Search

Purpose An online randomised experiment found that the labels lumbar sprain, non-specific low back pain (LBP), and episode of back pain reduced perceived need for imaging, surgery and second opinions compared to disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis among 1447 participants with and without LBP. They also reduced perceived seriousness of LBP and increased recovery expectations. Methods In this study we report the results of a content analysis of free-text data collected in our experiment. We used two questions: 1. When you hear the term [one of the six labels], what words or feelings does this make you think of? and 2. What treatment (s) (if any) do you think a person with [one of the six labels] needs? Two independent reviewers analysed 2546 responses. Results Ten themes emerged for Question1. Poor prognosis emerged for disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis, while good prognosis emerged for lumbar sprain, non-specific LBP, and episode of back pain. Thoughts of tissue damage were less common for non-specific LBP and episode of back pain. Feelings of uncertainty frequently emerged for non-specific LBP. Twenty-eight treatments emerged for Question2. Surgery emerged for disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis compared to lumbar sprain, non-specific LBP, and episode of back pain. Surgery did not emerge for non-specific LBP and episode of back pain. Conclusion Our results suggest that clinicians should consider avoiding the labels disc bulge, degeneration and arthritis and opt for labels that are associated with positive beliefs and less preference for surgery, when communicating with patients with LBP.

What are the effects of diagnostic labels and advice, and interactions between labels and advice, on perceived need for shoulder surgery for rotator cuff disease?2×2 factorial online randomised experiment.People with shoulder pain.Participants read a scenario describing a patient with rotator cuff disease and were randomised to bursitis label plus guideline-based advice, bursitis label plus treatment recommendation, rotator cuff tear label plus guideline-based advice, and rotator cuff tear label plus treatment recommendation. Guideline-based advice included encouragement to stay active and positive prognostic information. Treatment recommendation stressed that treatment is needed for recovery.Perceived need for surgery (primary outcome), imaging, an injection, a second opinion and to see a specialist; and perceived seriousness of the condition, recovery expectations, impact on work performance and need to avoid work.A total of 2,024 responses (99.8% of 2,028 randomised) were analysed. Labelling as bursitis (versus rotator cuff tear) decreased perceived need for surgery (mean effect -0.5 on a 0-to-10 scale, 98.3% CI -0.7 to -0.2), imaging and to see a specialist, and perceived seriousness of the condition and need to avoid work. Guideline-based advice (versus treatment recommendation) decreased perceived need for surgery (mean effect -1.0, 98.3% CI -1.3 to -0.7), imaging, an injection, a second opinion and to see a specialist, and perceived seriousness of the condition and recovery expectations. There was little to no evidence of an advice label interaction for any outcome.Labels and advice influenced perceived need for surgery and other secondary outcomes in people with rotator cuff disease, with larger effects for advice. There was evidence of little or no interaction between labels and advice for any outcome, but the additive effect of labels and advice appeared large for some outcomes (eg, perceived need for imaging and perceived seriousness of the condition).ACTRN12621001370897.

Background Patients presenting to Emergency Department (ED) with non-specific low back pain can receive more unnecessary, intensive and costly care than is recommended. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an unprecedented opportunity to examine how health systems prioritise necessary care that provides clear benefits to patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on care of low back pain in the ED. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic medical record data on care for low back pain from three public hospitals in Sydney. We included patients diagnosed with spinal conditions who presented between March and May in 2019 and in 2020. Outcomes were the total number of patients presenting with spinal conditions to ED, the proportion diagnosed with non-specific low back pain, and the proportion receiving potentially unnecessary aspects of care (ambulance use, imaging, opioids, hospital admissions). We calculated relative risk with 95% CIs and examined plots with locally weighted smoothed curves. Results Presentations for spinal conditions over a three-month period to three EDs reduced from 694 in 2019 to 475 in 2020 (31% reduction, 95% CI = 26%–37%). The proportion of patients diagnosed with non-specific low back pain (83% in 2019 vs 86% in 2020), or receiving potentially unnecessary care were similar in 2019 and 2020 (Imaging = 25% vs 25%; Opioids = 54% vs 56%; Admitted = 18% vs 20%; pathology test = 24% vs 23%). The proportion of patients arriving by ambulance was higher during the pandemic; 29% in 2019 vs 41% in 2020 (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.19–1.63). Conclusions ED presentations for low back pain associated with spinal conditions decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Use of potentially unnecessary aspects of care did not change or increased during the pandemic.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed A new wave of treatments has emerged to target nervous system alterations and mal-adaptive conceptualizations about pain for chronic low back pain. The acceptability of these treatments is still uncertain. We conducted a qualitative study alongside a randomized controlled trial to identify perceptions of facilitators or barriers to participation in a non-pharmacological intervention that resulted in clinically meaningful reductions across 12 months for disability compared to a sham intervention. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants from the trial’s active arm after they completed the 12-week program. We included a purposeful sample (baseline and clinical characteristics) (n = 20). We used reflexive thematic analysis informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability for health care interventions. We identified positive and negative emotional/cognitive responses associated with treatment acceptability and potential efficacy, including emotional support, cognitive empowerment, readiness for self-management, and acceptance of face-to-face and online components designed to target the brain. These findings suggest the importance of psychoeducation and behavior change techniques to create a positive attitude towards movement and increase the perception of pain control; systematic approaches to monitor and target misconceptions about the interventions during treatment; and psychoeducation and behavior change techniques to maintain the improvements after the cessation of formal care. Perspective: This article presents the experiences of people with chronic low back pain participating in a new non-pharmacological brain-targeted treatment that includes face-to-face and self-directed approaches. The facilitators and barriers of the interventions could potentially inform adaptations and optimization of treatments designed to target the brain to treat chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: The first-line treatment consistently recommended for people with low back pain is patient education and advice. Regardless of the duration of low back pain, clinicians should provide education on the benign nature of low back pain, reassurance about the absence of a serious medical condition, and advice to remain active. There is little guidance on how best to provide this care. OBJECTIVE: This Masterclass will draw on recent evidence to explore how physical therapy clinicians could deliver person-centred education and advice to people with low back pain to refine their clinical consultation. DISCUSSION: First, we highlight the potential value of providing validation to acknowledge the distressing experience and consequences of low back pain. Second, we describe a tool to open channels of communication to provide education and advice in a patient-centred and efficient way. Clinicians could consider using the Attitude toward Education and advice for Low back pain Questionnaire to gain an insight into patient attitudes toward education and advice at the outset of a clinical encounter. Finally, we provide options for tailoring patient education and advice to promote self-management of low back pain based on patient attitudes. We present evidence that a positive attitude toward messages about causes rather than messages about physical activity predicts intention to self-manage low back pain. We combine this evidence to suggest a pathway for clinicians to provide education and advice to people with low back pain within the time constraints of a clinical consultation.

The increasing number of gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) harms, including deaths observed across countries is concerning to health-care professionals and policy makers. However, it is unclear if the public shares these concerns. This study aimed to describe posts related to gabapentinoids, conduct a content analysis to identify common themes and describe adverse events or symptoms.Keywords of 'pregabalin' or 'Lyrica' or 'gabapentin' or 'Neurontin' were used to search for related tweets posted by people in the community between 8 March and 7 May 2021. Eligible tweets included a keyword in the post. We extracted de-identified data which included descriptive data of the total number of posts over time; and data on individual tweets including date, number of re-tweets and post content. Data were exported separately for pregabalin- and gabapentin-related tweets. A 20% random sample was used for the thematic analysis.There were 2931 pregabalin-related tweets and 2736 gabapentin-related tweets. Thematic analysis revealed three themes (sharing positive experiences and benefits of taking gabapentinoids, people voicing their negative experiences, and people seeking opinions and sharing information). Positive experiences of gabapentinoids were related to sharing stories and giving advice. This was contrasted to negative experiences including ineffectiveness, withdrawals, side effects and frustration related to cost and insurance coverage. Brain fog was the most common adverse symptom reported. Gabapentinoid-related deaths were only mentioned in three tweets.The increasing public health concern of gabapentinoid-related deaths was not translated to Twitter discussions.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a distressing and disabling pain condition. Many people with CRPS and the health professionals who treat them seek information about the condition via the Internet. The credibility, accuracy and comprehensiveness of online CRPS information remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the credibility, accuracy and comprehensiveness of information presented on freely accessible websites that aim to educate people about CRPS. Keyword searches were conducted on the Australian Google site, with 'trustworthy' websites included and critically appraised. Primary outcomes were recognised metrics of credibility (JAMA benchmark credibility criteria) and website accuracy (according to European CRPS guidelines). Comprehensiveness was assessed using the proportion of European CRPS guidelines covered by the websites. In all, 30 websites with 819 recommendations were critically appraised. Five (17%) websites met all credibility criteria; of the recommendations, 349 (43%) were accurate, 252 (31%) were inaccurate and 218 (26%) were unclear. For comprehensiveness, an average of 17% of general guidelines, 15% of therapeutic guidelines and 6% of medication/supplement guidelines were covered. Online information about CRPS available to Australians has low credibility, accuracy and comprehensiveness. Many website recommendations are inaccurate or unclear, and many websites endorse inappropriate treatments. There is an urgent need for accurate and comprehensive sources of CRPS information online.

This observational study evaluated people's attitudes towards educational statements and tested whether this predicted intention to self-manage low back pain (LBP).People with or without LBP who were over 18-years of age and fluent in written English were recruited. Participants completed an online survey asking demographic questions and questions on the presence or absence of LBP, its duration and intensity. We assessed attitude toward educational statements and conducted linear regression analyses to investigate the relationship between attitude toward each statement and intention to self-manage.We recruited 656 participants, n=345(53.6%), with LBP of varying duration. On average, participants had a positive attitude toward all statements except one; participants with chronic LBP had a negative attitude toward a statement relating to the cause of LBP. The effect of attitude on intention to self-manage was dependent on whether someone had LBP and for how long. For example, increased intention to self-manage was predicted by a positive attitude toward educational statements related to staying active [β= 0.22 (CI 0.11 to 0.33] in participants without pain, statements about reassurance [β=0.33 (CI 0.16 to 0.49] for participants with acute or subacute LBP, and statements about the severity of back pain [β= 0.25 (CI 0.18 to 0.33] for participants with chronic LBP.We noted differences in attitude toward educational messages and individuals' intention to self-manage LBP depending on pain duration. Self-management could be encouraged with specific reassurance in people with acute or subacute LBP and education about severity in people with chronic LBP.

IMPORTANCE: Audit and feedback can improve professional practice, but few trials have evaluated its effectiveness in reducing potential overuse of musculoskeletal diagnostic imaging in general practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of audit and feedback for reducing musculoskeletal imaging by high-requesting Australian general practitioners (GPs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This factorial cluster-randomized clinical trial included 2271 general practices with at least 1 GP who was in the top 20% of referrers for 11 imaging tests (of the lumbosacral or cervical spine, shoulder, hip, knee, and ankle/hind foot) and for at least 4 individual tests between January and December 2018. Only high-requesting GPs within participating practices were included. The trial was conducted between November 2019 and May 2021, with final follow-up on May 8, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible practices were randomized in a 1:1:1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 4 different individualized written audit and feedback interventions (n = 3055 GPs) that varied factorially by (1) frequency of feedback (once vs twice) and (2) visual display (standard vs enhanced display highlighting highly requested tests) or to a control condition of no intervention (n = 764 GPs). Participants were not masked. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the overall rate of requests for the 11 targeted imaging tests per 1000 patient consultations over 12 months, assessed using routinely collected administrative data. Primary analyses included all randomized GPs who had at least 1 patient consultation during the study period and were performed by statisticians masked to group allocation. RESULTS: A total of 3819 high-requesting GPs from 2271 practices were randomized, and 3660 GPs (95.8%; n = 727 control, n = 2933 intervention) were included in the primary analysis. Audit and feedback led to a statistically significant reduction in the overall rate of imaging requests per 1000 consultations compared with control over 12 months (adjusted mean, 27.7 [95% CI, 27.5-28.0] vs 30.4 [95% CI, 29.8-30.9], respectively; adjusted mean difference, −2.66 [95% CI, −3.24 to −2.07]; P

IntroductionSocial media provide promising contemporary platforms for sharing public health information with a broad audience. Before implementation, testing social media campaigns that are intended to engage audiences and initiate behaviour change is necessary. This trial aims to investigate the effectiveness of a public health campaign to increase people’s confidence in becoming more active despite low back pain in comparison with no intervention.Methods and analysisThis is an online randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups and one control group in a 1:1:1 allocation. People over 18 years of age and fluent in English will be recruited via social media advertising. We developed a social media-based public health campaign to support recommendations for managing low back pain. The interventions are two videos. Participants in the control group will be asked questions about low back pain but will not view either video intervention. The primary outcome will be item 10 of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, which asks participants to rate how confident they would feel to gradually become more active despite pain ranging from 0 (not at all confident) to 6 (completely confident). This outcome will be measured immediately in all participant groups. We will compare group mean of the three arms of the trial using univariate analyses of variance.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. We obtained ethical approval from our institutions Human Research Ethics Committee before data collection. We will publish the results in a peer-reviewed medical journal and on institution websites.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622000466741).

ObjectivesTo explore how people perceive different advice for rotator cuff disease in terms of words/feelings evoked by the advice and treatment needs.SettingWe performed a content analysis of qualitative data collected in a randomised experiment.Participants2028 people with shoulder pain read a vignette describing someone with rotator cuff disease and were randomised to:bursitis labelplusguideline-based advice, bursitis labelplustreatment recommendation, rotator cuff tear labelplusguideline-based adviceandrotator cuff tear labelplustreatment recommendation. Guideline-based adviceincluded encouragement to stay active and positive prognostic information.Treatment recommendationemphasised that treatment is needed for recovery.Primary and secondary outcomesParticipants answered questions about: (1) words/feelings evoked by the advice; (2) treatments they feel are needed. Two researchers developed coding frameworks to analyse responses.Results1981 (97% of 2039 randomised) responses for each question were analysed.Guideline-based advice(vstreatment recommendation) more often elicited words/feelings of reassurance, having a minor issue, trust in expertise and feeling dismissed, and treatment needs of rest, activity modification, medication, wait and see, exercise and normal movements.Treatment recommendation(vsguideline-based advice) more often elicited words/feelings of needing treatment/investigation, psychological distress and having a serious issue, and treatment needs of injections, surgery, investigations, and to see a doctor.ConclusionsWords/feelings evoked by advice for rotator cuff disease and perceived treatment needs may explain whyguideline-based advicereduces perceived need for unnecessary care compared to atreatment recommendation.

Background Diagnostic labels may influence treatment intentions. We examined the effect of labelling low back pain (LBP) on beliefs about imaging, surgery, second opinion,seriousness, recovery, work, and physical activities. Methods Six-arm online randomized experiment with blinded participants with and without LBP. Participants received one of six labels:‘disc bulge’,‘degeneration’,‘arthritis’,‘lumbar sprain’,‘non-specific LBP’,‘episode of back pain’. The primary outcome was the belief about the need for imaging. Results A total of 1375 participants (mean [SD] age, 41.7 years [18.4 years]; 748 women [54.4%]) were included. The need for imaging was rated lower with the labels‘episode of back pain’(4.2 [2.9]),‘lumbar sprain’(4.2 [2.9]) and‘non-specific LBP’(4.4 [3.0]) compared to the labels‘arthritis’(6.0 [2.9]),‘degeneration’(5.7 [3.2]) and‘disc bulge’(5.7 [3.1]). The same labels led to higher recovery expectations and lower ratings of need for a second opinion, surgery and perceived seriousness compared to‘disc bulge’,‘degeneration’and‘arthritis’. Differences were larger amongst participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care. No differences were found in beliefs about physical activity and work between the six labels. Conclusions ‘Episode of back pain’,‘lumbar sprain’and‘non-specific LBP’reduced need for imaging, surgery and second opinion compared to‘arthritis’,‘degeneration’and‘disc bulge’amongst public and patients with LBP as well as reducing the perceived seriousness of LBP and enhancing recovery expectations. The impact of labels appears most relevant amongst those at risk of poor outcomes (participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care).

We aimed to determine, in those who present to the ED with low back pain (LBP): (i) the prevalence of four key diagnostic categories, (ii) trends in lumbar imaging from 2015 to 2019 and (iii) the effect of a new model of care on lumbar imaging in the ED.We conducted a retrospective analysis of routinely collected medical data of four tertiary hospitals in Sydney, Australia. We analysed ED presentations for LBP between January 2012 and October 2019. Outcomes were the prevalence of four key diagnostic categories of LBP and use of lumbar imaging. We examined trends in lumbar imaging over time and used interrupted time series analysis to determine the impact of model of care implementation on imaging use.There were 31 168 presentations for LBP of which 64.5% were non-specific LBP, 27.2% were problems beyond the spine, 5.3% were LBP with neurological signs and 2.3% were serious spinal conditions. 28.9% received lumbar imaging; use did not change substantially between 2012 and 2019. Patients diagnosed with serious spinal conditions were more likely to receive imaging (59%) than those diagnosed with non-specific LBP (29%). Implementation of a state-wide model of care in November 2016 did not appear to influence imaging use.Most presentations to the ED for LBP are for non-specific LBP. Around 2% will have specific spinal pathology. Use of imaging in those diagnosed with non-specific LBP remains high and was unaffected by implementation of a state-wide model of care.

To compare and contrast the diagnostic codes for spinal causes of low back pain (LBP) in 3 disease classification systems (International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-10, International Classification of Primary Care [ICPC]-2 PLUS and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms - Australia [SNOMED CT-AU]) and consider how well they are aligned with the diagnostic approach recommended in contemporary clinical practice guidelines for LBP.This was a descriptive study which included 3 disease classification systems: ICD-10, ICPC-2 PLUS and SNOMED CT-AU. Two independent authors extracted relevant LBP codes from each system and mapped the codes to 3 guideline-endorsed categories of spine-related diagnoses for LBP (specific spinal pathology, radicular syndromes, and non-specific LBP) and the various clinical conditions (sub-categories) within each of the 3 categories.ICD-10, ICPC-2 PLUS, and SNOMED CT-AU had 126, 118 and 100 codes for LBP, respectively. All systems provided codes that would cover the 3 guideline-endorsed categories of spine-related diagnoses for LBP. On the basis of contemporary guidelines, the authors developed lists of discrete sub-categories of specific spinal pathology (56 sub-categories), radicular syndromes (7 sub-categories), and non-specific LBP (10 sub-categories). Each of the classification systems was then mapped against these sub-categories to tally redundancy and determine exhaustiveness. However, no system covered all 73 sub-categories of LBP, and within each system, there was substantial redundancy with up to 22 codes for the same clinical condition.LBP diagnostic codes used in popular disease classification systems are out of touch with current approaches to diagnosis, as reflected in contemporary LBP guidelines. Our findings suggest these disease classification systems need revision, but precisely how they should be revised is unclear.