Background. Chronic pain is a complex condition that demonstrates better outcomes in multidisciplinary rehabilitation, typically delivered to groups of patients by tertiary healthcare teams. An inter-disciplinary pain management course for individual patients was developed to increase the scope of physical therapists working in primary care by integrating osteopathic manual therapy with psychological interventions from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), a form of ‘3rd wave’ Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. Method and Results. A single cohort study with pre-course (n=180) and post-course (n=79) self-report measures (44% response rate) evaluated six week interventions which combined individual manual therapy with self-management, delivered by teams of qualified and student osteopaths. Data included: quality of life (European Quality of Life Questionnaire); pain, mood and coping (Bournemouth Questionnaire); psychological flexibility (Revised Acceptance and Action Questionnaire); and mindfulness (Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory). Participants were predominantly female (68%), unemployed (59%), with an average age of 49 and pain duration of more than 12 months (86%). Commonly reported symptoms were low back pain (82%), neck pain (60%) and multiple sites (86%). At six months, there were statistically significant improvements in all four outcome measures (p<0.0005), with promising effect sizes in quality of life and pain coping (r=0.52) which appeared to be mediated by changes in psychological flexibility. Conclusions. This innovative, integrated, patient-centred chronic pain management course demonstrated promising outcomes when delivered by osteopaths with varying experience. Randomised clinical trials are now needed to assess outcomes in comparison with standard care, and optimal ways of training physical therapists to deliver effective psychological interventions. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: A Department of Health ‘Innovation, Excellence and Strategic Development’ (IESD) grant for the Voluntary Sector Investment Programme (AIMS Ref: 2527190; ISRCTN: 04892266). The results of this study are being submitted for publication in the International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine and will be presented at the COME Collaboration Osteopathic Conference in Barcelona on September 30th 2017 and at the Therapy Expo 2017 at the NEC in Birmingham on November 22nd 2017

Background and purpose. The Fear Avoidance Model is used to explain why some patients with acute low back pain develop chronic low back pain (CLBP). Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) targeting dysfunctional behavioural cognitions (pain catastrophizing and fear of movement) is recommended. Purpose: to investigate whether a two-week CBT-based pain management program results in improvement in dysfunctional behavioural cognitions and whether these improved cognitions improve functional outcomes. Methods and Results. Cohort study including 524 consecutive CLBP-patients. Main outcome: functioning (ODI). Secondary outcomes: pain severity (NRS), pain catastrophizing (PCS), fear of movement (TSK). Assessments: pre- and post-treatment, 1 and 12-months follow-up (FU). Improvement over time was analysed with repeated measures ANOVA. Path analyses were used to examine the influence of pain catastrophizing and fear of movement on functional disability and pain severity. Multiple imputation was used to complete missing data. Participants with incomplete data (12.8%) did not differ from those with complete data (n= 457). 59% were females, mean age 46 (± 9.5) years, mean CLBP-duration 12 (± 10.8) years. All outcomes significantly improved at post-treatment and a slight significant improvement between post-treatment and 12 months FU was observed. Path analyses showed a direct effect for catastrophizing on post-treatment functioning and an indirect effect for catastrophizing through fear of movement on post-treatment functioning. Comparable results with pain severity as outcome. Conclusion. A two-week pain management program improved dysfunctional behavioral cognitions and functional outcomes in patients with longstanding CLBP up to one year. Targeting both pain catastrophizing and fear of movement during the program resulted in improved outcomes. Conflicts of Interest: JK O'Dowd is director of and shareholder in RealHealth. The authors declare that this abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national or international meeting. Sources of Funding:. No funding obtained

