Internet delivered interventions may provide a route to rapid support for behavioural self-management for low back pain (LBP) that could be widely applied within primary care. Although evidence is emerging that more complex technologies (mobile apps linked to digital wristbands) can have some impact on LBP-related disability, there is a need to determine the effectiveness of highly accessible, web-based support for self-management for LBP. We conducted a multi-centre pragmatic randomised controlled trial, testing ‘SupportBack’, an accessible internet intervention developed specifically for primary care. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the SupportBack interventions in reducing LBP-related physical disability in primary care patients. Participants were randomised to 1 of 3 arms: 1) Usual care + internet intervention + physiotherapy telephone support, 2) Usual care + internet intervention, 3) Usual care alone. Utilising a repeated measures design, the primary outcome for the trial was disability over 12 months using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: 826 were randomised, with follow-up rates: 6 weeks = 83%; 3 months = 72%; 6 months = 70%; 12 months = 79%. Analysis is ongoing, comparing each intervention arm versus usual care alone. The key results will be presented at the conference.Background
Methods and results
Low back-related leg pain (LBLP) is clinically diagnosed as referred leg pain or sciatica. Within the spectrum of LBLP there may be unrecognised subgroups of patients. This study aimed to identify and describe clusters of LBLP patients using latent class analysis (LCA). The study population were 609 LBLP primary care consulters. Variables from clinical assessment were included in the LCA. Characteristics of the statistically identified clusters were described and compared to the clinically defined groups of LBLP patients.Background
Methods
Early intervention is advocated to prevent long-term work absence due to musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. The SWAP trial tested whether adding a vocational advice (VA) service to best current care led to fewer days work absence over 4 months. The SWAP trial was a cluster randomised controlled trial in 6 general practices, 3 randomised to best current care (control), 3 randomised to best current care and the VA service (intervention). Patients were ≥18 years, absent from work ≤6 months or struggling at work due to MSK pain. Primary outcome was number of days absent over 4 months. Exploratory subgroup analyses examined whether the effect was larger for patients with spinal pain compared to other MSK pain.Introduction
Methods
Internet interventions provide an opportunity to encourage patients with LBP to self-manage and remain active, by tailoring advice and providing evidence-based support for increasing physical activity. This paper reports the development of the ‘SupportBack’ internet intervention, designed for use with usual primary care, as the first stage of a feasibility RCT currently underway comparing: usual primary care alone; usual care plus the internet intervention; usual care plus the internet intervention with physiotherapist telephone support. The internet intervention delivers a 6-week, tailored programme focused on graded goal setting, self-monitoring, and provision of tailored feedback to encourage physical activity/exercise increases or maintenance. 22 patients with back pain from primary care took part in ‘think aloud’ interviews, to qualitatively explore the intervention, provide feedback on its relevance and quality and identify any extraneous content or omissions.Background:
Methods:
Identification of nerve root involvement (NRI) in patients with low back-related leg pain (LBLP) can be challenging. Diagnostic models have mainly been developed in secondary care with conflicting reference standards and predictor selection. This study aims to ascertain which cluster of items from clinical assessment best identify NRI in primary care consulters with LBLP Cross-sectional data on 395 LBLP consulters were analysed. Potential NRI indicators were seven clinical assessment items. Two definitions of NRI formed the reference standards: (i) high confidence (≥80%) NRI clinical diagnosis (ii) high confidence (≥80%) NRI clinical diagnosis with confirmatory magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed and compared for both reference standards. Model performances were summarised using the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic and area under the curve (AUC). Bootstrapping assessed internal validity.Background:
Methods:
To explore the cost-utility of implementing stratified care for low back pain (LBP) in general practice, compared with usual care, within patient risk subgroups (low, medium and high risk of persistent disabling pain determined by the STarT Back tool). Adopting a cost-utility framework alongside a prospective, sequential comparison of separate patient cohorts (922 patients in total) with six-month follow-up, the base case analysis estimated the incremental LBP-related healthcare cost per additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) by risk subgroup. Uncertainty was explored with cost-utility planes and acceptability curves. Sensitivity analyses examined alternative approaches (a complete case analysis, the incorporation of non-LBP-related healthcare use and estimation of societal costs relating to work absence).Purpose and background
Methods
60% of back pain patients report pain radiation in the leg(s), which is associated with worse symptoms and poorer recovery. The majority are treated in primary care, but detailed information about them is scarce. The objective of this study is to describe the characteristics of patients with back and leg pain-seeking treatment in primary care. Adult patients consulting their GP with back and leg pain were invited to the study. Participants completed questionnaires including sociodemographic, physical and psychosocial measures. They also underwent standardised clinical assessments by physiotherapists, and received an MRI scan.Background
Methods
Pain with radiation to the leg is a common presentation in back pain patients. Radiating leg pain is either referred pain or radicular, commonly described as sciatica. Clinically distinguishing between these types of leg pain is recognized as difficult but important for management purposes. The aim of this study was to investigate inter-therapist agreement when diagnosing referred or radicular pain. Thirty-six primary care consulters with low back-related leg pain were assessed and diagnosed as referred or radicular leg pain by one of six trained experienced musculoskeletal physiotherapists. Assessments were videoed, excluding any diagnosis discourse, and viewed by a second physiotherapist who made an independent diagnosis. Therapists rated their confidence with diagnosis and reasons for their decision. Data was summarized using percentage agreements and kappa (K) coefficients with two sided 95% confidence intervals (CI).Background
Methods
Research on people's own experiences of living with sciatica is limited and this study aims to contribute to a better understanding of the impact of sciatica and its treatment. Longitudinal study based on in-depth interviews at baseline, six and twelve months follow-up. Thirty seven people were interviewed (15 men, 22 women) using a topic guide that allowed for detailed exploration of their story. All interviews were digitally recorded, fully transcribed, imported in the NVivo data management system and analysed thematically using the constant comparative method.Purpose and background
Methods
Although low back pain (LBP) with leg pain, is considered by most a poor prognostic indicator, it is at the same time believed to have a favourable natural resolution, and is often treated along similar lines to non-specific LBP, in line with current guidelines. It is unclear whether patients with LBP and leg pain are a distinct subgroup that might benefit from early identification and targeted interventions. We set out to investigate the impact of LBP with leg pain on health outcomes and health resources compared with that of LBP alone, and to explore which factors contribute to the observed disability outcomes. A systematic literature search of all English language peer reviewed publications was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL for the years 1994 to 2009.Purpose and background
Methods
