Therefore, identified LBP trajectories have been translated into visual pain trajectories (VPTs) that allow people with LBP, at the time of consult, to reflect upon their pain experience and identify the VPT that best categorizes their pain course. We have limited knowledge regarding the extent to which a chosen VPT reflects the prospectively experienced trajectory. Thus, we explored the distribution of pain intensity and pain pattern characteristics (from prospective pain trajectory data) within the retrospectively chosen VPT classes. We enrolled patients with LBP from Danish chiropractic practice. Using SMS, participants (n = 719) scored their pain weekly on an 11-point numerical rating scale for 52 weeks. At week 52, participants identified 1 of 8 VPTs that reflected their perceived back pain trajectory during the preceding year. We found that the chosen VPTs reflected pain intensity, but that pain patterns (episodic, fluctuating, and persistent) were not systematically recognized, and the experienced course varied substantially amongst participants within the same VPT. The VPTs are related to some aspects of the experienced LBP course but are not a proxy for the SMS-measured trajectories. Reasons for apparent mismatches between the experienced course of LBP and VPT recall warrant further investigation. PERSPECTIVE: Self-reported back pain trajectories reflected pain intensities obtained through weekly SMS tracking over a year, but participants' recall did not reflect the pain patterns (episodes and fluctuations) discovered prospectively. Clinicians can use self-reported pain trajectories to facilitate a dialog about pain experience, but not as a proxy for prospective measures.

Characteristics associated with comorbid lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis: an analysis of 9,136 good life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D®) participants.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have found that lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) often co-occurs with knee or hip OA and can impact treatment response. However, it is unclear what participant characteristics may be helpful in identifying individuals with these co-occurring conditions. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore characteristics associated with comorbid symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) enrolled in a primary care education and exercise program. METHODS: Sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, health status measures, and a self-report questionnaire on the presence of LSS symptoms was collected at baseline from the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark primary care program for knee and hip OA. Cross-sectional associations between characteristics and the presence of comorbid LSS symptoms were assessed separately in participants with primary complaint of knee and hip OA, using domain-specific logistic models and a logistic model including all characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 6,541 participants with a primary complaint of knee OA and 2,595 participants with a primary complaint of hip OA were included, of which 40% and 50% reported comorbid LSS symptoms, respectively. LSS symptoms were associated with similar characteristics in knee and hip OA. Sick leave was the only sociodemographic variable consistently associated with LSS symptoms. For clinical characteristics, back pain, longer symptom duration and bilateral or comorbid knee or hip symptoms were also consistently associated. Health status measures were not consistently related to LSS symptoms. CONCLUSION: Comorbid LSS symptoms in people with knee or hip OA undergoing a primary care treatment program of group-based education and exercise were common and associated with a similar set of characteristics. These characteristics may help to identify people with co-occurring LSS and knee or hip OA, which can be used to help guide clinical decision-making.

The Swiss chiropractic practice-based research network: a population-based cross-sectional study to inform future musculoskeletal research.

The Swiss chiropractic practice-based research network (PBRN) is a nationwide project developed in collaboration with patients, clinicians, and academic stakeholders to advance musculoskeletal epidemiologic research. The aim of this study was to describe the clinician population recruited and representativeness of this PBRN to inform future collaboration. A population-based cross-sectional study was performed. PBRN clinician characteristics were described and factors related to motivation (operationalised as VAS score ≥ 70) to participate in a subsequent patient cohort pilot study were assessed. Among 326 eligible chiropractors, 152 enrolled in the PBRN (47% participation). The PBRN was representative of the larger Swiss chiropractic population with regards to age, language, and geographic distribution. Of those enrolled, 39% were motivated to participate in a nested patient cohort pilot study. Motivation was associated with age 40 years or older versus 39 years or younger (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.0-5.2), and with a moderate clinic size (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.7) or large clinic size (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.0-7.8) versus solo practice. The Swiss chiropractic PBRN has enrolled almost half of all Swiss chiropractors and has potential to facilitate collaborative practice-based research to improve musculoskeletal health care quality.Trial registration: Swiss chiropractic PBRN (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05046249); Swiss chiropractic cohort (Swiss ChiCo) pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05116020).