Purpose and background. A review of secondary healthcare provision for civilians suffering persistent pain and living in the British Forces Germany (BFG) community was carried out in order to better inform referral from primary care. This population consists mostly of British nationals each with differing linguistic skills and cultural backgrounds. Patients may be referred to Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bielefeld (EvKB) in Germany or to Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) in the UK. It was considered important to identify potential language or cultural-related barriers to improve decision making when considering where best to refer for a pain management programme (PMP). Methods. Clinical visits undertaken at GSTT and EvKB involved observation of clinical activities, collection of documentation and informal staff discussions. Data were organised into common themes and categorised to provide information for written reflective accounts on each visit. Results. The PMP at EvKB is medical doctor-led, supported by integrated psychologists. English language skills of individual staff members appear varied. Patients stay in shared rooms on a medical ward environment. Group based pain education here is provided in German only. Access to the GSTT PMP requires competent English language skills. It is psychologist-led and delivered by an interdisciplinary team. Patients reside in individual living accommodation and attend group therapy sessions. Conclusion. To reduce risk of increasing anxiety, cultural differences related to language, medical hierarchy and privacy should be considered before referring non-German speakers with complex psychosocial needs to EvKB. Given the complexity of pain, non-native speakers may misunderstand translations of cultural nuances used in pain education. No conflicts of interest. Funding was received by the primary author from SSAFA Forces Help for dissertation tuition fees. This work formed part of a project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MSc Clinical Management of Pain at the University of Edinburgh

Previous research has suggested that when subjected to painful lumbar stimulation, chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with illness behaviour (IB) are unable to effectively engage a sensory modulation system utilised by patients without IB. 1. Furthermore, reduced insular cortex volume in CLBP patients with IB, may compound this problem. 2. . Pain Management Programs (PMP) has demonstrated reductions in IB and disability associated with chronic pain conditions. This current study aims to assess whether the pattern of cerebral response to pain in IB patients could be normalised by participation in a PMP. 12 patients with CLBP and IB (>4/5 Waddell signs present) were recruited prior to attending a 16-day PMP. FMRI scanning occurred prior to (PrePMP) and upon completion of the PMP (PostPMP). 8 healthy volunteers (HC) were scanned once. As in previous research, painful stimuli consisted of intense electrical stimulation delivered bilaterally to the lower back. The presentation of 3 colours indicated the likelihood of receiving 10second stimulation to the lower back (Always, Never and Maybe). IB scores were significantly reduced PostPMP (p <0.05). FMRI group activation maps for the Always condition revealed PostPMP patients increased activation in posterior regions, areas similarly activated by HC. For the Maybe condition, compared to PrePMP group, HC demonstrated greater activation in precuneus and middle and inferior frontal regions. Compared to their pre-treatment selves, PostPMP patients demonstrated increased activation in posterior and frontal regions. The results demonstrate that completion of a 16-day PMP leads to alteration in the brain's response to painful low back stimulation in CLBP patients with IB. Increased activation is seen in regions associated with the top-down modulation of pain. The response is similar to that seen in HC, and greater than before PMP confirming that the PMP process facilitates the utilisation of more normal coping pathways in response to CLBP

Aims. Historically, patients undergoing surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) have been nursed postoperatively in a critical care (CC) setting because of the challenges posed by prone positioning, extensive exposures, prolonged operating times, significant blood loss, major intraoperative fluid shifts, cardiopulmonary complications, and difficulty in postoperative pain management. The primary aim of this paper was to determine whether a scoring system, which uses Cobb angle, forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and number of levels to be fused, is a valid method of predicting the need for postoperative critical care in AIS patients who are to undergo scoliosis correction with posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all AIS patients who had undergone PSF between January 2018 and January 2020 in a specialist tertiary spinal referral centre. All patients were assessed preoperatively in an anaesthetic clinic. Postoperative care was defined as ward-based (WB) or critical care (CC), based on the preoperative FEV1, FVC, major curve Cobb angle, and the planned number of instrumented levels. Results. Overall, 105 patients were enrolled. Their mean age was 15.5 years (11 to 25) with a mean weight of 55 kg (35 to 103). The mean Cobb angle was 68° (38° to 122°). Of these, 38 patients were preoperatively scored to receive postoperative CC. However, only 19% of the cohort (20/105) actually needed CC-level support. Based on these figures, and an average paediatric intensive care unit stay of one day before stepdown to ward-based care, the potential cost-saving on the first postoperative night for this cohort was over £20,000. There was no statistically significant difference between the Total Pathway Score (TPS), the numerical representation of the four factors being assessed, and the actual level of care received (p = 0.052) or the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (p = 0.187). Binary logistic regression analysis of the TPS variables showed that the preoperative Cobb angle was the only variable which significantly predicted the need for critical care. Conclusion. Most patients undergoing posterior fusion surgery for AIS do not need critical care. Of the readily available preoperative measures, the Cobb angle is the only predictor of the need for higher levels of care, and has a threshold value of 74.5°. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):713–719

