A Stratified Approach for Managing Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care (SPLIT Program): A Before-and-After Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of stratified primary care for low back pain (SPLIT program) in decreasing back-related disability for patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care. METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after study. We compared health-related outcomes for 2 sequential, independent cohorts of patients with LBP recruited at 7 primary care units in Portugal. The first prospective cohort study characterized usual care (UC) and collected data from February to September 2018. The second was performed when the SPLIT program was implemented and collected data from November 2018 to October 2021. Between cohorts, physical therapists were trained in the implementation of the SPLIT program, which used the STarT Back Screening Tool to categorize patients for matched treatment. We compared back-related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, 0-24 points), pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale, 0-10 points), perceived effect of treatment (Global Perceived Effect Scale, -5 to +5 points), and health-related quality of life (EuroQoL 5 dimensions 3 levels index, 0-1 points). RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 447 patients: 115 in the UC cohort (mostly treated with pharmacologic treatment) and 332 in the SPLIT cohort (all referred for a physical therapy intervention program). Over the study period of 6 months, patients in the SPLIT program showed significantly greater improvements in back-related disability (ß, -2.94; 95% CI, -3.63 to -2.24; P ≤ .001), pain (ß, -0.88; 95% CI, -1.18 to -0.57; P ≤ .001), perceived effect of treatment (ß, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.82; P ≤ .001), and health-related quality of life (ß, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.14; P ≤ .001) compared with UC. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the SPLIT program for LBP showed greater benefits regarding health-related outcomes than those receiving UC.

A Home-Based eHealth Intervention for an Older Adult Population With Food Insecurity: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity is a global public health challenge, affecting predominately the most vulnerable people in society, including older adults. For this population, eHealth interventions represent an opportunity for promoting healthy lifestyle habits, thus mitigating the consequences of food insecurity. However, before their widespread dissemination, it is essential to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of these interventions among end users. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of a home-based eHealth intervention focused on improving dietary and physical activity through an interactive television (TV) app among older adults with food insecurity. METHODS: A pilot noncontrolled quasi-experimental study was designed with baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments. Older adult participants with food insecurity were recruited from 17 primary health care centers in Portugal. A home-based intervention program using an interactive TV app aimed at promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors was implemented over 12 weeks. Primary outcomes were feasibility (self-reported use and interest in eHealth) and acceptability (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy), which were evaluated using a structured questionnaire with a 7-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes were changes in food insecurity (Household Food Insecurity Scale), quality of life (European Quality of Life Questionnaire with five dimensions and three levels and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue), physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire, Elderly Mobility Scale, grip strength, and regularity of exercise), and nutritional status (adherence to the Mediterranean diet). RESULTS: A sample of 31 older adult individuals with food insecurity was enrolled in the 12-week intervention program with no dropouts. A total of 10 participants self-reported low use of the TV app. After the intervention, participants were significantly more interested in using eHealth to improve food insecurity (baseline median 1.0, IQR 3.0; 3-month median 5.0, IQR 5.0; P=.01) and for other purposes (baseline median 1.0, IQR 2.0; 3-month median 6.0, IQR 2.0; P=.03). High levels of acceptability were found both before and after (median range 7.0-7.0, IQR 2.0-0.0 and 5.0-7.0, IQR 2.0-2.0, respectively) the intervention, with no significant changes for most constructs. Clinically, there was a reduction of 40% in food insecurity (P=.001), decreased fatigue (mean -3.82, SD 8.27; P=.02), and improved physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire: mean -0.22, SD 0.38; P=.01; Elderly Mobility Scale: mean -1.50, SD 1.08; P=.01; regularity of exercise: baseline 10/31, 32%; 3 months 18/31, 58%; P=.02). No differences were found for the European Quality of Life Questionnaire with five dimensions and three levels, grip strength, or adherence to the Mediterranean diet. CONCLUSIONS: The home-based eHealth intervention was feasible and highly acceptable by participants, thus supporting a future full-scale trial. The intervention program not only reduced the proportion of older adults with food insecurity but also improved participants' fatigue and physical function. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/resprot.6626.

Clinical courses, impact and prognostic indicators for a persistent course of low back pain: Results from a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a long-term health condition with distinct clinical courses. Its characterization together with the identification of prognostic factors for a persistent LBP course may trigger the development of personalized interventions. This study aimed to investigate the courses of chronic LBP (CLBP), its cumulative impact, and the indicators for the persistence of pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with active CLBP from the EpiDoC, a population-based cohort study of a randomly recruited sample of 10.661 adults with prolonged follow-up, were considered. Pain, disability, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed at three time-points over five years. According to their pain symptoms over time, participants were classified as having a persistent (pain at the baseline and at all the subsequent time-points) or a relapsing pain course (pain at the baseline and no pain at least in one of the subsequent time-points). A mixed ANOVA was used to compare mean differences within and between patients of distinct courses. Prognostic indicators for the persistent LBP course were modulated through logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the 1.201 adults with active CLBP at baseline, 634 (52.8%) completed the three time-points of data collection: 400 (63.1%) had a persistent and 234 (36.9%) a relapsing course. Statistically significant interactions were found between the group and time on disability (F (2,1258) = 23.779, p<0.001) and HRQoL (F (2,1252) = 82.779, p<0.001). In the adjusted model, the persistent course was associated with the disability level (OR 1.86, CI95% 1.40-2.40, p<0.001), depressive symptoms (OR 1.96, CI95% 1.21-3.18, p = 0.007), female gender (OR 1.90, CI95% 1.26-2.87, p = 0.002) and having a manual job (OR 1.46, CI95% 1.02-2.10, p = 0.040). CONCLUSION: In the long-term, patients with CLBP may follow a persistent or relapsing course of pain. Being female, presenting depressive symptoms, having a manual job and higher disability at baseline predicts a persistent course of LBP.

Patients' self-reported medical care for low back pain: a nationwide population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of medical care-seeking among adults with low back pain (LBP) and to characterise and compare use of diagnostic procedures and medical management between primary and secondary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Data from the EpiReumaPt, a nationwide population-based study conducted in Portugal including a representative sample of non-institutionalised adults (n=10 661) stratified by administrative territorial units was analysed. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who self-reported history of LBP within the previous 12 months (n=6434) and sought medical care for this problem in the same period (n=2618). OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' self-reported diagnostic workup and management procedures performed by medical care for LBP collected through a structured questionnaire. Medical care procedures were stratified by level of care. RESULTS: The prevalence of medical care-seeking for LBP was 38.0% (95% CI 35.9% to 40.1%). Primary care in isolation (45.3%) was the most sought level of care. Emergency departments (25.9%) and orthopaedics (19.4%) were the most sought secondary medical specialties. Several pathoanatomical diagnoses were used, supported by laboratory or imaging tests (91.1%). Disc herniation (20.4%) and osteoarthritis (19.7%) were the most frequent diagnoses, and X-ray (63.7%) was the most frequent diagnostic procedure self-reported by individuals. Most (75.1%) reported being treated for LBP: 80.4% with oral medication and 49.9% with injectables. The mean duration of pharmacological treatment was 104.24 (SD, 266.80) days. The use of pathoanatomical diagnoses, laboratory or imaging tests, and pharmacological treatments were generally more frequent for secondary care (p<0.05). Approximately one-quarter of individuals (24.5%) reported seeking care from additional healthcare providers, physiotherapists (66.9%) were the most frequent. CONCLUSIONS: Medical care for LBP is frequent and associated with high levels of pathoanatomical diagnoses, imaging and laboratory tests and pharmacological therapy in both primary and secondary care settings. Funding and delivery actions should be prioritised to assure appropriate care for LBP.