Associations Between Relative Value Units and Patient-Reported Back Pain and Disability.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gold LS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5384601 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan-Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Associations Between Relative Value Units and Patient-Reported Back Pain and Disability.
Gold Laura S LS Bryan Matthew M Comstock Bryan A BA Bresnahan Brian W BW Deyo Richard A RA Nedeljkovic Srdjan S SS Nerenz David R DR Heagerty Patrick P Jarvik Jeffrey G JG
Gerontology & geriatric medicine 20170116
<b>Objective:</b> To describe associations between health care utilization measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). <b>Method:</b> Primary data were collected from patients ≥65 years with low back pain visits from 2011 to 2013. Six PROs of pain and functionality were collected 12 and 24 months after the index visits and total and spine-specific relative value units (RVUs) from electronic health records were tabulated over 1 year. We calculated correlation coefficients between RVUs and 12- ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Minimizing the number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can reduce patient burden. The primary aim of the present study was to investigate whether physical therapists (PTs) can estimate psychological PROM scores in patients with low back pain (LBP) through physical therapy evaluation. The secondary aims were; 1) to investigate whether the clinical experiences of PTs influence correlations between PT estimates and psychological PROM scores, and 2) to investigate the sensitivity and specificity of PT estimates for the psychological features detected by the PROMs. We recruited hospitalized patients owing to LBP, who underwent evaluation by PTs on the initial day of hospitalization. Patients completed PROMs, including the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale immediately before the initial physical therapy session. PTs rated the magnitude of patient kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS; 0 = not detected at all, 10 = very highly detected) through physical therapy evaluation immediately after the initial session. The PTs were blinded to the PROM results. We categorized PTs into two subgroups (PTs with ≥4 years and those with <4 years of clinical experience). Data from 78 patients (mean [SD] age = 60.5 [16.3] years) and 21 PTs were analyzed. A statistically significant but weak correlation (P = .04, Spearman's ρ = .24) was detected only in the total PCS scores and PT NRS scores in a dataset of all patients and PTs. Further, there were no statistically significant differences in correlations (all P >.05) between the two subgroups of PTs in all measures. Low sensitivity and high specificity of PT estimates for psychological features through physical therapy evaluation were identified in all PROMs when PT NRS scores were categorized into the binary score by 5 (negative: <5; positive: ≥5).
| S-EPMC6974035 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study was to compare outcomes and health care utilization of older patients who did versus did not fill opioid prescriptions within 90 days of initiating care for low back pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS:For patients ?65 years with new back pain visits, we used propensity scores to match those who filled no opioid prescriptions to those who filled ?2 opioid prescriptions within 90 days (and the first opioid prescription within 30?d) of the index visit. Over 24 months, we examined patient-reported outcomes, health care utilization, and subsequent opioid prescription fills. RESULTS:Among 1954 patients eligible for matching, 238 (12%) filled ?2 opioid prescriptions within 90 days; 200 of these were matched to controls. Patients with versus without early opioid prescriptions had similar patient-reported outcomes but were more likely to have filled ?1 opioid prescription 18 to 24 months after the index visit (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]=2.4 [1.5-3.9]) and to have had ?1 visit to the emergency department in the subsequent 24 months (OR, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-2.5). DISCUSSION:Among older patients with new back pain visits, filling ?2 opioid prescriptions within 90 days of the visit was associated with similar back pain-related outcomes but increased likelihood of filling opioid prescriptions 18 to 24 months later compared with matched patients who did not fill early opioid prescriptions.