Background and study purpose. Low back pain with no identified underlying cause is categorised as primary musculoskeletal pain by the International Association for the Study of Pain. In April 2021, the National Institute for Care and Excellence (NICE) published updated guidance for the management of primary chronic pain conditions in England. As part of the De-STRESS pain study, we explored the perspectives of GPs on the updated guideline and impact upon clinical practice. Methods and results. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 GPs in England. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison techniques. GPs agreed with the recommendations restricting pharmacological options for pain management and reflected that they now had an expert reference to back-up their decision-making and could use the guidance in potentially difficult conversations with patients. Frustration was expressed by GPs about the lack of alternative options to medication, as the non-pharmacological recommendations were difficult to implement, had lengthy waiting lists, or were unavailable in their locality. Conclusion. Although GPs discussed benefits of the updated NICE guideline in potentially reducing prescriptions of ineffective and potentially harmful medications, frustration about the lack of alternative strategies added to the difficulties encountered in managing people with persistent back pain in primary care. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This study was funded by Versus Arthritis – grant number 22454; Carolyn A Chew-Graham is part-funded by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West Midlands

Background. Chronic pain is a significant burden and represents a major issue for world healthcare systems. Interventions include medication, surgery, pain management programmes, and social support through peer support groups. These groups are often informal, providing informational, emotional, and social support to members. The aim of this project is to co-produce guidance on how to establish a peer support programme for people living with chronic, non-cancer pain that is informed by evidence, theory, and stakeholder experience. Methods. This project is using Steps 1–4 of the Intervention Mapping (IM) approach to inform the research. Online workshops consisting of people living with chronic pain, third sector representatives, healthcare professionals, and researchers are being used to co-produce the guidance. Results. To date, 2 of the 4 planned workshops have been conducted. These have identified the needs of people living with chronic pain, goals for the peer support programme, and expectations of how a peer support programme should be executed. Topics for inclusion in the programme and their content have been identified, with further workshops to refine this planned. The final stage of this project will identify methods of delivery, specific resources that should be developed, and the training to be provided to peer support volunteers. Conclusion. The project has identified the diverse needs of people living with chronic pain and how these may be addressed by a peer support programme. It has identified flexible options that can be recommended to those who want to set up a programme and a variety content that may be included. Conflicts of Interest. None. Sources of Funding. Robert Gordon University

Purpose. Cognitive Muscular Therapy (CMT) is a new treatment for low back pain which integrates psychological techniques for pain management alongside training to improve postural control. Rather than focus on postural alignment or strength, CMT aims to improve the regulation of postural tone (low-level activity which supports the body against gravity). This is achieved by teaching patients an awareness of compensatory paraspinal activation, which can be triggered by overactivity of the abdominal muscles. The aim of this study was to understand whether CMT could reduce symptoms associated with low back pain and improve paraspinal muscle activation. Methods and results. Fifteen patients with chronic low back pain received seven weekly sessions of CMT from a physiotherapist. Clinical data was captured at baseline and two weeks after the intervention using the Roland-Morris questionnaire and the pain catastrophising scale. Activation of the erector spinae muscle during walking was also measured at baseline and after the final intervention session. Change data were analysed using paired t-tests. There was a 75% reduction (p<0.001) in the Roland-Morris score from a mean (SD) of 9.3(2.9) to 2.3(2.6), along with a 78% reduction in pain catastrophising (p<0.002) from 16.6(13) to 3.7(4.8). Activation of the contralateral erector spinae muscles reduced by 30% (p<0.01) during the contralateral swing phase of walking. Conclusion. In this small sample, CMT delivered large clinical improvements and reduced activation of the low back muscles during walking. Larger randomised trials are now required to confirm whether CMT could outperform existing physiotherapy treatments for chronic back pain. Conflict of interest. No conflicts of interest. Source of funding. University of Salford

