Randomized controlled trials reflected clinical practice when comparing the course of low back pain symptoms in similar populations.

OBJECTIVE:This study compares participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (the Minimal Invasive Treatment [MinT] trials) to participants in a related observational study with regard to their low back pain (LBP) symptom course. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:Eligible patients were diagnosed with chronic LBP originating from the facet joints (N = 615) or sacroiliac (SI) joints (N = 533) and were treated with radiofrequency denervation and an exercise program. Randomized patients were compared to patients in the related observational study who fulfilled all RCT eligibility criteria (observational group 1) and to patients who did not fulfill at least one of the RCT eligibility criteria (observational group 2). Outcomes were pain intensity, treatment success, and functional status over a 3-month period. Longitudinal mixed-model analyses and linear regression models were applied to analyze the differences in outcomes between the RCT and observational study groups. RESULTS:No differences in symptom course were found between patients in the RCTs and patients in observational group 1. Patients with facet joint pain in observational group 2 had overall less treatment success (odds ratios [OR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.90), and less improvement in physical functioning (mean difference [MD], 5.82; 95% CI, 2.54-9.11) compared to the RCT patients. Patients with SI joint pain in observational group 2 had higher pain scores (MD, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.09-0.72), less treatment success (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.96), and less improvement in physical functioning (MD, 7.16; 95% CI, 3.84-10.47) compared to the RCT patients. CONCLUSION:This supports the generalizability of results from the MinT RCTs as this study suggests that these RCTs reflect clinical practice when comparing similar populations. To what extent this holds true for all RCTs in LBP should be further explored

Efficacy of the Gelstix nucleus augmentation device for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain: protocol for a randomised, sham-controlled, double-blind, multicentre trial.

INTRODUCTION Discogenic pain is the cause of pain in 26%-40% of patients with for low back pain. Consensus about treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain is lacking and most treatment alternatives are supported by limited evidence. The percutaneous implantation of hydrogels into the nucleus pulposus represents a promising regenerative intradiscal therapy. The hydrogel 'GelStix' is composed primarily of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile and acts as a reservoir of hydration, producing increased pressure and improved pH balance, potentially leading to disc preservation. We hypothesise that treatment with GelStix will lead to greater reduction in pain intensity at 6 months post-treatment compared with patients receiving sham treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This is a parallel group, randomised sham-controlled double-blind, multicentre trial to assess whether the GelStix device is superior to sham in reducing pain intensity in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. The study will be conducted in two regional hospitals in Europe. Seventy-two participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the change in pain intensity between preoperative baseline and at 6 months postintervention. Secondary outcomes were disability, quality of life, the patient's global impression of change scale, the use of pain medication and the disc degeneration process assessed by means of MRI. For change in pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life and disc height, mean values will be compared between groups using linear regression analysis, adjusted for treatment centre. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Canton Ticino, Switzerland (CE2982) and by the Medical Ethical Committee Arnhem-Nijmegen, the Netherlands (2016-2944). All patients that agree to participate will be asked to sign an informed consent form. Results will be disseminated through international publications in peer-reviewed journals, in addition to international conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02763956. PROTOCOL VERSION 7.1, 18 November 2020

Cost-Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Denervation for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain:The MINT Randomized Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency denervation when added to a standardized exercise program for patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside 3 pragmatic multicenter, nonblinded randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in The Netherlands with a follow up of 52 weeks. Eligible participants were included between January 1, 2013, and October 24, 2014, and had chronic low back pain; a positive diagnostic block at the facet joints (n = 251), sacroiliac (SI) joints (n = 228), or a combination of facet joints, SI joints, and intervertebral discs (n = 202); and were unresponsive to initial conservative care. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and societal costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, no difference in costs between groups was found in the facet joint or combination RCT. The total costs were significantly higher for the intervention group in the SI joint RCT. The maximum probability of radiofrequency denervation being cost-effective when added to a standardized exercise program ranged from 0.10 in the facet joint RCT to 0.17 in the SI joint RCT irrespective of the ceiling ratio, and 0.65 at a ceiling ratio of €30 000 per QALY in the combination RCT. CONCLUSIONS: Although equivocal among patients with symptoms in a combination of the facet joints, SI joints, and intervertebral discs, evidence suggests that radiofrequency denervation combined with a standardized exercise program cannot be considered cost-effective from a societal perspective for patients with chronic low back pain originating from either facet or SI joints in a Dutch healthcare setting

Effect of radiofrequency denervation on pain intensity among patients with chronic lowback pain the mint randomized clinical trials

IMPORTANCE Radiofrequency denervation is a commonly used treatment for chronic low back pain, but high-quality evidence for its effectiveness is lacking. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency denervation added to a standardized exercise program for patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Three pragmatic multicenter, nonblinded randomized clinical trials on the effectiveness of minimal interventional treatments for participants with chronic low back pain (Mint study) were conducted in 16 multidisciplinary pain clinics in the Netherlands. Eligible participants were included between January 1, 2013, and October 24, 2014, and had chronic low back pain, a positive diagnostic block at the facet joints (facet joint trial, 251 participants), sacroiliac joints (sacroiliac joint trial, 228 participants), or a combination of facet joints, sacroiliac joints, or intervertebral disks (combination trial, 202 participants) and were unresponsive to conservative care. INTERVENTIONS All participants received a 3-month standardized exercise program and psychological support if needed. Participants in the intervention group received radiofrequency denervation as well. This is usually a 1-Time procedure, but the maximum number of treatments in the trial was 3. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas pain intensity (numeric rating scale, 0-10; whereby 0 indicated no pain and 10 indicated worst pain imaginable) measured 3 months after the intervention. The prespecified minimal clinically important difference was defined as 2 points or more. Final follow-up was at 12 months, ending October 2015. RESULTS Among 681 participants who were randomized (mean age, 52.2 years; 421 wom

