header advert
Results 1 - 20 of 24
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 34 - 34
1 Oct 2019
Wood L Foster N Lewis M Bishop A
Full Access

Background and Aim of Study

Despite several hundred RCTs of exercise for persistent non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), the treatment targets of exercise are unclear. In a systematic review we observed 30 direct and indirect treatment targets of exercise described across 23 RCTs for persistent NSLBP. Since not all treatment targets and outcomes can be assessed in all RCTs, it is therefore important to prioritise these treatment targets through consensus from key stakeholders. These consensus workshops aimed to agree treatment targets for the use of exercise interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in persistent NSLBP using nominal group workshop (NGW) methodology.

Methods and Results

The first UK workshop included people who had experience of exercise to manage their persistent NSLBP, clinicians who prescribe exercise for persistent NSLBP, and researchers who design exercise interventions tested in RCTs. The second workshop included participants attending an international back and neck pain research workshop. Twelve participants took part in the UK NGW and fifteen took part in the final ranking of the exercise treatment targets. In addition to the original list of 30 treatment targets, a further 26 ideas were generated. After grouping and voting, 18 treatment targets were prioritised. The top five ranked targets of exercise interventions for persistent NSLBP were: pain reduction, improvement in function, reduction of fear of movement, encouragement of normal movement and improvement of mobility. The results of the international NGW will also be presented.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 27 - 27
1 Oct 2019
Kigozi J Lewis M Konstantinou K Foster N Jowett S
Full Access

Funding

This report presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (NIHR HTA project number 12/201/09). NEF is a Senior NIHR Investigator and was supported through an NIHR Research Professorship (NIHR-RP-011-015). KK was supported by a HEFCE Senior Clinical Lectureship award. The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, MRC, CCF, NETSCC, the Health Technology Assessment programme or the Department of Health.

Background and Purpose

Stratified care (SC) has previously been found to be a cost-effective approach for primary care LBP patients. The SCOPiC trial compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a modified SC model combining prognostic and clinical characteristics to allocate sciatica patients into one of three groups (with matched care pathways) versus non-stratified, usual care (UC).


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 19 - 19
1 Oct 2019
Hill J Tooth S Cooper V Chen Y Lewis M Wathall S Saunders B Bartlam B Protheroe J Chudyk A Dunn K Foster N
Full Access

Background and aims

The Keele STarT Back approach is effective for stratifying patients with low back pain in primary care, but a similar approach has not been tested with a broader range of patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. We report a feasibility and pilot trial examining the feasibility of a future main trial of a primary care based, risk-stratification (STarT MSK) approach for patients with back, neck, knee, shoulder or multi-site pain.

Methods

A pragmatic, two-parallel arm, cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) in 8 GP practices (4 stratified care involving use of the Keele STarT MSK tool and matched treatment options: 4 usual care). Following screening, adults with one of the five most common MSK pain presentations were invited to take part in data collection over 6 months. Feasibility outcomes included exploration of selection bias, recruitment and follow-up rates, clinician engagement with using the Keele STarT MSK tool and matching patients to treatments.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 33 - 33
1 Oct 2019
Wood L Foster N Lewis M Bronfort G Groessl E Hewitt C Miyamoto G Reme S Bishop A
Full Access

Background

Complex interventions, such as exercise for LBP, often have many treatment targets. Matching a primary outcome to the target(s) of exercise interventions may provide greater standardized mean differences (SMDs) than using an unmatched primary outcome. We aimed to explore whether the conclusions of exercise trials for LBP might differ with i) improved matching of outcomes to treatment targets and ii) the use of composite outcome measures.

Methods and Results

We investigated i) matching in five trials (n=1033) that used an unmatched primary outcome but included some of their matched outcomes as secondary outcomes; ii) composite outcomes in four trials (n=864). The composite consisted of standardised averaged matched outcomes. All analyses replicated the primary outcome analysis, applied to the matched or composite outcome in each dataset. When not possible, SMDs were calculated for the primary and matched outcomes. i) Of five trials, three had greater SMDs and increased statistical significance with matched outcomes (pooled effect SMD 0.35 (95% CI 0.16, 0.54), p=0.0003) compared to an unmatched primary outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.13 (95% CI 0.04, 0.23) p=0.007). ii) Of four composite outcomes: two matched trials had greater SMDs and improved statistical precision in the primary outcome than the composite outcome; two unmatched trials had greater SMDs and improved statistical precision in the composite compared to the primary outcome.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 2 - 2
1 Oct 2019
Konstantinou K Lewis M Dunn K Hill J Artus M Foster N
Full Access

Background and Purpose

Healthcare for sciatica is usually ‘stepped’ with initial advice and analgesia, then physiotherapy, then more invasive interventions if symptoms continue. The SCOPiC trial tested a stratified care algorithm combining prognostic and clinical characteristics to allocate patients into one of three groups, with matched care pathways, and compared the effectiveness of stratified care (SC) with non-stratified, usual care (UC).