Background. Mobile apps have shown promise in helping people to self-manage conditions like chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, it is unclear who benefits most, why, and under what circumstances. This limits our understanding of how to maximize the potential of mobile app technology. Aim. This study aimed to test and refine programme theories about how mobile apps support people to self-manage CLBP in a real-world setting. The theories were based on a previously published realist review. Methods. A realist evaluation was conducted using one-to-one realist interviews by telephone with participants who had used the Curable app to self-manage their CLBP for three months. The interviews were guided by programme theories from the realist review. Analysis of the interviews used abductive and retroductive logic to create chains of inferences, which were then developed into context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs). These CMOCs offered causal explanations about who might benefit from a mobile app to self-manage CLBP, why and in what circumstances. Results. Ten interviews were conducted (nine with people with CLBP who trialled the app and one with a founding member of Curable LLC). Twenty CMOCs were created that identified key mechanisms such as agency, control and reassurance that interact with contextual factors such as acceptance, internal capacity, and a biopsychosocial approach to pain management. These factors influence whether a person with CLBP will benefit from a mobile app for self-management. Conclusions. Twenty CMOCs were created to support three programme theories centering around concepts of empowerment, burden of care, and timing. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. R Hunter's work was supported by the Inverness and Highland City-Region Deal Studentship Award [2018]. Presented at: 13th Congress of the European Pain Federation (EFIC), September 2023, Budapest, Hungary

Purpose and background of the study. Self-management and behaviour change is at the core of back pain management. Despite the high-rate of recurrence and healthcare utilisation, clinical guidelines do not include guidance for clinicians on return consultations. This project aimed to identify primary care clinicians’ reported practices and experiences of delivering self-management advice for people returning with persistent low back pain (LBP), to inform future delivery of self-management care. Methods and Results. In this qualitative study involving 27 primary care clinicians, four focus groups and two semi-structure interviews were conducted online. GPs (n=5) and physiotherapists working in primary care roles (First contact practitioners n=7, community and interface roles n=7, and mixed roles n=8) in England and Scotland shared their experience of delivering self-management advice to people returning with persistent LBP. Video recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed with reflexive thematic analysis. Clinicians unanimously shared their frustrations identifying the challenges involved in supporting people who return with LBP. Helpful strategies to support self-management in return consultations were identified by clinicians in addition to service and system-level changes vital to optimise care. Patient-factors affecting delivery of care, lack of defined responsibility and challenges in meeting patients’ expectations illustrated the tensions that exist in return consultations. Conclusion. This novel study provides insight into the experiences and practices of the frontline primary care workforce seeing patients return with persistent or recurrent LBP. It identifies the tensions that exist between services, professional roles and between clinicians and patients regarding self-management. Important practice implications have been identified to improve information-sharing, agenda-setting, and exploring expectations. No conflicts of interest.  . Source of funding. Lisa Osborn-Jenkins is funded by University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (UHS) Research & Development PhD Fellowship [GRT0723]

Purpose and background. Low back pain burdens individuals, society and services, including Emergency Departments (ED), straining services and prolonging wait times. Despite reported personal influences on deciding to attend ED, the role of third-party advice remains underexplored. Sparse guidance for clinicians and service-users highlights the need for effective back pain management strategies, to alleviate system pressure and optimise patient outcomes. This study explored how advice influences the decision to attend the ED for back pain. Methods and Results. From a subtle realist stance, the design was a secondary analysis of qualitative data, where 47 patients (26M:21F, aged 23–79 years) with back pain were purposively sampled from four EDs (2 Northern and 2 Southern) in England between August and December 2021. Eight patients had previously visited ED for this episode of back pain. As this was during the pandemic, semi-structured interviews were conducted online, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a reflective thematic analysis. Three themes were identified as crucial in making the decision to attend ED: The Healthcare professional; Trusted others; and the Individual. Healthcare professionals often dictated decisions, leaving participants feeling powerless. Trusted others provided varying support levels, often acting as allies. Individuals grappled with anxieties around their condition and treatment expectations. Conclusion. This study highlights the need for clinicians to provide clarity and guidance to individuals and their Trusted others, seeking advice regarding escalation to visit the ED with back pain. There was evidence that worrying about pain was a significant motivator for attending ED, resulting in malalignment with current practice guidelines. No conflicts of interest.  . Sources of funding. Funding for primary data: Health Education England & National Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

