Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL intervention for non-specific SUBACUTE low back pain in a working population : a cluster randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a multifactorial condition with individual and societal impact that affects populations globally. Current guidelines for the treatment of LBP recommend pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. The aim of this study was to compare usual clinical practice with the effectiveness of a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention in reducing disability, severity of pain and improving quality of life in a working population of patients with subacute (2-12 weeks), non-specific LBP. METHODS: Longitudinal cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 39 Primary Health Care Centres (PHCC) of Barcelona, with patients aged 18-65 years (n = 501; control group = 239; 26 PHCC, intervention group = 262; 13 PHCC). The control group received usual clinical care. The intervention group received usual clinical care plus a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention, which consisted of physiotherapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy and medication. The main outcomes were changes in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and the minimal clinically important differences. Secondary outcomes were changes in the McGill Pain (MGPQ) and Quality of Life (SF-12) questionnaires. Assessment was conducted at baseline, 3 and 12 months. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and analyst-blinded. Multiple imputations were used. RESULTS: Of the 501 enrolled patients, 421 (84%) provided data at 3 months, and 387 (77.2%) at 12 months. Mean age was 46.8 years (SD: 11.5) and 64.7% were women. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, only the intervention group showed significant changes at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027), but minimal clinically important difference were detected in both groups. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, the intervention group improvement more than the control group at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027). The intervention group presented a significant difference. Both groups presented a minimal clinically important difference, but more difference in the intervention group. The intervention group presented significant differences in the MGPQ scales of current pain intensity and VAS scores at 3 months. No statistically significant differences were found in the physical and mental domains of the SF-12. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention in a working population with non-specific subacute LBP has a small positive impact on disability, and on the level of pain, mainly at short-term, but no difference on quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21392091 (17 oct 2018) (Prospectively registred

Effectiveness of organizational interventions to reduce emergency department utilization: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) utilization has dramatically increased in developed countries over the last twenty years. Because it has been associated with adverse outcomes, increased costs, and an overload on the hospital organization, several policies have tried to curb this growing trend. The aim of this study is to systematically review the effectiveness of organizational interventions designed to reduce ED utilization. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted electronic searches using free text and Medical Subject Headings on PubMed and The Cochrane Library to identify studies of ED visits, re-visits and mortality. We performed complementary searches of grey literature, manual searches and direct contacts with experts. We included studies that investigated the effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce ED visits and the following study designs: time series, cross-sectional, repeated cross-sectional, longitudinal, quasi-experimental studies, and randomized trial. We excluded studies on specific conditions, children and with no relevant outcomes (ED visits, re-visits or adverse events). From 2,348 potentially useful references, 48 satisfied the inclusion criteria. We classified the interventions in mutually exclusive categories: 1) Interventions addressing the supply and accessibility of services: 25 studies examined efforts to increase primary care physicians, centers, or hours of service; 2) Interventions addressing the demand for services: 6 studies examined educational interventions and 17 examined barrier interventions (gatekeeping or cost). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The evidence suggests that interventions aimed at increasing primary care accessibility and ED cost-sharing are effective in reducing ED use. However, the rest of the interventions aimed at decreasing ED utilization showed contradictory results. Changes in health care policies require rigorous evaluation before being implemented since these can have a high impact on individual health and use of health care resources. Systematic review registration: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO. Identifier: CRD420111253

Flow of articles through the literature review process.

<p>Flow of articles through the literature review process.</p

Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL intervention for non-specific SUBACUTE low back pain in a working population : a cluster randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a multifactorial condition with individual and societal impact that affects populations globally. Current guidelines for the treatment of LBP recommend pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. The aim of this study was to compare usual clinical practice with the effectiveness of a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention in reducing disability, severity of pain and improving quality of life in a working population of patients with subacute (2-12 weeks), non-specific LBP. METHODS: Longitudinal cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 39 Primary Health Care Centres (PHCC) of Barcelona, with patients aged 18-65 years (n = 501; control group = 239; 26 PHCC, intervention group = 262; 13 PHCC). The control group received usual clinical care. The intervention group received usual clinical care plus a biopsychosocial multidisciplinary intervention, which consisted of physiotherapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy and medication. The main outcomes were changes in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and the minimal clinically important differences. Secondary outcomes were changes in the McGill Pain (MGPQ) and Quality of Life (SF-12) questionnaires. Assessment was conducted at baseline, 3 and 12 months. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and analyst-blinded. Multiple imputations were used. RESULTS: Of the 501 enrolled patients, 421 (84%) provided data at 3 months, and 387 (77.2%) at 12 months. Mean age was 46.8 years (SD: 11.5) and 64.7% were women. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, only the intervention group showed significant changes at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027), but minimal clinically important difference were detected in both groups. In the adjusted analysis of the RMDQ outcome, the intervention group improvement more than the control group at 3 months (- 1.33 points, p = 0.005) and at 12 months (- 1.11 points, p = 0.027). The intervention group presented a significant difference. Both groups presented a minimal clinically important difference, but more difference in the intervention group. The intervention group presented significant differences in the MGPQ scales of current pain intensity and VAS scores at 3 months. No statistically significant differences were found in the physical and mental domains of the SF-12. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention in a working population with non-specific subacute LBP has a small positive impact on disability, and on the level of pain, mainly at short-term, but no difference on quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21392091 (17 oct 2018) (Prospectively registred

The relationship between effectiveness and costs measured by a risk-adjusted case-mix system: multicentre study of Catalonian population data bases

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The main objective of this study is to measure the relationship between morbidity, direct health care costs and the degree of clinical effectiveness (resolution) of health centres and health professionals by the retrospective application of Adjusted Clinical Groups in a Spanish population setting. The secondary objectives are to determine the factors determining inadequate correlations and the opinion of health professionals on these instruments.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>We will carry out a multi-centre, retrospective study using patient records from 15 primary health care centres and population data bases. The main measurements will be: general variables (age and sex, centre, service [family medicine, paediatrics], and medical unit), dependent variables (mean number of visits, episodes and direct costs), co-morbidity (Johns Hopkins University Adjusted Clinical Groups Case-Mix System) and effectiveness.</p> <p>The totality of centres/patients will be considered as the standard for comparison. The efficiency index for visits, tests (laboratory, radiology, others), referrals, pharmaceutical prescriptions and total will be calculated as the ratio: observed variables/variables expected by indirect standardization.</p> <p>The model of cost/patient/year will differentiate fixed/semi-fixed (visits) costs of the variables for each patient attended/year (N = 350,000 inhabitants). The mean relative weights of the cost of care will be obtained. The effectiveness will be measured using a set of 50 indicators of process, efficiency and/or health results, and an adjusted synthetic index will be constructed (method: percentile 50).</p> <p>The correlation between the efficiency (relative-weights) and synthetic (by centre and physician) indices will be established using the coefficient of determination. The opinion/degree of acceptance of physicians (N = 1,000) will be measured using a structured questionnaire including various dimensions. Statistical analysis: multiple regression analysis (procedure: enter), ANCOVA (method: Bonferroni's adjustment) and multilevel analysis will be carried out to correct models. The level of statistical significance will be p < 0.05.</p