Dataset Information

Subgrouping patients with sciatica in primary care for matched care pathways: development of a subgrouping algorithm.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sciatica is a painful condition managed by a stepped care approach for most patients. Currently, there are no decision-making tools to guide matching care pathways for patients with sciatica without evidence of serious pathology, early in their presentation. This study sought to develop an algorithm to subgroup primary care patients with sciatica, for initial decision-making for matched care pathways, including fast-track referral to investigations and specialist spinal opinion.

Methods

This was an analysis of existing data from a UK NHS cohort study of patients consulting in primary care with sciatica (n?=?429). Factors potentially associated with referral to specialist services, were identified from the literature and clinical opinion. Percentage of patients fast-tracked to specialists, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for identifying this subgroup, were calculated.

Results

The algorithm allocates patients to 1 of 3 groups, combining information about four clinical characteristics, and risk of poor prognosis (low, medium or high risk) in terms of pain-related persistent disability. Patients at low risk of poor prognosis, irrespective of clinical characteristics, are allocated to group 1. Patients at medium risk of poor prognosis who have all four clinical characteristics, and patients at high risk of poor prognosis with any three of the clinical characteristics, are allocated to group 3. The remainder are allocated to group 2. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of the algorithm for patient allocation to fast-track group 3, were 51, 73 and 22% respectively.

Conclusion

We developed an algorithm to support clinical decisions regarding early referral for primary care patients with sciatica. Limitations of this study include the low positive predictive value and use of data from one cohort only. On-going research is investigating whether the use of this algorithm and the linked care pathways, leads to faster resolution of sciatica symptoms.

SUBMITTER: Konstantinou K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6611047 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Subgrouping patients with sciatica in primary care for matched care pathways: development of a subgrouping algorithm.

Konstantinou Kika K Dunn Kate M KM van der Windt Danielle D Ogollah Reuben R Jasani Vinay V Foster Nadine E NE

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20190704 1

<h4>Background</h4>Sciatica is a painful condition managed by a stepped care approach for most patients. Currently, there are no decision-making tools to guide matching care pathways for patients with sciatica without evidence of serious pathology, early in their presentation. This study sought to develop an algorithm to subgroup primary care patients with sciatica, for initial decision-making for matched care pathways, including fast-track referral to investigations and specialist spinal opinio ...[more]

PMID: 31272439

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care. Methods:We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as "completely recovered" or "much better" on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581. Findings:Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10?601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4-13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4-14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89-1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care. Interpretation:The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica. Funding:National Institute for Health Research.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary antibody deficiencies (PAD) are characterized by a heterogeneous clinical presentation and low prevalence, contributing to a median diagnostic delay of 3-10 years. This increases the risk of morbidity and mortality from undiagnosed PAD, which may be prevented with adequate therapy. To reduce the diagnostic delay of PAD, we developed a screening algorithm using primary care electronic health record (EHR) data to identify patients at risk of PAD. This screening algorithm can be used as an aid to notify general practitioners when further laboratory evaluation of immunoglobulins should be considered, thereby facilitating a timely diagnosis of PAD.MethodsCandidate components for the algorithm were based on a broad range of presenting signs and symptoms of PAD that are available in primary care EHRs. The decision on inclusion and weight of the components in the algorithm was based on the prevalence of these components among PAD patients and control groups, as well as clinical rationale.ResultsWe analyzed the primary care EHRs of 30 PAD patients, 26 primary care immunodeficiency patients and 58,223 control patients. The median diagnostic delay of PAD patients was 9.5 years. Several candidate components showed a clear difference in prevalence between PAD patients and controls, most notably the mean number of antibiotic prescriptions in the 4 years prior to diagnosis (5.14 vs. 0.48). The final algorithm included antibiotic prescriptions, diagnostic codes for respiratory tract and other infections, gastro-intestinal complaints, auto-immune symptoms, malignancies and lymphoproliferative symptoms, as well as laboratory values and visits to the general practitioner.ConclusionsIn this study, we developed a screening algorithm based on a broad range of presenting signs and symptoms of PAD, which is suitable to implement in primary care. It has the potential to considerably reduce diagnostic delay in PAD, and will be validated in a prospective study. Trial registration The consecutive prospective study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov under NCT05310604.