Determinants of potential drug–drug interaction associated dispensing in community pharmacies in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE: There are many drug–drug interactions (D–DI) of which some may cause severe adverse patient outcomes. Dispensing interacting drug combinations should be avoided when the risks are higher than the benefits. The objective of this study was to identify determinants of dispensing undesirable interacting drug combinations by community pharmacies in the Netherlands. METHODS: A total of 256 Dutch community pharmacies were selected, based on the dispensing of 11 undesirable interacting drug combinations between January 1st, 2001 and October 31st, 2002. These pharmacies were sent a questionnaire by the Inspectorate for Health Care (IHC) concerning their process and structure characteristics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of times the 11 undesirable interacting drug combinations were dispensed. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-six questionnaires (response rate 96.1%) were completed. Dispensing determinants were only found for the D–DI between macrolide antibiotics and digoxin but not for the other 10 D–DIs. Pharmacies using different medication surveillance systems differed in the dispensing of this interacting drug combination, and pharmacies, which were part of a health care centre dispensed this interacting drug combination more often. CONCLUSION: Medication surveillance in Dutch community pharmacies seems to be effective. Although for most D–DIs no determinants were found, process and structure characteristics may have consequences for the dispensing of undesirable interacting drug combinations

Health care expenditure and GDP: An international panel smooth transition approach

In this paper, we investigate the potential threshold effects in the relationship between national expenditures on health care and national income. Using a panel threshold regression model, we derive country-specific and time-specific income elasticities for 17 OECD countries over the period 1975–2003. In contrast to many previous analyses, our empirical results show that health care is a necessity rather than a luxury. Further, the relationship between health expenditure and income seems rather nonlinear, changing over time and across countries

Appropriate referral and selection of patients with chronic pain for spinal cord stimulation: European consensus recommendations and e-health tool

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment for chronic neuropathic, neuropathic-like and ischaemic pain. However, the heterogeneity of patients in daily clinical practice makes it often challenging to determine which patients are eligible for this treatment, resulting in undesirable practice variations. This study aimed to establish patient-specific recommendations for referral and selection of SCS in chronic pain. Methods: A multidisciplinary European panel used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) to assess the appropriateness of (referral for) SCS for 386 clinical scenarios in four pain areas: chronic low back pain and/or leg pain, complex regional pain syndrome, neuropathic pain syndromes and ischaemic pain syndromes. In addition, the panel identified a set of psychosocial factors that are relevant to the decision for SCS treatment. Results: Appropriateness of SCS was strongly determined by the neuropathic or neuropathic-like pain component, location and spread of pain, anatomic abnormalities and previous response to therapies targeting pain processing (e.g. nerve block). Psychosocial factors considered relevant for SCS selection were as follows: lack of engagement, dysfunctional coping, unrealistic expectations, inadequate daily activity level, problematic social support, secondary gain, psychological distress and unwillingness to reduce high-dose opioids. An educational e-health tool was developed that combines clinical and psychosocial factors into an advice on referral/selection for SCS. Conclusions: The RUAM was useful to establish a consensus on patient-specific criteria for referral/selection for SCS in chronic pain. The e-health tool may help physicians learn to apply an integrated approach of clinical and psychosocial factors. Significance: Determining the eligibility of SCS in patients with chronic pain requires careful consideration of a variety of clinical and psychosocial factors. Using a systematic approach to combine evidence from clinical studies and expert opinion, a multidisciplinary European expert panel developed detailed recommendations to support appropriate referral and selection for SCS in chronic pain. These recommendations are available as an educational e-health tool (https://www.scstool.org/)

Roles of Small GTPase Rac1 in the Regulation of Actin Cytoskeleton during Dengue Virus Infection

An important clinical characteristic of dengue hemorrhagic fever/dengue shock syndrome is increased vascular permeability. Actin cytoskeleton is a significant element of endothelial barrier function regulation. In vitro study showed that dengue virus infection could induce redistributions of actin cytoskeleton. It is not precisely clear the roles of actin and the mechanisms of its reorganization during the infection. Using immunochemical assays, drug inhibition assays and protein interaction profiling methods, we aimed to identify the ways in which dengue virus serotype 2 interacts with actin cytoskeleton. The study showed that dynamic treadmilling of actin is necessary for dengue virus entry, production and release, while small GTPase Rac1 also plays multiple roles during these processes. In addition, we demonstrated the association of viral E protein with actin, indicating a direct effect of viral protein on the structural modifications of actin cytoskeleton. Our results provide evidence for the participation of Rac1 signaling pathways in viral protein-induced actin reorganizations, which may be a mechanism involved in the etiology of dengue hemorrhagic fever