| S-EPMC5837891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designRetrospective database analysis.ObjectiveA range of patient-reported outcomes were used to measure disability due to low back pain. There is not a single back pain disability measurement commonly used in all randomized controlled trials. We report here our assessment as to whether different disability measures are sufficiently comparable to allow data pooling across trials.Summary of background dataWe used individual patient data from a repository of data from back pain trials of therapist-delivered interventions.MethodsWe used data from 11 trials (n=6089 patients) that had at least 2 of the following 7 measurements: Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, Chronic Pain Grade disability score, Physical Component Summary of the 12- or 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, Patient Specific Functional Scale, Pain Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, and Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire. Within each trial, the change score between baseline and short-term follow-up was computed for each outcome and this was used to calculate the correlation between the change scores and the Cohen's ? for the 3-level outcome of change score of less than, equal to, and more than zero. It was considered feasible to pool 2 measures if they were at least moderately correlated (correlation>0.5) and have at least moderately similar responsiveness (?>0.4).ResultsAlthough all pairs of measures were found to be positively correlated, most correlations were less than 0.5, with only 1 pair of outcomes in 1 trial having a correlation of more than 0.6. All ? statistics were less than 0.4 so that in no cases were the criteria for acceptability of pooling measures satisfied.ConclusionThe lack of agreement between different outcome measures means that pooling of data on these different disability measurements in a meta-analysis is not recommended.Level of evidence2.
| S-EPMC4504533 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aims to explore (i) physiotherapists' current use in daily practice of patient-reported measurement instruments (screening tools and questionnaires) for patients with acute low back pain (LBP), (ii) the underlying reasons for using these instruments, (iii) their perceived influence on clinical decision-making, and (iv) the association with physiotherapist characteristics (gender, physiotherapy experience, LBP experience, overall e-health affinity). METHODS:Survey study among Dutch physiotherapists in a primary care setting. A sample of 650 physiotherapists recruited from LBP-related and regional primary care networks received the survey between November 2018 and January 2019, of which 85 (13%) completed it. RESULTS:Nearly all responding physiotherapists (98%) reported using screening tools or other measurement instruments in cases of acute LBP; the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (64%) and the STarT Back Screening Tool (61%) are used most frequently. These instruments are primarily used to evaluate treatment effect (53%) or assess symptoms (51%); only 35% of the respondents mentioned a prognostic purpose. Almost three-quarters (72%) reported that the instrument only minimally impacted their clinical decision-making in cases of acute LBP. CONCLUSIONS:Our survey indicates that physiotherapists frequently use patient-reported measurement instruments in cases of acute LBP, but mostly for non-prognostic reasons. Moreover, physiotherapists seem to feel that current instruments have limited added value for clinical decision-making. Possibly, a new measurement instrument (e.g., screening tool) needs to be developed that does fit the physiotherapist's needs and preferences. Our findings also suggest that physiotherapist may need to be more critical about which measurement instrument they use and for which purpose.
| S-EPMC7041183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: Numerous recently published clinical care guidelines, including the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) Guideline for Low Back Pain (LBP), call for nonpharmacological approaches to pain management. However, little data exist regarding the extent to which these guidelines have been adopted by patients and medical doctors. The study objective was to determine patient-reported treatment recommendations by medical doctors for LBP and patient compliance with those recommendations. Design: This study used a cross-sectional web and mail survey. Settings/Location: The study was conducted among Gallup Panel members across the United States. Subjects: Survey participants included 5377 U.S. adults randomly selected among Gallup Panel members. Of those, 545 reported a visit to a medical doctor within the past year for low back pain and were asked a series of follow-up questions regarding treatment recommendations. Interventions: Participants were asked about medical doctor recommendations for both drug (acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, benzodiazepines, Gabapentin, Neurontin, and cortisone injections) and nondrug (self-care treatments, massage, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and physical therapy) treatments. Outcome Measures: Participants were asked to indicate if their medical doctor recommended each drug and nondrug therapy for their LBP and if they had followed each of those treatment recommendations. Results: Ninety-six percent of patients who visited a medical doctor for LBP received a recommendation for one or more pain treatments, with 81% reporting that their medical doctor recommended both drug and nondrug therapies. Seventy-six percent of respondents were recommended acetaminophen or NSAIDs, 79% were recommended self-care treatments, 37% were recommended massage, acupuncture, or spinal manipulation, and 60% were recommended physical therapy. Nearly two-thirds of our sample reported that their doctor had recommended prescription medications, including opioids, benzodiazepines, Gabapentin, Neurontin, or cortisone injections. Reported adherence to treatment recommendations ranged from 68% for acupuncture to 94% for NSAIDs. Conclusions: One year after publication of the ACP's Guideline on LBP, patients report that medical doctors recommended both pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment approaches to patients with LBP. In the majority of cases, a combination of prescription medications and self-care were recommended, illustrating the need for additional research on the effectiveness of multi-modal treatment strategies. Patients reported that they were largely compliant with medical doctor recommendations, underscoring the influence that medical doctors have in directing patient care for LBP. These findings indicate that further work is also needed to explore the impact of personal experience, training, clinical evidence, sociocultural factors, and health plans on medical doctors therapeutic recommendations in the context of back pain.
