Professional barriers and facilitators to using stratified care approaches for managing non-specific low back pain: a qualitative study with Canadian physiotherapists and chiropractors

Background: Recent clinical practice guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP) recommend using stratified care approaches. To date, no study has assessed barriers and facilitators for health professionals in using stratified care approaches for managing non-specific LBP in the Canadian primary care setting. This study aimed to identify and contrast barriers and facilitators to using the stratified care approaches for non-specific LBP among Canadian physiotherapists and chiropractors. Methods: Individual telephone interviews, underpinned by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), explored beliefs and attitudes about, and identified barriers and facilitators to the use of stratified care approaches for managing non-specific LBP in a purposive sample of 13 chiropractors and 14 physiotherapists between September 2015 and June 2016. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed by two independent assessors using directed content analysis. Results: Three and seven TDF domains were identified as likely relevant for physiotherapists and chiropractors, respectively. Shared key beliefs (and relevant domains of the TDF) for both physiotherapists and chiropractors included: lack of time, cost, and expertise (Environmental Context and Resources); and consulting more experienced colleagues and chronic patients with important psychological overlay (Social Influences). Unique key domains were identified among physiotherapists: incompatibility with achieving other objectives (Goals), and chiropractors: confidence in using stratified care approaches (Beliefs about Capabilities); intention to use stratified care approaches (Intentions); awareness and agreement with stratified care approaches (Knowledge); assessment of readiness for change and intentional planning behaviour (Behavioural Regulation); and improving the management of non-specific LBP patients and the uptake of evidence-based practice (Beliefs about Consequences). Conclusions: Several shared and unique barriers and facilitators to using the stratified care approaches for non-specific LBP among Canadian physiotherapists and chiropractors were identified. Findings may help inform the design of tailored theory-based knowledge translation interventions to increase the uptake of stratified care approaches in clinical practice. © The Author(s). 2019

Multiancestry analysis of the HLA locus in Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases uncovers a shared adaptive immune response mediated by HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes

Across multiancestry groups, we analyzed Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) associations in over 176,000 individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) versus controls. We demonstrate that the two diseases share the same protective association at the HLA locus. HLA-specific fine-mapping showed that hierarchical protective effects of HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes best accounted for the association, strongest with HLA-DRB1*04:04 and HLA-DRB1*04:07, and intermediary with HLA-DRB1*04:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:03. The same signal was associated with decreased neurofibrillary tangles in postmortem brains and was associated with reduced tau levels in cerebrospinal fluid and to a lower extent with increased Aβ42. Protective HLA-DRB1*04 subtypes strongly bound the aggregation-prone tau PHF6 sequence, however only when acetylated at a lysine (K311), a common posttranslational modification central to tau aggregation. An HLA-DRB1*04-mediated adaptive immune response decreases PD and AD risks, potentially by acting against tau, offering the possibility of therapeutic avenues

Developing a Valuation Function for the Preference-Based Multiple Sclerosis Index: Comparison of Standard Gamble and Rating Scale.

OBJECTIVE:The standard gamble (SG) and rating scale (RS) are two approaches that can be employed to elicit health state preferences from patients in order to inform decision making. The objectives of this study were: (i) to contribute evidence towards the similarities and differences in the SG and the RS to reflect patient preferences, and (ii) to develop a multi-attribute utility function (MAUF) (i.e., scoring algorithm) for the PBMSI. STUDY DESIGN:Two samples were recruited for the study. The first sample provided cross-sectional data to generate the preference weights which were then used to develop (D) the MAUFD. The distribution of SG and RS were compared across levels of perceived difficulty. The second sample provided additional data to validate (V) the MAUF, termed MAUFV. RESULTS:The mean RS values ranged from 0.39 to 0.65, whereas the mean SG values were much higher ranging from 0.80 to 0.91. Correlations between the two methods were very low ranging from -0.29 to 0.15. Bland-Altman plots revealed the extent of differences in values produced by the two methods. CONCLUSION:In contemplating trade-offs in the selection of a preference-based elicitation approach for a MAUF that could guide clinical decision making, results suggest the RS is preferable in terms of feasibility and validity for MS patients. The PBMSI with patient preferences shows promise as a measure of health-related quality of life for MS

PBMSI MAUF_D developed based on rating scale values obtained from the Development sample.

<p>PBMSI MAUF_D developed based on rating scale values obtained from the Development sample.</p

Mean rating scale and standard gamble values derived from the development sample.

<p>Mean rating scale and standard gamble values derived from the development sample.</p

Concordance between the levels of difficulty between the RS and the SG in the development sample.

<p>Concordance between the levels of difficulty between the RS and the SG in the development sample.</p

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the Development and the Validation sample.

<p>Demographic and clinical characteristics of the Development and the Validation sample.</p

SG values by quantiles for PBMSI corner states in the development sample.

<p>SG values by quantiles for PBMSI corner states in the development sample.</p

Scatter plot to assess agreement between the SG MAUF_V and the RS MAUF_V for the validation sample.

<p>Scatter plot to assess agreement between the SG MAUF_V and the RS MAUF_V for the validation sample.</p