Methods

Pragmatic two-parallel arm RCT with 476 adults recruited from 42 GP practices and randomised (1:1) to either SC or UC (238 per arm). In SC, participants in group 1 were offered up to 2 advice/treatment sessions with a physiotherapist, group 2 were offered up to 6 physiotherapy sessions, and group 3 was ‘fast-tracked’ to MRI and spinal specialist opinion. Primary outcome was time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms (6-point ordinal scale) collected via text messages. Secondary outcomes (4 and 12 months) included leg and back pain intensity, physical function, psychological status, time-off-work, satisfaction with care. Primary analysis was by intention to treat.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_9 | Pages 12 - 12
1 Sep 2019
Wood L Foster N Lewis M Bishop A
Full Access

Background

Exercise is a complex intervention, and often has more than one treatment target. Results from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions for chronic low back pain (CLBP) typically show small to moderate effect sizes, but these may differ where outcomes better reflect the targets of interventions. This review aimed to describe what treatment targets, outcome domains and primary outcome measures are used in exercise RCTs, and examined how well the selected outcome domains match the treatment targets used in each RCT.

Methods and Results

A computer-aided literature search was performed in eight databases, from inception to August 2018. Inclusion criteria: RCTs in CLBP, exercise compared to a non-exercise arm, sample size >60 per arm. Title and abstract review, subsequent full text review, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently undertaken by pairs of reviewers.

Of 18251 initially identified titles and abstracts, 23 trials were included in the review. 30 treatment targets were extracted, and 6 primary outcome domains identified. A logic model of the treatment targets and outcomes demonstrated diverse relationships. Only 5 RCTs matched their primary outcome domain to the identified treatment targets, 12 used primary outcomes that did not match the reported treatment targets, and 6 were partially matched.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1204 - 1209
1 Sep 2017
Fawi HMT Saba K Cunningham A Masud S Lewis M Hossain M Chopra I Ahuja S

Aims

To evaluate the incidence of primary venous thromboembolism (VTE), epidural haematoma, surgical site infection (SSI), and 90-day mortality after elective spinal surgery, and the effect of two protocols for prophylaxis.

Patients and Methods

A total of 2181 adults underwent 2366 elective spinal procedures between January 2007 and January 2012. All patients wore anti-embolic stockings, mobilised early and were kept adequately hydrated. In addition, 29% (689) of these were given low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) while in hospital. SSI surveillance was undertaken using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 3 - 3
1 May 2017
Wynne-Jones G Artus M Bishop A Lawton S Lewis M Main C Sowden G Wathall S Burton A van der Windt D Hay E
Full Access

Introduction

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.

Methods

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.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 97-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 27 - 27
1 Feb 2015
Whitehurst D Bryan S Lewis M Hay E Mullis R Foster N
Full Access

Purpose and background

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).

Methods

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).


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 96-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 4 - 4
1 Feb 2014
Stynes S Konstantinou K Dunn K Lewis M Hay E
Full Access

Background

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.

Methods

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).


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 29 - 29
1 Jan 2013
Foster N Mullis R Lewis M Whitehurst D Hay E
Full Access

Background and purpose

The STarT Back trial demonstrated benefits from a stratified primary care model that targets low back pain (LBP) treatment according to patient prognosis (low-, medium-, or high-risk). The current IMPaCT Back study implemented this approach in everyday primary care to investigate; i) changes in GPs' and physiotherapists' attitudes, confidence and behaviours, ii) patients' clinical outcomes, and iii) cost-effectiveness.

Method

This quality improvement study involved 5 GP practices (65 GPs and 34 physiotherapists) with before and after implementation cohorts of consecutive LBP consulters using an intention to treat analysis to compare patient data. Phase 1: Usual care data collection from clinicians and patients (pre-implementation). Phase 2: Introduction of prognostic screening and targeted treatment including a minimal GP intervention (low-risk group), systematic referral to physiotherapy (medium-risk group) and to psychologically informed physiotherapy (high-risk group). Phase 3: Post-implementation data collection from clinicians and patients.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 28 - 28
1 Jan 2013
Hill J Whitehurst D Lewis M Bryan S Dunn K Foster N Konstantinou K Main C Mason E Somerville S Sowden G Vohora K Hay E
Full Access

Background

One untested back pain treatment model is to stratify management depending on prognosis (low, medium or high-risk). This 2-arm RCT investigated: (i) overall clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified primary care (intervention), versus non-stratified current best practice (control); and (ii) whether low-risk patients had non-inferior outcomes, and medium/high-risk groups had superior outcomes.

