Articles: low-back-pain.
-
Cross-sectional case-control study. ⋯ 3.
-
Despite epidemic rates of addiction and death from prescription opioids in the United States, suggesting the importance of providing alternatives to opioids in the treatment of pain, little is known regarding how payers' coverage policies may facilitate or impede access to such treatments. ⋯ Wide variation in coverage of nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain may be driven by the absence of best practices, the administrative complexities of developing and revising coverage policies, and payers' economic incentives. Such variation suggests an important opportunity to improve the accessibility of services, reduce opioid use, and ultimately improve the quality of care for individuals with chronic, noncancer pain while alleviating the burden of opioid addiction and overdose.
-
Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent and recurrent conditions in the general population, with personal, professional, social and economic impact. However, there is a lack of consistent evidence about chronic low back pain (CLBP) prognosis, especially highlighting predictors that influence CLBP outcome. Existing systematic reviews are scarce, outdated and incomplete. The primary aim of this systematic review is to identify multivariable models and/or predictors associated with clinical outcomes in subjects with CLBP (namely pain intensity, disability, return to work, psychological well-being and quality of life). ⋯ PROSPERO CRD42017079233.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Effectiveness and Downstream Healthcare Utilization for Patients That Received Early Physical Therapy Versus Usual Care for Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Randomized controlled trial. ⋯ Military service members seeking care from a general practitioner were recruited. Patients attended a 20-minute self-management class with focus on psychosocial resilience and then randomized to usual care only (UC) versus immediately starting a 3-week physical therapy program (PT). Primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included Oswestry scores at 4- and 12-week follow-up, numeric pain rating scale, global rating of change, and healthcare utilization at 1 year. Analysis of covariance was used to compare differences between groups, significance set at 0.05.
-
Beyond expert suggestions as to the appropriate subject matter for chronic pain assessments, little is known about the actual content of multidisciplinary pain centre (MPC) clinical assessments. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Low Back Pain Core Set (ICF LBP-CS) provides a universal language to support the consistent description of LBP-related assessments across disciplines within multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). This study sought to map the content of MPC clinical assessments to the ICF to: (1) identify and compare the content of clinical MDT assessments using a cross-disciplinary framework and (2) examine the content validity of the LBP-CS. ⋯ Overall, the findings revealed novel insights into the content of MPC clinical assessments that can be used to improve health care delivery. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-based assessment profiles demonstrated unique contributions from each discipline to chronic low back pain assessment. Finally, users of the LBP-CS can be confident that the tool exhibits sound content validity from the perceptive of MDT assessments of functioning, disability, and health.