Background. Over 55,000 spinal operations are performed annually in the NHS. Effective postoperative analgesia facilitates early mobilisation and assists rehabilitation and hospital discharge, but is difficult to achieve with conventional, opioid-based, oral analgesia. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of two alternative techniques, namely intrathecal opioid and the more novel erector-spinae plane blockade, is unknown. The Pain Relief After Instrumented Spinal Surgery (PRAISE) trial aims to evaluate these techniques. Methods. PRAISE is a multicentre, prospective, parallel group, patient-blinded, randomised trial, seeking to recruit 456 adult participants undergoing elective, posterior lumbar-instrumented spinal surgery from up to 25 NHS hospitals. Participants will be randomised 1:1:1 to receive (1) Usual Care with local wound infiltration, (2) Intrathecal Opioid plus Usual Care with local wound infiltration or (3) Erector Spinae Plane blockade plus Usual Care with no local wound infiltration. The primary outcome is pain on movement on a 100mm visual analogue scale at 24 hours post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include pain at rest, leg pain, quality of recovery (QoR-15), postoperative opioid consumption, time to mobilisation, length of hospital stay, health utility (EQ-5D-5L), adverse events and resource use. Parallel economic evaluation will estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results. Differences in the primary outcome at 24 hours will be estimated by mixed-effects linear regression modelling, with fixed effects for randomisation factors and other important prognostic variables, and random effects for centre, using the as-randomised population. Treatment effects with 95% confidence intervals will be presented. Conclusion. The study is due to open in May 2024 and complete in 2026. Conflicts of Interest. No conflicts of interest declared. Sources of Funding. NIHR Health Technology Award – grant number NIHR153170. Trial presentations so far. APOMP 2023 and 2024; RCOA conference, York, November 2023; Faculty of Pain Management training day, London, February 2024

Purpose and Background. Guidelines recommend biopsychosocial care for chronic, complex musculoskeletal conditions, including non-specific low back pain. The aims were: 1/ to assess how patients with low back pain respond to osteopathic treatment, both before and after an osteopath has completed a Biopsychosocial Pain Management (BPM) course; and 2/ to assess if it is feasible and acceptable for osteopath participants to receive weekly SCED data and use it to guide patient management. Methods and Results. A multiple baseline single case experimental design trial (. clinicaltrials.gov. , on 18/10/2021, ID number NCT05120921) with 11 UK osteopaths was conducted. Patients were randomised to early, middle or late treatment start dates. Statistical analysis assessed the change between baseline, intervention and follow-up periods. Primary outcomes were the Numeric Pain Rating (NPR) and Patient Specific Function Scales (PSFS), measured during the baseline, the 6-week intervention, and during a 12-week follow-up period. At baseline, the osteopaths reported stronger biopsychosocial attitudes to pain, compared to biomedical beliefs (PABS: 34 behavioural scale; 29 biomedical scale). Overall, patient participants showed daily increases in symptoms during the pre-treatment phase (+0.24/day, p<0.001), and daily decreases during treatment (−2.94 over the treatment phase, p<0.001), which continued post-treatment (−3.36 over 12 weeks, p=0.04). Similar improvements were observed for function. Conclusion. Osteopathic care was shown to help patients with persistent low back pain. Patient recruitment was challenging because of the randomisation. With further development, the method shows feasibility as a means of enhancing research activity among practising clinicians. Previous presentations or publications of the work. The protocol was published (. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijosm.2023.100660. ) and presented at SBPR in 2022. The results were presented to an osteopathic conference in October 2023. Ethics approval was received from the University College of Osteopathy Research Ethics Committee. Conflicts of interests. Jerry Draper-Rodi receives fees from the sales of the e-learning course on the biopsychosocial management on the UCO CPD platform. Sources of funding. The research was funded by the Osteopathic Foundation

Lumbar fusion remains the gold standard for the treatment of discogenic back pain. Total disc replacement has fallen out of favor in many institutions. Other motion preservation alternatives, such as nucleus replacement, have had limited success and none are commercially available at this time. Two prospective, nonrandomized multicenter studies of lumbar disc nucleus replacement using the PerQdisc 2.0 nucleus replacement device in patients with lumbar discogenic back pain. Early clinical results are presented. A total of 16 patients from 4 international sites (Germany, Paraguay, Canada and Belgium) were enrolled in the trial between May 2019 and February 2021. Data collection points include baseline and postoperatively at 1, 2, 6, and 12 months. Clinical outcome measures were obtained from the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-12V2, Analgesic Score (AS), and radiographic assessments. Prospectively gathered data on patient reported outcomes, neurological outcome, surgical results, radiological analysis, and any adverse events. 16 patients had successful implantation of the device. There have been no expulsions of the device. Early postoperative results are available in 13/16 patients at 6 months and 11/16 patients at 12 months. There have been 4 (25%) revision surgeries 3–12 months post implantation between the two trials. 12 of 13 (92%) patients had Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in ODI at 6 months and 10 of 11 (91%) at 12 months. Mean decrease in ODI from baseline to 12 months was 44.8. At 12 months 8 (73%) patients are not taking pain medication, 1 (9%) patient is taking a narcotic for pain management. 73% of patients are working without restrictions at 12 months post implant. Early clinical and technical results are encouraging. Long term follow up is essential and is forthcoming. Additional patient recruitment and data points are ongoing. FDA/Drug Status Investigational/Not approved

Aims

People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial).