| S-EPMC8035914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2014, the National Institutes of Health Pain Consortium Research Task Force recommended that patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) be stratified by its impact on their lives. They proposed the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) to help guide therapy and facilitate study comparability. The ISS has been evaluated as a continuous measure, but not for use as a stratification or classification scheme.ObjectivesIdentify the characteristics of successful schemes to inform the use of the ISS for stratification or classification.Study designScoping review of the peer-reviewed literature.MethodsSearch of PubMed, CINAHL, and APA PsycInfo to identify patient self-report-based classification schemes applicable to CLBP. Data were captured on the methods used for each scheme's development, the domains covered, their scoring criteria and what the classification has successfully measured. The study was reviewed and approved by the RAND Human Subjects Protection Committee (2019-0651-AM02).ResultsThe search identified 87 published articles about the development and testing of 5 classification schemes: 1) The Subgroups for Targeted Treatment (STarT) Back Screening Tool, 2) Multiaxial Assessment of Pain, 3) Graded Chronic Pain Scale, 4) Back Pain Classification Scale, and 5) Chronic Pain Risk Score. All have been shown to be predictive of future outcomes and the STarT Back has been found useful in identifying effective classification-specific treatment. Each scheme had a different classification scoring structure, was developed using different methods, and 3 included domains not found in the ISS.LimitationsExpanding the search to other databases may have identified more classification schemes. Our minimum number of publications inclusion criterion eliminated dozens of cluster analyses, some of which may have eventually been replicated.ConclusionsThe methods used to develop these successful classification schemes, especially those that use straightforward scoring schemes, should be considered for use in the development of a scheme based on the ISS.
| S-EPMC10543950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the effects of two different resistance exercise protocols on self-reported disability, fear avoidance beliefs, pain catastrophizing, and back pain symptoms in obese, older adults with low back pain (LBP).MethodsObese adults (n = 49, 60-85 yr) with chronic LBP were randomized into a total body resistance exercise intervention (TOTRX), lumbar extensor exercise intervention (LEXT), or a control group (CON). Main outcomes included perceived disability (Oswestry Disability Index, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire). Psychosocial measures included the Fear Avoidance Beliefs survey, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, and Pain Catastrophizing Scale. LBP severity was measured during three functional tasks: walking, stair climbing, and chair rise using an 11-point numerical pain rating scale.ResultsThe TOTRX group had greater reductions in self-reported disability scores due to back pain (Oswestry Disability Index, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) compared with those in the LEXT (P < 0.05). The Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores decreased in the TOTRX group compared with that in the CON group by month 4 (64.3% vs 4.8%, P < 0.05). Pain severity during chair rise activity and walking was decreased in both the LEXT and TOTRX groups relative to the CON group.ConclusionsGreater reductions in perceived disability due to LBP can be achieved with TOTRX compared with those achieved with LEXT. Pain catastrophizing and pain severity decreased most with TOTRX. The positive change in psychological outlook may assist obese, older adults with chronic back pain in reconsidering the harmfulness of the pain and facilitate regular participation in other exercise programs.