Association between physical activity, sedentary behaviour and the trajectory of low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the world's most prevalent health issues. Patients with LBP experience various intensities and durations of symptoms, which can lead to distinctive course patterns commonly described as symptom trajectories. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the association between different amounts of physical activity and sedentary behavior and the trajectory of LBP, in people with a lifetime history of LBP. STUDY DESIGN: The study involved a secondary analysis of observational longitudinal data collected from the AUstralian Twin low BACK pain (AUTBACK) study. METHODS: A total of 329 individual twins met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Latent Class Growth Analysis was used to identify distinct patterns of LBP and select the primary outcome (probability of having a severe LBP trajectory, 0%-100%). Linear regression models were used to investigate the association between different amounts of physical activity or sedentary behavior at baseline, and the probability of having a severe LBP trajectory. Results were expressed as ß coefficients and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity was significantly associated with the probability of having a severe LBP trajectory (unadjusted ß -0.0276; 95%CI -0.0456 to -0.0097, p=.003). For every 1-minute increase in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity per week, there was a 2.8%-point reduction in a participant's probability of having a severe LBP trajectory. No significant associations were identified between sedentary behavior or light intensity physical activity, and the probability of having a severe LBP trajectory. CONCLUSIONS: In people with a lifetime history of LBP, engagement in higher volumes of moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity at baseline was associated with a lower probability of developing a severe trajectory of LBP over 1 year.

Data-driven network analysis identified subgroup-specific low back pain pathways: a cross-sectional GLA:D Back study.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the physical, activity, pain, and psychological pathways contributing to low back pain (LBP) -related disability, and if these differ between subgroups. METHODS: Data came from the baseline observations (n = 3849) of the "GLA:D Back" intervention program for long-lasting nonspecific LBP. 15 variables comprising demographic, pain, psychological, physical, activity, and disability characteristics were measured. Clustering was used for subgrouping, Bayesian networks (BN) were used for structural learning, and structural equation model (SEM) was used for statistical inference. RESULTS: Two clinical subgroups were identified with those in subgroup 1 having worse symptoms than those in subgroup 2. Psychological factors were directly associated with disability in both subgroups. For subgroup 1, psychological factors were most strongly associated with disability (ß = 0.363). Physical factors were directly associated with disability (ß = -0.077), and indirectly via psychological factors. For subgroup 2, pain was most strongly associated with disability (ß = 0.408). Psychological factors were common predictors of physical factors (ß = 0.078), pain (ß = 0.518), activity (ß = -0.101), and disability (ß = 0.382). CONCLUSIONS: The importance of psychological factors in both subgroups suggests their importance for treatment. Differences in the interaction between physical, pain, and psychological factors and their contribution to disability in different subgroups may open the doors toward more optimal LBP treatments.

Associations between comorbid lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms and treatment outcomes in 6,813 patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis following a patient education and exercise therapy program.

Objective: People with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) can experience comorbid lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but the impact on treatment outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between comorbid LSS symptoms and changes in pain, function, and quality of life following a patient education and exercise therapy program. Design: This was a longitudinal analysis of 6813 participants in the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D®) program; a structured patient education and exercise therapy program for knee and hip OA. Participants were classified as having comorbid LSS symptoms based on self-report symptom items. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences in change in pain, function, and quality of life outcomes (0 worst to 100 best) at 3- and 12-month follow-up. Results: 15% and 23% of knee and hip OA participants had comorbid LSS symptoms, respectively. Knee participants with comorbid LSS symptoms had smaller improvement in pain at 3-months (-1.7, 95% CI -3.3 to -0.1) and hip participants with comorbid LSS symptoms had greater improvement in function at 3- (2.5, 95% CI 0.5 to 5.0) and 12-months (3.8, 95% CI 0.9 to 6.6), when compared to those without LSS symptoms. These differences were not clinically significant and no differences in other outcomes were observed. Conclusion: Knee or hip OA patients with comorbid LSS symptoms should expect similar improvements in knee- or hip-related pain, function, and quality of life outcomes when undergoing a patient education and exercise therapy program compared to those without LSS symptoms.

