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. There is an increasing burden of LBP. Clinical guidelines promote physical activity (PA) and self-management strategies and aim to reform unhelpful clinical activity. This study explores osteopaths' beliefs about non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and the role of activity in the treatment of NSLBP. Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of twelve qualified osteopaths in the UK. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and constructivist grounded theory was used to conceptualise, collect and analyse data. Results. Four categories; practitioners' beliefs and mode of practice, PA interventions used, challenges and obstacles to promoting activity and strategies used in practice; conceptualised three practitioner styles. Variation was reported in the management of NSLBP, perceptions of successful PA interventions and strategies used in practice. Perceived obstacles to PA were identified. A proposed model highlights how different practitioner styles adopted a biomedical or behavioural orientation towards NSLBP, leading to different approaches to behavioural change strategies and self-management in the treatment of NSLBP. Conclusion. There are opportunities for educational programs to enhance competencies in exercise prescription and activity promotion, and knowledge of behavioural change strategies to promote self-management in NSLBP. Further quantitative research is recommended to measure osteopaths' attitudes and behaviour related to activity promotion and to test clinical effectiveness of related interventions. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Purpose and background. Acute and chronic spinal pain are major causes of disability, and many patients use analgesics to treat their pain. However, increased use of analgesics, particularly prescription opioids have the potential to be overused and cause dependence. Psychological factors such as stress, anxiety, depression, pain acceptance, pain catastrophising and alexithymia influence both the pain response and analgesic use, yet to date no studies have explored these variables in spinal pain patients. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the nature, prevalence and correlates of analgesic dependence among patients with acute or chronic spinal pain. Methods and results. Patients over the age of 18 attending outpatient services at the Royal Derby Hospital with complaints of either acute or chronic spinal pain and currently using analgesics to treat their pain completed the Current Opioid Misuse Measure, the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21, the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire-8, the Pain Catastrophising Scale, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20, and the Leeds Dependence Questionnaire, a measure of analgesic dependence. Preliminary findings from 52 patients (16 males and 36 females) with chronic spinal pain ranging from 23–88 years old, show that greater pain catastrophising is a significant predictor of analgesic dependence (t = 2.74, df = 51, p = 0.009). Conclusion. The study findings can inform the development of appropriate interventions targeting pain catastrophising to prevent and/or treat analgesic dependence, as well as contributing to potential future research on the understanding of tapering spinal pain patients off analgesic medication. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Introduction. Analgesic drugs are often prescribed to patients with low back pain (LBP). Recommendations for non-invasive pharmacological management of LBP from recent clinical practice guidelines were compared with each other and with the best available evidence on drug efficacy. Methods. Guideline recommendations concerning opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), paracetamol, antidepressants, anticonvulsants and muscle relaxants from national primary care guidelines published within the last 3 years were included in this review. For each pharmacotherapy, the most recent systematic review was included as the best available evidence on drug efficacy and common adverse effects were summarized. Results. Eight recent national clinical practice guidelines were included in this review (from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, The Netherlands, UK and US). Guidelines are universally moving away from pharmacotherapy due to the limited efficacy and the risk of adverse effects. NSAIDs have replaced paracetamol as the first choice analgesics for LBP in many guidelines. Opioids are considered to be a last resort in all guidelines, but prescriptions of these medications have been increasing over recent years. Only limited evidence exists for the efficacy of antidepressants and anticonvulsants in chronic LBP. Muscle relaxants are one of the analgesics of first choice in the US, but aren't widely available and thus not widely recommended in most other countries. Conclusions. Upcoming guideline updates should shift their focus from pain to function and from pharmacotherapy to non-pharmacologic treatment options. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This review has been supported by a program grant of the Dutch Arthritis Foundation

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).

The difficulties in the management of chronic lower back pain are recognised by professionals and patients alike but this recognition can stem from very different perspectives. This paper discusses how patients identify ways in which their experience and perception of pain changes over time and how that impacts on their relationship with professionals delivering a treatment regime. It presents the results of secondary analysis of longitudinal patient data collected under a serial qualitative interview methodology in which the analytical focus is on patients' changing expectations and perceptions of pain. This orientation to the data demonstrates not only established notions of ‘acceptance’ within biographical disruption, but also ways in which individuals revise, mediate, negotiate and integrate meanings of pain to gain both short and long-term coherence. By taking a more holistic view of patient narratives that situates treatment prescriptions and related behaviours within the context of individuals' everyday life, the analysis highlights ‘sense-making’ as a dynamic process. In doing so, it shows that patients draw reference points not only from their most immediate experiences of chronic low back pain but also from the (dis)continuities of lifecourse experience prior to the onset of pain and anticipated for the future. The paper therefore seeks to both illuminate the dynamics of the patient perspective and provide indicators of where some differences in patient/professional perceptions may lie. Suggestions for promoting concordance between patients and health care professionals will be discussed

Aims

Open discectomy (OD) is the standard operation for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), however, has shown similar outcomes to OD and there is increasing interest in this procedure. However despite improved surgical techniques and instrumentation, reoperation and infection rates continue and are reported to be between 6% and 24% and 0.7% and 16%, respectively. The objective of this study was to compare the rate of reoperation and infection within six months of patients being treated for LDH either by OD or PELD.

Objectives

Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation was evaluated after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures in a randomized, controlled clinical study performed for United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. PEMF significantly increased fusion rates at six months, but 12-month fusion outcomes for subjects at elevated risk for pseudoarthrosis were not thoroughly reported. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effect of PEMF treatment on subjects at increased risk for pseudoarthrosis after ACDF procedures.