Methods

1573 adults with back pain (+/− radiculopathy) consulting at 10 general practices in England responded to invitations to attend an assessment clinic, at which 851 eligible participants were randomised (intervention n=568; control n=283). Primary outcome using intention-to-treat analysis was the difference in change in the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included 4-month RMDQ change between arms overall, and at risk-group level at both time-points. The economic evaluation estimated incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and back pain-related health care costs.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXIX | Pages 93 - 93
1 Jul 2012
Kempshall P Guro R Lewis M Mintowt-Czyz W Chandratreya A Roy W
Full Access

Aims

Wales in collaboration with the Welsh Assembly Government, has attempted to start a national ligament register.

Introduction

Norway is the lead in Europe for running a successful national quality knee ligament registry. As yet there is no UK wide registry encompassing all forms of knee ligament surgery. The issue has been discussed at previous society meetings, but no consensus has been reached.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 5 - 5
1 Jan 2012
Konstantinou K Hider S Jordan J Lewis M Dunn K Hay E
Full Access

Purpose and background

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.

Methods

A systematic literature search of all English language peer reviewed publications was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL for the years 1994 to 2009.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 238 - 238
1 Mar 2010
Mullis R Lewis M Hay E
Full Access

Purpose of the study: The aim of this study was to develop an individualised assessment tool capable of defining clinically meaningful change within areas identified by each patient as important.

Background: Much work has been dedicated to identifying a definition of successful outcome in LBP. However, what is important to the patient is often not considered, or is poorly assessed. Goals that are important to the individual enhance self-engagement, and can serve as strong motivators of action in rehabilitation. Goal Scaling is a method which enables patients to systematically identify individualised goals, to quantify their achievement, and may provide a valid outcome of genuine importance to the patient.

Methods: A semi-structured interview was developed around the principles of goal attainment scaling, but modified to elicit patient identified individualised goals that incorporate a marker of “minimum important change” within each scale. Patients also completed measures on disability and global change in condition, and were followed-up for six months.

Results: Thirty-five patients referred to a specialised LBP clinic took part in this pilot study. Patients were able to identify specific realistic goals, and understood the concept of minimal important change within their chosen goal areas. At six months, goal attainment scores were responsive to change, associated with disability and global change in condition, and able to distinguish between “improvers” and “non-improvers”.

Conclusion: Goal scaling provided useful additional information about the problems associated with, and the progress of patients with LBP. Work on a self-complete version for use in clinical trials is underway.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_II | Pages 219 - 219
1 Jul 2008
Hill J Dunn K Mullis R Lewis M Main C Hay E
Full Access

Background: Patients with LBP, ‘at risk’ of persistent symptoms, require targeted treatment in primary care. We have therefore developed and validated a new screening tool to classify these patients into appropriate management groups.

Methods: A list of LBP prognostic indicators was compiled by reviewing published studies and analysing existing datasets. Indicators were selected for the tool according to face and construct validity, consistency and strength of association. For each indicator outcome measure (e.g. Pain Catastrophising Scale) an individual question (e.g. ‘I feel that my back pain is terrible and that it is never going to get an better’) was selected for inclusion (ROC analysis). The tool was modelled to classify patients into 3 categories of risk. The screening tool and corresponding complete scales were mailed to 244 consecutive primary care LBP consulters. Individual items were validated against complete scales. Reliability was examined on 53 responders.

Results: This new screening tool classifies patients using 9-items to cover 8 key prognostic indicators. The questionnaires returned by 131 consulters demonstrated excellent construct validity for all individual items. 33% of patients were classified as ‘high risk’ (psychosocial and physical factors), 44% ‘intermediate risk’ (physical factors alone) and 23% ‘low risk’. Discrimination between groups across relevant constructs such as pain, disability, days off work and psychological distress was highly significant. Test-retest reliability was moderate (kappa = 0.54).

Conclusions: A novel LBP screening tool has been validated in primary care and effectively classifies patients ‘at risk’ of persistent symptoms. This will facilitate appropriate targeting of treatment.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 8 - 8
1 Mar 2008
Evans A Gillespie G Dabke H Lewis M Roberts P Kulkarni R
Full Access

Proximal humeral fractures are common and often occur in osteoporotic bone. Suture fixation utilises the rotator cuff tendons as well as bone providing adequate stability and avoids complications associated with metalwork insertion.

Surgical exposure was via a delto-pectoral approach with minimal dissection of the fracture site. Initially a 2 suture technique was utilized with heavy ethibond sutures passed through drill holes either side of the bicipital groove; however, because of concerns about varus instability the technique now uses a third suture placed laterally acting as a tension band to prevent varus collapse. Patients with Neer 2 and 3 part fractures treated with suture fixation were assessed clinically (using the Constant score) and radiologically at a mean of 27 months post fracture.

To date 24 patients have been studied. The average age of the patients in our series was 70.2. All fractures progressed to union with no cases of radiological avascular necrosis. We had 2 cases of mal-union (-one varus and one valgus-), both with a 2-suture technique. One patient had early loss of fixation; re-exploration was performed with stability conferred by a third lateral suture. Active abduction > 120o was achieved in 9 patients with a mean Constant score of 72 compared to 89 on the un-injured contra-lateral side. We have demonstrated that suture fixation of displaced proximal humeral fractures is an effective alternative to fixation using metalwork. The advantages are that minimal soft tissue stripping of the fracture site is required and the potential problems associated with metalwork insertion into osteoporotic bone are avoided. Following one case of varus mal-union with a 2-suture technique we now routinely use a third suture to act as a lateral tension band.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 87-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 36 - 37
1 Mar 2005
Mullis R Dziedzic K Lewis M Cooper V Main C Watson P Hay E
Full Access

Purpose of the study: To investigate whether video analysis, in addition to self-reported paper audit, could elucidate expected differences in the content of two interventions.

Background: We have completed a randomised clinical trial comparing two types of physiotherapy for subacute low back pain (“hands on” physiotherapy versus a pain management programme). An essential component in conducting clinical trials is to audit the interventions to check for compliance with the protocol. We use two approached:

self complete proforma

video recording.

Methods: i) Treatment content was recorded on a proforma by the physiotherapists after each session.

ii) A check-list of treatment modalities was constructed from this proforma. Twelve sessions were recorded on video (one new and one review patient for each therapist). The recordings were rated by 3 blinded, independent observers using the checklist. These were compared with the self-report audit forms relating to the same physiotherapy session.

Results: Analysis of the videos showed good levels of agreement (67%) between the 3 observers. Agreement between the video content and paper audit was also good (84%, _ = 0.59). The complete paper audit revealed clear differences between the treatment arms. Patients undergoing the “handson” treatment received manual therapy, whereas patients in the pain management group had specific issues addressed in the course of the consultation.

Conclusions: Feasible, reliable methods of confirming the content of interventions delivered in pragmatic trials are difficult to achieve. Self report paper audits are simple but rely upon the honesty and accuracy of the completer, and may not pick up subtle differences in approach. Video recording is time consuming, may be threatening to the treating practitioner and patient, and is difficult to analyse. A compromise approach involving sample video recordings along with paper self complete audit was able to validate the content of the treatments delivered.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 87-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 39 - 39
1 Mar 2005
Mullis R Lewis M Croft P Hay E
Full Access

Purpose of the study: The aim of this ongoing research is to develop and utilise an individualised, patient-centred approach to outcome measurement in LBP. Specifically, we aim to develop an assessment tool capable of defining “clinically meaningful change” within each patient.

Background: Much work has been dedicated to identifying a definition of successful outcome in LBP. A consensus meeting suggested that 5 discrete domains merit measurement (back specific function, generic health status, pain, work disability and patient satisfaction). Validated tools exist which measure each of these domains. However, how to define what constitutes a “clinically meaningful improvement” as distinct from a “statistically significant change” remains problematic.

Patient satisfaction has been identified as a key dimension in the assessment of outcome in LBP. However what outcome is important to the patient is often not considered, or is poorly assessed. Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is a method for systematically targeting individualised goals, and quantifying their achievement. This will provide a valid outcome measure of genuine importance to the patient.

Methods: A semi-structured interview is being developed around the principles of GAS, but specifically modified to elicit patient identified individualised goals that incorporate a marker of “minimum important change” within each scale.

Results: Pilot work has shown that patients can identify meaningful individual goals, which will serve as individualised outcome measures. Furthermore, the notion of achieving a “minimum important change” based around these concepts and within these target scales appears to be generally understood.

Conclusions: Development of an individualised assessment tool capable of defining “clinically meaningful change” within each patient is ongoing. Future work will focus on identifying associations between this individualised outcome and other widely used measures in LBP research, and in establishing the clinical practicality of this approach for use in treatment trials.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 85-B, Issue SUPP_II | Pages 113 - 113
1 Feb 2003
Ahuja S Lewis M Howes J Davies PR
Full Access

To assess the results of this technique for stabilisation of severe spondylolisthesis, 12 patients with symptomatic severe spondylolisthesis underwent this procedure. The slipped L5 vertebra was stabilized using a hollow medullary screw through the posterior part of the body of S1 into the slipped L5 body, supplemented with pedicle screws into L5 and S1 with posterolateral fusion.

At one year follow-up, all but one patient had improved in leg pain. 2 patients were aware of the prominent pedicle screws. 360° fusion was achieved without any progression of spondylolisthesis. Thus 360° fusion for severe L5-S1 spondylo-listhesis can be achieved effectively using this technique.