| S-EPMC4137474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To clarify the significance of mechanical impairments, pain, and functional limitations as predictors of chronic low back pain (LBP). Ninety patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP) were prospectively studied with clinical tests and questionnaires. Changes in muscle extensibility and endurance tests were evaluated and changes assessed in LBP intensity on numeric rating scale 0-10 and severity with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 0-100. In the present study we found significant associations between the 4 muscle extensibility and 2 endurance tests and pain at nonspecific patients with chronic LBP (P<0.005). The 2 muscle extensibility and 1 endurance tests were in complete equilibrium with ODI disability and hence showed similar results (P<0.005). The associations between the muscle extensibility and endurance tests and pain were significantly elevated in patients with nonspecific chronic LBP.
| S-EPMC6323331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:STUDY DESIGN:Secondary analysis of the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) cohort study. OBJECTIVE:To characterize associations of self-reported race/ethnicity with back pain (BP) patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health care utilization among older adults with a new episode of care for BP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:No prior longitudinal studies have characterized associations between multiple race/ethnicity groups, and BP-related PROs and health care utilization in the United States. METHODS:This study included 5117 participants ?65 years from three US health care systems. The primary BP-related PROs were BP intensity and back-related functional limitations over 24 months. Health care utilization measures included common diagnostic tests and treatments related to BP (spine imaging, spine-related relative value units [RVUs], and total RVUs) over 24 months. Analyses were adjusted for multiple potential confounders including sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and study site. RESULTS:Baseline BP ratings were significantly higher for blacks vs. whites (5.8 vs. 5.0; P?<?0.001). Participants in all race/ethnicity groups showed statistically significant, but modest improvements in BP over 24 months. Blacks and Hispanics did not have statistically significant improvement in BP-related functional limitations over time, unlike whites, Asians, and non-Hispanics; however, the magnitude of differences in improvement between groups was small. Blacks had less spine-related health care utilization over 24 months than whites (spine-related RVU ratio of means 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.86). Hispanics had less spine-related health care utilization than non-Hispanics (spine-related RVU ratio of means 0.60; 95% CI 0.40-0.90). CONCLUSION:Blacks and Hispanics had slightly less improvement in BP-related functional limitations over time, and less spine-related health care utilization, as compared to whites and non-Hispanics, respectively. Residual confounding may explain some of the association between race/ethnicity and health outcomes. Further studies are needed to understand the factors underlying these differences and which differences reflect disparities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:3.
| S-EPMC5972040 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Postural abnormalities in Parkinson's disease (PD) form a spectrum of functional trunk misalignment, ranging from a "typical" parkinsonian stooped posture to progressively greater degrees of spine deviation. Objective: To analyze the association between degree of postural abnormalities and disability and to determine cut-off values of trunk bending associated with limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs), motor impairment, falls, and back pain. Methods: The study population was 283 PD patients with ≥5° of forward trunk bending (FTB), lateral trunk bending (LTB) or forward neck bending (FNB). The degrees were calculated using a wall goniometer (WG) and software-based measurements (SBM). Logistic regression models were used to identify the degree of bending associated with moderate/severe limitation in ADLs (Movement Disorders Society Unified PD Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS] part II ≥17), moderate/severe motor impairment (MDS-UPDRS part III ≥33), history of falls (≥1), and moderate/severe back pain intensity (numeric rating scale ≥4). The optimal cut-off was identified using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: We found significant associations between modified Hoehn & Yahr stage, disease duration, sex, and limitation in ADLs, motor impairment, back pain intensity, and history of falls. Degree of trunk bending was associated only with motor impairment in LTB (odds ratio [OR] 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.22). ROC curves showed that patients with LTB of 10.5° (SBM, AUC 0.626) may have moderate/severe motor impairment. Conclusions: The severity of trunk misalignment does not fully explain limitation in ADLs, motor impairment, falls, and back pain. Multiple factors possibly related to an aggressive PD phenotype may account for disability in PD patients with FTB, LTB, and FNB.
| S-EPMC7136533 | biostudies-literature