Exploring visual pain trajectories in neck pain patients, using clinical course, SMS-based patterns, and patient characteristics: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The dynamic nature of neck pain has so far been identified through longitudinal studies with frequent measures, a method which is time-consuming and impractical. Pictures illustrating different courses of pain may be an alternative solution, usable in both clinical work and research, but it is unknown how well they capture the clinical course. The aim of this study was to explore and describe self-reported visual trajectories in terms of details of patients' prospectively reported clinical course, their SMS-based pattern classification of neck pain, and patient's characteristics. METHODS: Prospective cohort study including 888 neck pain patients from chiropractic practice, responding to weekly SMS-questions about pain intensity for 1 year from 2015 to 2017. Patients were classified into one of three clinical course patterns using definitions based on previously published descriptors. At 1-year follow-up, patients selected a visual trajectory that best represented their retrospective 1-year course of pain: single episode, episodic, mild ongoing, fluctuating and severe ongoing. RESULTS: The visual trajectories generally resembled the 1-year clinical course characteristics on group level, but there were large individual variations. Patients selecting Episodic and Mild ongoing visual trajectories were similar on most parameters. The visual trajectories generally resembled more the clinical course of the last quarter. DISCUSSION: The visual trajectories reflected the descriptors of the clinical course of pain captured by weekly SMS measures on a group level and formed groups of patients that differed on symptoms and characteristics. However, there were large variations in symptoms and characteristics within, as well as overlap between, each visual trajectory. In particular, patients with mild pain seemed predisposed to recall bias. Although the visual trajectories and SMS-based classifications appear related, visual trajectories likely capture more elements of the pain experience than just the course of pain. Therefore, they cannot be seen as a proxy for SMS-tracking of pain over 1 year.

The association between different outcome measures and prognostic factors in patients with neck pain: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health domains like pain, disability, and health-related quality of life are commonly used outcomes for musculoskeletal disorders. Most prognostic studies include only one outcome, and it is unknown if prognostic factors and models may be generic across different outcomes. The objectives of this study were to examine the correlation among commonly used outcomes for neck pain (pain intensity, disability, and health-related quality of life) and to explore how the predictive performance of a prognostic model differs across commonly used outcomes. METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective cohort study with data from patients with neck pain aged 18-84 years consulting Norwegian chiropractors. We used three different outcomes: pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and health-related quality of Life (EQ-5D). We assessed associations between change in outcome scores at 12-weeks follow-up with Pearson's correlation coefficient. We used multivariable linear regression models to explore differences in explained variance and relationship between predictors and outcomes. RESULTS: The study sample included 1313 patients and 941 (72%) completed follow-up at 12 weeks. The strongest correlation was between NDI and EQ-5D (r = 0.57) while the weakest correlation was between EQ-5D and pain intensity (r = 0.39). The correlation between NDI and pain intensity was moderate (r = 0.53) In the final regression models, the explained variance ranged from adjusted R2 of 0.26 to 0.60, highest with NDI and lowest with pain intensity as outcome. The predictive contributions of the included predictors were similar across outcomes. Among the investigated predictors, pain patterns and the baseline measure of the corresponding outcome measure contributed the most to explained variance across all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The highest correlation was found between NDI and EQ-5D and the lowest with pain intensity. The same prognostic model showed highest predictive performance with NDI as outcome and poorest with pain intensity as outcome. These results suggest that we need more knowledge on the reasons for the differences in predictive performance variation across outcomes.

