Responsible, Safe, and Effective Use of Biologics in the Management of Low Back Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines

BACKGROUND: Regenerative medicine is a medical subspecialty that seeks to recruit and enhance the body\u27s own inherent healing armamentarium in the treatment of patient pathology. This therapy\u27s intention is to assist in the repair, and to potentially replace or restore damaged tissue through the use of autologous or allogenic biologics. This field is rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of underperforming conventional therapy midst the hopes and high expectations of patients and medical personnel alike. But, because this is a relatively new area of medicine that has yet to substantiate its outcomes, care must be taken in its public presentation and promises as well as in its use. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance for the responsible, safe, and effective use of biologic therapy in the lumbar spine. To present a template on which to build standardized therapies using biologics. To ground potential administrators of biologics in the knowledge of the current outcome statistics and to stimulate those interested in providing biologic therapy to participate in high quality research that will ultimately promote and further advance this area of medicine. METHODS: The methodology used has included the development of objectives and key questions. A panel of experts from various medical specialties and subspecialties as well as differing regions collaborated in the formation of these guidelines and submitted (if any) their appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest. Trustworthy standards were employed in the creation of these guidelines. The literature pertaining to regenerative medicine, its effectiveness, and adverse consequences was thoroughly reviewed using a best evidence synthesis of the available literature. The grading for recommendation was provided as described by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE: Lumbar Disc Injections: Based on the available evidence regarding the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), including one high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT), multiple moderate-quality observational studies, a single-arm meta-analysis and evidence from a systematic review, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level III (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best-evidence synthesis. Based on the available evidence regarding the use of medicinal signaling/ mesenchymal stem cell (MSCs) with a high-quality RCT, multiple moderate-quality observational studies, a single-arm meta-analysis, and 2 systematic reviews, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level III (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Lumbar Epidural Injections Based on one high-quality RCT, multiple relevant moderate-quality observational studies and a single-arm meta-analysis, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Lumbar Facet Joint Injections Based on one high-quality RCT and 2 moderate-quality observational studies, the qualitative evidence for facet joint injections with PRP has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Sacroiliac Joint Injection Based on one high-quality RCT, one moderate-quality observational study, and one low-quality case report, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. CONCLUSION: Based on the evidence synthesis summarized above, there is Level III evidence for intradiscal injections of PRP and MSCs, whereas the evidence is considered Level IV for lumbar facet joint, lumbar epidural, and sacroiliac joint injections of PRP, (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis.Regenerative therapy should be provided to patients following diagnostic evidence of a need for biologic therapy, following a thorough discussion of the patient\u27s needs and expectations, after properly educating the patient on the use and administration of biologics and in full light of the patient\u27s medical history. Regenerative therapy may be provided independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatment including a structured exercise program, physical therapy, behavioral therapy, and along with the appropriate conventional medical therapy as necessary. Appropriate precautions should be taken into consideration and followed prior to performing biologic therapy. Multiple guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), potential limitations in the use of biologic therapy and the appropriate requirements for compliance with the FDA have been detailed in these guidelines. KEY WORDS: Regenerative medicine, platelet-rich plasma, medicinal signaling cells, mesenchymal stem cells, stromal vascular fraction, bone marrow concentrate, chronic low back pain, discogenic pain, facet joint pain, Food and Drug Administration, minimal manipulation, evidence synthesis

STOP leg clots - Swedish multicentre trial of outpatient prevention of leg clots : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial on the efficacy of intermittent pneumatic compression on venous thromboembolism in lower leg immobilised patients

Introduction Leg immobilisation in a cast or an orthosis after lower limb injuries is associated with a high risk of complications of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and hampered healing. Current pharmacoprophylaxes of VTE are inefficient and associated with adverse events. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) could represent a novel, efficient and safe VTE-prophylactic alternative that may enhance injury healing. The aim of STOP leg clots is to assess the efficacy of adjuvant IPC-therapy on reduction of VTE incidence and improvement of healing in lower leg immobilised outpatients. Methods and analysis STOP leg clots is a multicentre randomised controlled superiority trial. Eligible patients (700 patients/arm) with either an acute ankle fracture or Achilles tendon rupture will be randomised to either addition of IPC during lower-leg immobilisation or to treatment-as-usual. The primary outcome will be the total VTE incidence, that is, symptomatic and asymptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT) or symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE), during the leg immobilisation period, approximately 6-8 weeks. DVT incidence will be assessed by screening whole leg compression duplex ultrasound at removal of leg immobilisation and/or clinically diagnosed within the time of immobilisation. Symptomatic PE will be verified by CT. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported outcome using validated questionnaires, healing evaluated by measurements of tendon callus production and changes in VTE-prophylactic mechanisms assessed by blood flow and fibrinolysis. Data analyses will be blinded and based on the intention-to-treat. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was obtained by the ethical review board in Stockholm, Sweden, Dnr 2016/1573-31. The study will be conducted in accordance with the Helsinki declaration. The results of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed international journals.Funding Agencies|Swedish research councilSwedish Research CouncilEuropean Commission [Dnr: 2017-00202]</p

Perspectives of LGBTQ Older Adults on Aging in Place: A Qualitative Investigation

This qualitative study conducted by a community-research partnership used multiple types of data collection to examine variables relevant for LGBTQ older adults who wished to age in place in their urban Denver neighborhood. Focus groups, interviews, and a town hall meeting were used to identify barriers and supports to aging in place. Participants (N = 73) identified primarily as lesbian or gay, aged 50–69, and lived with a partner. Ageism, heterosexism, and cisgenderism emerged as cross-cutting themes that negatively impact access to health care, housing, social support, home assistance, and legal services. Resilience from weathering a lifetime of discrimination was identified as a strength to handle aging challenges. Recommendations for establishing an aging in place model included establishing welcoming communities and resource centers and increasing cultural competence of service providers. This study provides a unique contribution to understanding the psychosocial, medical, and legal barriers for successfully aging in place

Evaluation of a recommender app for apps for the treatment of depression and anxiety: an analysis of longitudinal user engagement

Objective:While depression and anxiety are common mental health issues, only a small segment of the population has access to standard one-on-one treatment. The use of smartphone apps can fill this gap. An app recommender system may help improve user engagement of these apps and eventually symptoms. Methods:IntelliCare was a suite of apps for depression and anxiety, with a Hub app that provided app recommendations aiming to increase user engagement. This study captured the records of 8057 users of 12 apps. We measured overall engagement and app-specific usage longitudinally by the number of weekly app sessions ("loyalty") and the number of days with app usage ("regularity") over 16 weeks. Hub and non-Hub users were compared using zero-inflated Poisson regression for loyalty, linear regression for regularity, and Cox regression for engagement duration. Adjusted analyses were performed in 4561 users for whom we had baseline characteristics. Impact of Hub recommendations was assessed using the same approach. Results:When compared to non-Hub users in adjusted analyses, Hub users had a lower risk of discontinuing IntelliCare (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI, 0.62-0.71), higher loyalty (2- to 5-fold), and higher regularity (0.1-0.4 day/week greater). Among Hub users, Hub recommendations increased app-specific loyalty and regularity in all 12 apps. Discussion/Conclusion:Centralized app recommendations increase overall user engagement of the apps, as well as app-specific usage. Further studies relating app usage to symptoms can validate that such a recommender improves clinical benefits and does so at scale

Responsible, Safe, and Effective Use of Biologics in the Management of Low Back Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines

BACKGROUND: Regenerative medicine is a medical subspecialty that seeks to recruit and enhance the body\u27s own inherent healing armamentarium in the treatment of patient pathology. This therapy\u27s intention is to assist in the repair, and to potentially replace or restore damaged tissue through the use of autologous or allogenic biologics. This field is rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of underperforming conventional therapy midst the hopes and high expectations of patients and medical personnel alike. But, because this is a relatively new area of medicine that has yet to substantiate its outcomes, care must be taken in its public presentation and promises as well as in its use. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance for the responsible, safe, and effective use of biologic therapy in the lumbar spine. To present a template on which to build standardized therapies using biologics. To ground potential administrators of biologics in the knowledge of the current outcome statistics and to stimulate those interested in providing biologic therapy to participate in high quality research that will ultimately promote and further advance this area of medicine. METHODS: The methodology used has included the development of objectives and key questions. A panel of experts from various medical specialties and subspecialties as well as differing regions collaborated in the formation of these guidelines and submitted (if any) their appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest. Trustworthy standards were employed in the creation of these guidelines. The literature pertaining to regenerative medicine, its effectiveness, and adverse consequences was thoroughly reviewed using a best evidence synthesis of the available literature. The grading for recommendation was provided as described by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE: Lumbar Disc Injections: Based on the available evidence regarding the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), including one high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT), multiple moderate-quality observational studies, a single-arm meta-analysis and evidence from a systematic review, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level III (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best-evidence synthesis. Based on the available evidence regarding the use of medicinal signaling/ mesenchymal stem cell (MSCs) with a high-quality RCT, multiple moderate-quality observational studies, a single-arm meta-analysis, and 2 systematic reviews, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level III (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Lumbar Epidural Injections Based on one high-quality RCT, multiple relevant moderate-quality observational studies and a single-arm meta-analysis, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Lumbar Facet Joint Injections Based on one high-quality RCT and 2 moderate-quality observational studies, the qualitative evidence for facet joint injections with PRP has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. Sacroiliac Joint Injection Based on one high-quality RCT, one moderate-quality observational study, and one low-quality case report, the qualitative evidence has been assessed as Level IV (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis. CONCLUSION: Based on the evidence synthesis summarized above, there is Level III evidence for intradiscal injections of PRP and MSCs, whereas the evidence is considered Level IV for lumbar facet joint, lumbar epidural, and sacroiliac joint injections of PRP, (on a scale of Level I through V) using a qualitative modified approach to the grading of evidence based on best evidence synthesis.Regenerative therapy should be provided to patients following diagnostic evidence of a need for biologic therapy, following a thorough discussion of the patient\u27s needs and expectations, after properly educating the patient on the use and administration of biologics and in full light of the patient\u27s medical history. Regenerative therapy may be provided independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatment including a structured exercise program, physical therapy, behavioral therapy, and along with the appropriate conventional medical therapy as necessary. Appropriate precautions should be taken into consideration and followed prior to performing biologic therapy. Multiple guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), potential limitations in the use of biologic therapy and the appropriate requirements for compliance with the FDA have been detailed in these guidelines. KEY WORDS: Regenerative medicine, platelet-rich plasma, medicinal signaling cells, mesenchymal stem cells, stromal vascular fraction, bone marrow concentrate, chronic low back pain, discogenic pain, facet joint pain, Food and Drug Administration, minimal manipulation, evidence synthesis