35 research outputs found
Association of early imaging for back pain with clinical outcomes in older adults
IMPORTANCE: In contrast to the recommendations for younger adults, many guidelines allow for older adults with back pain to undergo imaging without waiting 4 to 6 weeks. However, early imaging may precipitate interventions that do not improve outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To compare function and pain at the 12-month follow-up visit among older adults who received early imaging with those who did not receive early imaging after a new primary care visit for back pain without radiculopathy.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort of 5239 patients 65 years or older with a new primary care visit for back pain (2011-2013) in 3 US health care systems. We matched controls 1:1 using propensity score matching of demographic and clinical characteristics, including diagnosis, pain severity, pain duration, functional status, and prior resource use.
EXPOSURES: Diagnostic imaging (plain films, computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) of the lumbar or thoracic spine within 6 weeks of the index visit.
PRIMARY OUTCOME: back or leg pain-related disability measured by the modified Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (score range, 0-24; higher scores indicate greater disability) 12 months after enrollment.
RESULTS: Among the 5239 patients, 1174 had early radiographs and 349 had early MRI/CT. At 12 months, neither the early radiograph group nor the early MRI/CT group differed significantly from controls on the disability questionnaire. The mean score for patients who underwent early radiography was 8.54 vs 8.74 among the control group (difference, -0.10 [95% CI, -0.71 to 0.50]; mixed model, P = .36). The mean score for the early MRI/CT group was 9.81 vs 10.50 for the control group (difference,-0.51 [-1.62 to 0.60]; mixed model, P = .18).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among older adults with a new primary care visit for back pain, early imaging was not associated with better 1-year outcomes. The value of early diagnostic imaging in older adults for back pain without radiculopathy is uncertain
The Effect of Including Benchmark Prevalence Data of Common Imaging Findings in Spine Image Reports on Health Care Utilization Among Adults Undergoing Spine Imaging: A Stepped-Wedge Randomized Clinical Trial
Importance: Lumbar spine imaging frequently reveals findings that may seem alarming but are likely unrelated to pain. Prior work has suggested that inserting data on the prevalence of imaging findings among asymptomatic individuals into spine imaging reports may reduce unnecessary subsequent interventions.
Objective: To evaluate the impact of including benchmark prevalence data in routine spinal imaging reports on subsequent spine-related health care utilization and opioid prescriptions.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This stepped-wedge, pragmatic randomized clinical trial included 250 401 adult participants receiving care from 98 primary care clinics at 4 large health systems in the United States. Participants had imaging of their backs between October 2013 and September 2016 without having had spine imaging in the prior year. Data analysis was conducted from November 2018 to October 2019.
Interventions: Either standard lumbar spine imaging reports (control group) or reports containing age-appropriate prevalence data for common imaging findings in individuals without back pain (intervention group).
Main Outcomes and Measures: Health care utilization was measured in spine-related relative value units (RVUs) within 365 days of index imaging. The number of subsequent opioid prescriptions written by a primary care clinician was a secondary outcome, and prespecified subgroup analyses examined results by imaging modality.
Results: We enrolled 250 401 participants (of whom 238 886 [95.4%] met eligibility for this analysis, with 137 373 [57.5%] women and 105 497 [44.2%] aged \u3e60 years) from 3278 primary care clinicians. A total of 117 455 patients (49.2%) were randomized to the control group, and 121 431 patients (50.8%) were randomized to the intervention group. There was no significant difference in cumulative spine-related RVUs comparing intervention and control conditions through 365 days. The adjusted median (interquartile range) RVU for the control group was 3.56 (2.71-5.12) compared with 3.53 (2.68-5.08) for the intervention group (difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -2.9% to 1.5%; P = .54). Rates of subsequent RVUs did not differ between groups by specific clinical findings in the report but did differ by type of index imaging (eg, computed tomography: difference, -29.3%; 95% CI, -42.1% to -13.5%; magnetic resonance imaging: difference, -3.4%; 95% CI, -8.3% to 1.8%). We observed a small but significant decrease in the likelihood of opioid prescribing from a study clinician within 1 year of the intervention (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.00; P = .04).
Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, inserting benchmark prevalence information in lumbar spine imaging reports did not decrease subsequent spine-related RVUs but did reduce subsequent opioid prescriptions. The intervention text is simple, inexpensive, and easily implemented.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02015455
Geographic Variation in Epidural Steroid Injection Use in Medicare Patients
Background: The rates of epidural steroid injections have increased dramatically over time, with conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of epidural steroid injections for the treatment of various low-back pain disorders. Given the uncertainty about their role, we sought to evaluate the geographic variation in the use of epidural steroid injections for low back pain within the United States. We also sought to determine whether greater rates of epidural steroid injections are associated with lower rates of lumbar surgery
Prosthetic and orthotic options for lower extremity amputation and reconstruction
Lower extremity injury and deformity can result from a number of etiologies. Regardless of the underlying cause, the decision to pursue amputation or reconstruction of a lower limb is challenging for both patients and practitioners. This decision is largely dependent on the patient’s premorbid health and function, functional goals and preferences, and characteristics and viability of the affected limb. The role of adaptive devices following surgery should never be underestimated. Advances in prostheses and orthoses have provided patients with a wider range of options to consider when deciding between limb reconstruction and amputation. The primary goals of any adaptive device are to improve function, prevent recurrence or ulceration of the defect, and allow for use of conventional footwear and/or clothing. When a lower extremity amputation is indicated, selection of the correct level is of critical importance in order to optimize healing potential and function. Each distinct level has certain inherent prosthetic and orthotic considerations. Likewise, the application of an adaptive device following reconstruction of the lower extremity also has demonstrable benefits and must be tailored to the specific defect and procedure performed. Knowledge of available prosthetic and orthotic options is of considerable importance for the reconstructive surgeon tasked with limb salvage or resurfacing an amputated extremity. This article reviews considerations of various types of lower extremity amputation and reconstruction, and provides a framework for the role of adaptive devices following surgery
A pilot randomized controlled trial of a telemedicine psychosocial intervention to improve symptom management in adults with long COVID: the COPE study protocol
Abstract Background Long COVID is a serious public health concern due to its high prevalence and potentially debilitating symptoms. Symptoms may include fatigue, dyspnea, cognitive problems, insomnia, anxiety, and depression. There is currently no cure for long COVID, and the average length of recovery and proportion of patients who fully recover are still unknown. Subsequently, there is a critical need to improve function. Research in other chronic conditions suggests that psychosocial self-management interventions reduce symptom severity and interference with functioning. We describe the design of our study to examine the feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and preliminary efficacy of an intervention designed to improve symptom management and coping in adults with long COVID. Methods This pilot trial (N = 50) uses a pragmatic, randomized two-group parallel design set within the University of Washington Post-COVID Rehabilitation and Recovery Clinic. The self-management intervention is a 6-week, group-based telemedicine intervention that teaches evidence-based strategies to manage common symptoms and improve stress management as well as communication and self-advocacy. The comparator is a wait-list control. Participants complete self-report measures of the primary and secondary outcomes at baseline and post-treatment/wait-list. Primary outcomes include intervention feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. Secondary outcomes include Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures of fatigue, sleep disturbance, cognitive difficulties, self-efficacy, pain interference, depression and anxiety symptoms, and a measure of long COVID symptoms and impression of change. At post-intervention, intervention participants also complete a qualitative interview to inform intervention refinement. Quantitative data will be examined using descriptive and statistical analysis including t-tests and chi-square tests to compare the intervention and wait-list groups on secondary outcomes. Qualitative data will be analyzed using the rigorous and accelerated data reduction technique (RADaR). Discussion Results of this pilot randomized controlled trial will characterize the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the self-management intervention and inform intervention refinement necessary prior to further testing. Long COVID is a public health concern, and rehabilitation approaches that equip patients to manage symptoms may improve patient function and quality of life and reduce burden on the health care system. Trial registration NCT05658536. December 16, 2022
Trajectories of symptoms and function in older adults with low back disorders
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there are distinct trajectories of back pain and function among older adults and to identify characteristics that distinguish among patients with substantially different prognoses.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although the differential diagnosis and course of low back pain among older adults may differ from middle-aged adults, there is little evidence. Better understanding variability in recovery among older adults may help target patients for more intensive clinical interventions, plan resource use, and design clinical studies of more homogeneous patient groups.
METHODS: Patients aged 65 years or older with a new episode of care for back pain were recruited at 3 geographically diverse sites. Patients completed pain intensity and Roland-Morris Disability measures at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months later. We used latent class analysis to identify distinct trajectories of pain and function and then logistic regression to identify predictors of membership in the improving trajectories.
RESULTS: There were 3929 participants who completed outcome measures at every follow-up interval. Latent class analysis identified subgroups with low, intermediate, or high pain or disability scores who remained relatively stable over time. However, small subgroups showed dramatic improvement from baseline to 1 year (17% with major improvement in Roland score, pain intensity, or both). Shorter pain duration, higher patient confidence in improvement, and fewer comorbid conditions at baseline were each associated independently with favorable prognosis.
CONCLUSION: Although most patients remained relatively stable over a year, latent class analysis identified small groups with major improvement in pain, function, or both. This technique may, therefore, be useful for studying back pain prognosis. Our results should help assemble more prognostically homogeneous groups for research, and the technique may help identify subgroups of patients with uniquely successful responses to investigational interventions.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3
Subsequent health-care utilization associated with early physical therapy for new episodes of low back pain in older adults
BACKGROUND: The association between early physical therapy (PT) and subsequent health-care utilization following a new visit for low back pain is not clear, particularly in the setting of acute low back pain.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate the association between initiating early PT following a new visit for an episode of low back pain and subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization in older adults.
DESIGN/SETTING: This is a prospective cohort study. Data were collected at three integrated health-care systems in the United States through the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) registry.
PATIENT SAMPLE: We recruited 4,723 adults, aged 65 and older, presenting to a primary care setting with a new episode of low back pain.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was total back pain-specific relative value units (RVUs), from days 29 to 365. Secondary outcomes included overall RVUs for all health care and use of specific health-care services including imaging (x-ray and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] or computed tomography [CT]), emergency department visits, physician visits, PT, spinal injections, spinal surgeries, and opioid use.
METHODS: We compared patients who had early PT (initiated within 28 days of the index visit) with those not initiating early PT using appropriate, generalized linear models to adjust for potential confounding variables.
RESULTS: Adjusted analysis found no statistically significant difference in total spine RVUs between the two groups (ratio of means 1.19, 95% CI of 0.72-1.96, p=.49). For secondary outcomes, only the difference between total spine imaging RVUs and total PT RVUs was statistically significant. The early PT group had greater PT RVUs; the ratio of means was 2.56 (95% CI of 2.17-3.03, p\u3c.001). The early PT group had greater imaging RVUs; the ratio of means was 1.37 (95% CI of 1.09-1.71, p=.01.) CONCLUSIONS: We found that in a group of older adults presenting for a new episode of low back pain, the use of early PT is not associated with any statistically significant difference in subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization compared with patients not receiving early PT