Abstract
Study background: The management of patients presenting in primary care with a “new episode of back pain” using the RCGP guidelines by a nurse practitioner (NP) compared to a control group given ‘usual care’ by the GP.
Methods and Results: The evaluation includes sequential monitoring of LBOS, audit of documentation for both groups of patients to assess application of guidelines and patient recall of key information.
Conclusion: The NHS Plan (2000) called for national standards for treating all major conditions in “Shifting the Balance of Power- the next steps” (2001) a clear criterion is that “service outcomes which provide better and better validated information” will form part of the performance rating. These two documents highlight the need for more user and client involvement in service development but this needs to be carefully monitored and linked to effective evidence.
This study demonstrates that the NP documentation follows the guidelines identified by the RCGP, conversely it was not possible to assess from the GP documentation if all the steps had been followed. The mean average LBOS in the NP patients was slightly higher than those in the GP group, was this because these patients were having guideline applied care as opposed to “usual care”?
Evaluation of the patient recall of information shows the NP sent five patients for X-ray even though this did not occur and is not recommended in guidelines. Conversely twenty-three patients can remember being given the “Back Book” by the GP but this was only documented in three cases.
We believe that patient recall demonstrates an ineffective way to measure outcome and funding allocation for back pain management and needs to more accurately reflect the evidence.
Correspondence should be addressed to the editorial secretary: Dr Charles Pither, c/o British Orthopaedic Society, Royal College of Surgeons, 35-43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PN.