Swiss chiropractic practice-based research network and musculoskeletal pain cohort pilot study: protocol of a nationwide resource to advance musculoskeletal health services research.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain conditions, a leading cause of global disability, are usually first managed in primary care settings such as medical, physiotherapy, and chiropractic community-based practices. While chiropractors often treat MSK conditions, there is limited real-world evidence on the topic of health service outcomes among patients receiving this type of care. A nationwide Swiss chiropractic practice-based research network (PBRN) and MSK pain patient cohort study will have potential to monitor the epidemiological trends of MSK pain conditions and contribute to healthcare quality improvement. The primary aims of this protocol are to (1) describe the development of an MSK-focused PBRN within the Swiss chiropractic setting, and (2) describe the methodology of the first nested study to be conducted within the PBRN-an observational prospective patient cohort pilot study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This initiative is conceptualised with two distinct phases. Phase I focuses on the development of the Swiss chiropractic PBRN, and will use a cross-sectional design to collect information from chiropractic clinicians nationwide. Phase II will recruit consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with MSK pain from community-based chiropractic practices participating in the PBRN into a prospective chiropractic cohort pilot study. All data collection will occur through electronic surveys offered in the three Swiss official languages (German, French, Italian) and English. Surveys will be provided to patients prior to their initial consultation in clinics, 1 hour after initial consultation, and at 2, 6 and 12 weeks after initial consultation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from the independent research ethics committee of Canton Zurich (BASEC-Nr: 2021-01479). Informed consent will be obtained electronically from all participants. Findings will be reported to stakeholders after each study phase, presented at local and international conferences, and disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. STUDY PRE-REGISTRATION: Phase I-Swiss chiropractic PBRN (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05046249); Phase 2-Swiss chiropractic cohort (Swiss ChiCo) pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05116020).

User perspectives on systematic data collection regarding back pain managed in general practice - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Back pain is a main driver of disability and the most prevalent reason why people in Demark visit a general practitioner (GP). However, little is known about back pain management in primary care. For new strategies to be sustainable and to accommodate the recommendations for evidence-based practice, patients' perspectives are paramount to complement clinical expertise and research evidence. This study aimed to identify recommendations for systematic data collection in a nationwide cohort regarding the management of back pain in general practice from the perspectives of GPs and patients. METHOD: We applied an adapted exploratory sequential design using focus groups and individual interviews. Seven GPs and ten patients with back pain participated, and four focus groups and seventeen individual interviews were conducted. Data were analyzed using abductive reasoning. RESULTS: Both GPs and patients with back pain found that 1) recruitment to a cohort should take place through the GPs, 2) the heterogeneity of patients with back pain and their need for individualized treatment and care should be considered, and 3) data from the cohort should feed into a flowchart or guideline to illustrate a generic patient pathway and visually assist both the patient and GP to obtain an overview and, thus, structure the patient pathway. CONCLUSION: GPs and patients with back pain both considered the nationwide cohort with the overall aim to investigate back pain management as being extremely relevant in relation to improve t the patient pathway. User perspectives should be explored and integrated into health care interventions.

Beliefs about back pain and associations with clinical outcomes: a primary care cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate associations between beliefs about low back pain (LBP) at baseline and pain intensity and disability at 2-week, 13-week and 52-week follow-up. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Primary care private chiropractic clinics in Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2734 adults consulting a chiropractor for a new episode of LBP, with follow-up data available from 71%, 61% and 52% of the participants at 2, 13 and 52 weeks, respectively. OUTCOME MEASURES: Beliefs about LBP were measured by the Back Belief Questionnaire (BBQ) before consulting the chiropractor. Pain (Numerical Rating Scale 0-10) and disability (the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) were measured at baseline and after 2, 13 and 52 weeks. Associations were explored using longitudinal linear mixed models estimating interactions between BBQ and time, and by estimating associations between single items of BBQ and 13-week outcomes. RESULTS: More positive beliefs about LBP were weakly associated with a reduction in pain at 2 weeks (ß interaction BBQ#Time=-0.02 (95% CI -0.04 to -0.001)), at 13 weeks (-0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to -0.01)) and at 52 weeks of follow-up (-0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to -0.01); p=0.003). For disability, the association was uncertain (p=0.7). The item 'Back trouble means periods of pain for the rest of one's life' had the strongest association with both reduction in pain (-0.29, 95% CI -0.4 to -0.19, p<0.001) and disability (-2.42, 95% CI -3.52 to -1.33, p<0.001) at 13-week follow-up. CONCLUSION: Positive beliefs regarding LBP, measured by the BBQ, were associated with a reduction in pain intensity at both short-term and long-term follow-up. However, the association was weak, and the clinical relevance is therefore questionable. No clear association was demonstrated between beliefs and disability. This study did not show promise that back beliefs as measured by the BBQ were helpful for predicting or explaining the course of LBP in this setting.