header advert
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 9 - 9
1 Oct 2019
Corp N Mansell G Stynes S Wynne-Jones G Hill J van der Windt D
Full Access

Background and aims

The EU-funded Back-UP project aims to develop a cloud computer platform to guide the treatment of low back and neck pain (LBNP) in first contact care and early rehabilitation. In order to identify evidence-based treatment options that can be recommended and are accessible to people with LBNP across Europe, we conducted a systematic review of recently published guidelines.

Methods

Electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Epistemonikos, PEDro, TRIP, NICE, SIGN, WHO, Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) and DynaMed Plus were searched. We searched for guidelines published by European health professional or guideline development organisations since 2013, focusing on the primary care management of adult patients presenting with back or neck pain (including whiplash associated symptoms, radicular pain, and pregnancy-related LBP). The AGREE-II tool was used to assess the quality of guideline development and reporting.


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. 95-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 6 - 6
1 Jan 2013
Mansell G Hill J Vowles K van der Windt D
Full Access

Introduction

The STarT Back trial demonstrated that targeting back pain treatment according to patient prognosis (low, medium or high-risk subgroups) is effective. However, the mechanisms leading to these improved treatment outcomes remain unknown. This study aimed to identify which psychological variables included in the study were mediating treatment outcome for all patients and within the low, medium and high-risk subgroups.

Methods

Secondary analysis was conducted on 466 patients randomised to the active treatment arm with 4-month follow-up available. Psychological variables included depression (HADs), fear (TSK), catastrophising (PCS), bothersomeness and illness perception constructs (IPQ brief) e.g. personal control. Treatment outcome was characterised using change in disability score (RMDQ) at 4-months. Residualised change scores were calculated for each variable and Pearson's correlations were calculated overall and at the subgroup level to determine potential mediating variables for disability improvement.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 486 - 486
1 Nov 2011
Artus M van der Windt D Jordan K Hay E
Full Access

Objectives: To assess the evidence for a similar pattern of response to treatment among non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) patients in clinical trials.

Design: A systematic review of published trials on NSLBP and meta-analysis of within-group treatment effect calculated as the Standardised Mean Difference (SMD).

Data source: The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials’ database (CENTRAL), April 2007.

Review methods: We included randomised controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of primary care treatments in patients with NSLBP aged 18 years or over. We excluded trials conducted in patients with LBP of identifiable cause (e.g. disc herniation or arthritis), post-operative or post-traumatic back pain, or back pain during pregnancy or labour. We chose outcome measures commonly used in the majority of NSLBP trials, namely the Visual Analogue scale (VAS) for pain severity, Roland Morris Disability questionnaire (RMDQ) and Oswestry Disability questionnaire (ODQ) for physical functioning.

Results: 118 trials investigating a wide range of primary care treatment for NSLBP were included. In spite of heterogeneity, we found evidence for a similar pattern of symptom improvement represented by large SMDs at six weeks follow up ((0.86 for pain, 95% CI = 0.65,1.07, 0.97 for RMDQ, 95% CI = 0.66,1.28 and 0.98 for ODQ, 95% CI = 0.62,1.33) followed by much smaller further change at 13 week (pain 1.07 95% CI = 0.87,1.27, RMDQ 0.93 95% CI = 0.67,1.20, ODQ 0.92 95% CI = 0.70,1.14), 27 week (pain 1.03 95% CI = 0.82,1.25, RMDQ 0.91 95% CI = 0.59,1.24, ODQ 1.08 95% CI = 0.80,1.36 and 52 week (pain 0.88 95% CI = 0.60,1.1, RMDQ 1.01 95% CI = 0.68,1.34, ODQ 1.14 95% CI = 0.88,1.39). There was no statistically significant difference between responses in various trials arms (index treatment, active comparator treatment, placebo or sham treatment, usual care or waiting list controls). There was also no statistically significant difference between responses to pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments.

Conclusions: NSLBP symptoms seem to improve very well and in a similar pattern in clinical trials following a wide variety of active as well as inactive treatments. It is important to explore factors other than the treatments themselves that might influence symptom improvement. Exploring possible sources of underlying heterogeneity in responses might lead to some of these factors.

Conflict of Interest: None

Source of Funding: This work is part of a PhD fellowship funded by the arc (Arthritis research campaign).