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether, after correction of an adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), leaving out the subfascial drain gives results that are no worse than using a drain in terms of total blood loss, drop in haemoglobin level, and opioid consumption.

Aims

Traumatic central cord syndrome (CCS) typically follows a hyperextension injury and results in motor impairment affecting the upper limbs more than the lower, with occasional sensory impairment and urinary retention. Current evidence on mortality and long-term outcomes is limited. The primary aim of this study was to assess the five-year mortality of CCS, and to determine any difference in mortality between management groups or age.

Background. Previous research in people with musculoskeletal low back pain (MLBP) in primary care shows that a reliable and valid measure of consultation-based reassurance enables testing reassurance against patient' outcomes. Little is known about the role of reassurance in people with MLBP consulting spinal surgeons, especially in cases where surgeons recommend not to have surgery. There might be several reasons to exclude surgery as a treatment option, that range from positive messages about symptoms resolving to negative messages, suggesting that all reasonable avenue of treatment have been exhausted. AIM to explore patient's experience of consultation-based reassurance in people with MLBP who have been recently advised not to have surgery. Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 low back pain patients who had recently consulted for spinal surgery and were advised that surgery is not indicated. Interview were audio recorded and transcribed, and then coded using NVIVO qualitative software and analysed using the Framework Analysis. Results. Most patients reported feeling dismissed and discouraged. They considered that consultants were better in relationship building and data gathering than in providing cognitive and generic reassurance. Major emerging themes included the complexity and confusion of their NHS journey, lack of continuity-of-care, lack of information for their condition and a sense of dismissal. Patients reported that they needed reassurance through clear explanations and discussion of pain management, but instead were discharged into a void. Conclusion. Effective communication with patients attending surgical settings to consult about their back pain is important, especially when no active treatment is being offered. No conflict of interest. Funded by a grant from EuroSpine awarded to Professor Tamar Pincus and carried out within the NHS

Aims

Psychoeducative prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes is relatively novel in spinal fusion surgery and, like most rehabilitation treatments, they are rarely well specified. Spinal fusion patients experience anxieties perioperatively about pain and immobility, which might prolong hospital length of stay (LOS). The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine if a Preoperative Spinal Education (POSE) programme, specified using the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) and designed to normalize expectations and reduce anxieties, was safe and reduced LOS.

Background. Low back pain (LBP) with or without leg pain, is one of the most common causes of pain and disability and a frequent cause of attendance to emergency departments (ED). Increasing numbers of patients create a difficult challenge for clinicians to effectively and appropriately manage patients with LBP in an urgent care setting. Purpose. To improve the management of atraumatic spinal pain patients admitted onto the emergency assessment unit (EAU) thus improving quality of care, reducing bed stay and facilitating appropriate discharge and follow-up within an interdisciplinary model. Method. From January 2014, consultant physiotherapists, led a 7-day service to assess and manage patients admitted to the EAU with atraumatic back pain. Patients are referred for appropriately and timely investigations. Non-medical prescribing skills allow physiotherapists to offer pharmacological review and prescribing in line with best practice guidelines. All care is delivered within a framework of inter-professional care with involvement of emergency medicine, spinal orthopaedic, neurosurgical, pain management and pharmacy teams. Results. Length of stay has reduced by 25% in two years (potential saving £411,726 per annum). Official patient complaints have reduced to zero. Readmission within 30 days has fallen from 1.2% of the total number of admissions with atraumatic back pain to 0.8% despite earlier discharge. Cost of bed stay has fallen from. Conclusion. Highly skilled physiotherapists are ideally placed to lead and deliver safe and effective care for patients presenting with atraumatic back pain within an urgent care setting. This has resulted in improved care at lower cost. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained