Search

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.Objective: To (1) confirm validity of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function and pain interference computer-adaptive tests (CATs) and (2) assess the validity of PROMIS Global Health (GH) and five additional PROMIS CATs: social role satisfaction, fatigue, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance in a population of patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP) who completed a 3-month Interdisciplinary Pain Program (IPP).Summary Of Background Data: Recent recommendations for assessing outcomes in patients with cLBP have included PROMIS scales; however, there is a need for further evaluation, and PROMIS GH has not been studied in this population.Methods: The study cohort included patients with cLBP who completed the entirety of a 3-month IPP between August 2016 and December 2018. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were analyzed before the start of the IPP and at graduation. Convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients. Known groups' validity assessed the change in PROMIS scores stratified by improvement on the Modified LBP Disability Questionnaire. Responsiveness was evaluated with standardized response means based on global impression of change.Results: IPP was completed by 217 patients (67.7% women, age 53.8 ± 12.8). Convergent validity was supported (P < 0.01 for all pairwise PROMs comparisons). All PROMs improved significantly by graduation, with the largest improvement for PROMIS pain interference, physical function, social role satisfaction, and Modified LBP Disability Questionnaire. Known groups' validity demonstrated the greatest change on PROMIS physical function, social role satisfaction, pain interference, and depression. Responsiveness was supported for all PROMs in 170 (78.3%) patients who indicated at least minimal improvement (standardized response means 0.43-1.06).Conclusion: Our study provides support of PROMIS CATs, highlights the importance of including other meaningful outcome measures, such as social role satisfaction, and provides the first validation of PROMIS GH, in patients with cLBP. PROMs collection can be streamlined through the use of PROMIS CATs which offer advantages over legacy measures.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: This is an observational cohort study.Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of PT to an interdisciplinary treatment approach in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP).Summary Of Background Data: CLBP is a costly and potentially disabling condition. Physical therapy (PT), cognitive behavioral therapy, and interdisciplinary pain programs (IPPs) are superior to usual care. Empirical evidence is lacking to clearly support one treatment approach over another in patients with CLBP.Methods: One hundred seventeen adult patients who completed an IPP for individuals with ≥3 months of back pain were compared to 214 adult patients with similar characteristics who completed PT. The Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire was the primary outcome measure. Additional measures included: PROMIS physical function, global health, social role satisfaction, pain interference, anxiety, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and Patient Health Questionnaire. Patients who completed the IPP were matched by propensity score to a historical control group of patients who completed a course of PT. Change in functional disability was compared between IPP patients and matched controls. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed pre to post participation in the IPP using paired t test and by calculating the proportion with clinically meaningful improvement.Results: Propensity score matching generated 81 IPP and 81 PT patients. Patients enrolled in the IPP had significantly greater improvement in MDQ scores upon completion compared to patients in PT (15.8 vs. 7.1, P < 0.001). The majority of IPP patients reached the threshold for clinically meaningful change of ≥10 point reduction (60.5%) compared to 34.6% of PT patients, P < 0.01. Patients in the IPP also showed statistically and clinically significant improvement in social role satisfaction, fatigue, and sleep disturbance.Conclusion: CLBP patients in an IPP demonstrated greater functional improvements compared to similar patients participating in PT.Level Of Evidence: 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. States and municipalities have instituted a variety of tobacco control measures (TCMs) to address the significant impact tobacco use has on population health. The American Lung Association annually grades state performance of tobacco control using the State of Tobacco Control grading framework., Objective: To gain an updated understanding of how recent efforts in tobacco control have impacted tobacco use across the United States, using yearly State of Tobacco Control TCM assessments., Design: The independent TCM variables of smoke-free air score, cessation score, excise tax, and percentage of recommended funding were selected from the American Lung Association State of Tobacco Control reports. Predictors of adult smoking rates were determined by a mixed-effects model., Setting/participants: The 50 US states and District of Columbia., Main Outcome Measure: Adult smoking rate in each state from 2011 to 2013., Results: The average adult smoking rate decreased significantly from 2011 to 2013 (21.3% [SD: 3.5] to 19.3% [SD: 3.5], P = .016). All forms of TCMs varied widely in implementation levels across states. Excise taxes (β = -.812, P = .006) and smoke-free air regulations (β = -.057, P = .008) were significant, negative predictors of adult smoking. Cessation services (β = .015, P = .46) did not have a measurable effect on adult smoking., Conclusion: Tobacco control measures with the strongest influence on adult smoking include the state excise tax and state smoke-free air regulations. The lack of robust funding for tobacco cessation services across the majority of US states highlights an important shortfall in current tobacco control policy.