Project description:BACKGROUND CONTEXT:Evidence is lacking on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in patients seeing their primary care physicians. This evidence could guide timely appropriate treatment and referral decisions. PURPOSE:The present study aims to describe the prognosis and prognostic factors in primary care patients with low back-related leg pain and sciatica. STUDY DESIGN:This is a prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE:The present study included adults visiting their family doctor with back-related leg pain in the United Kingdom. OUTCOME MEASURES:Information about pain, function, psychological, and clinical variables, was collected. Good outcome was defined as 30% or more reduction in disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). METHODS:Participants completed the questionnaires, underwent clinical assessments, received a magnetic resonance imaging scan, and were followed-up 12 months later. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the prognostic value of six a priori defined variable sets (leg pain duration, pain intensity, neuropathic pain, psychological factors, clinical examination, and imaging variables). A combined model, including variables from all models, examined independent effects. The National Institute for Health Research funded the study. There are no conflicts of interest. RESULTS:A total of 609 patients were included. At 12 months, 55% of patients improved in both the total sample and the sciatica group. For the whole cohort, longer leg pain duration (odds ratio [OR] 0.41; confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.90), higher identity score (OR 0.70; CI 0.53-0.93), and patient's belief that the problem will last a long time (OR 0.27; CI 0.13-0.57) were the strongest independent prognostic factors negatively associated with improvement. These last two factors were similarly negatively associated with improvement in the sciatica subgroup. CONCLUSIONS:The present study provides new evidence on the prognosis and prognostic factors of back-related leg pain and sciatica in primary care. Just over half of patients improved at 12 months. Patient's belief of recovery timescale and number of other symptoms attributed to the pain are independent prognostic factors. These factors can be used to inform and direct decisions about timing and intensity of available therapeutic options.

Project description:ObjectiveThe study aimed to develop a comprehensive algorithm (meta-algorithm) for primary care encounters of patients with multimorbidity. We used a novel, case-based and evidence-based procedure to overcome methodological difficulties in guideline development for patients with complex care needs.Study designSystematic guideline development methodology including systematic evidence retrieval (guideline synopses), expert opinions and informal and formal consensus procedures.SettingPrimary care.InterventionThe meta-algorithm was developed in six steps:1. Designing 10 case vignettes of patients with multimorbidity (common, epidemiologically confirmed disease patterns and/or particularly challenging health care needs) in a multidisciplinary workshop.2. Based on the main diagnoses, a systematic guideline synopsis of evidence-based and consensus-based clinical practice guidelines was prepared. The recommendations were prioritised according to the clinical and psychosocial characteristics of the case vignettes.3. Case vignettes along with the respective guideline recommendations were validated and specifically commented on by an external panel of practicing general practitioners (GPs).4. Guideline recommendations and experts' opinions were summarised as case specific management recommendations (N-of-one guidelines).5. Healthcare preferences of patients with multimorbidity were elicited from a systematic literature review and supplemented with information from qualitative interviews.6. All N-of-one guidelines were analysed using pattern recognition to identify common decision nodes and care elements. These elements were put together to form a generic meta-algorithm.ResultsThe resulting meta-algorithm reflects the logic of a GP's encounter of a patient with multimorbidity regarding decision-making situations, communication needs and priorities. It can be filled with the complex problems of individual patients and hereby offer guidance to the practitioner. Contrary to simple, symptom-oriented algorithms, the meta-algorithm illustrates a superordinate process that permanently keeps the entire patient in view.ConclusionThe meta-algorithm represents the back bone of the multimorbidity guideline of the German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians. This article presents solely the development phase; the meta-algorithm needs to be piloted before it can be implemented.

Project description:BackgroundFew studies have examined primary care management for acute sciatica, including referral to physical therapy.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether early referral to physical therapy reduced disability more than usual care (UC) alone for patients with acute sciatica.DesignRandomized controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02391350).Setting2 health care systems in Salt Lake City, Utah.Patients220 adults aged 18 to 60 years with sciatica of less than 90 days' duration who were making an initial primary care consultation.InterventionAll participants received imaging and medication at the discretion of the primary care provider before enrollment. A total of 110 participants randomly assigned to UC were provided 1 session of education, and 110 participants randomly assigned to early physical therapy (EPT) were provided 1 education session and then referred for 4 weeks of physical therapy, including exercise and manual therapy.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (OSW) score after 6 months. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity, patient-reported treatment success, health care use, and missed workdays.ResultsParticipants in the EPT group had greater improvement from baseline to 6 months for the primary outcome (relative difference, -5.4 points [95% CI, -9.4 to -1.3 points]; P = 0.009). The OSW and several secondary outcomes favored EPT after 4 weeks. After 1 year, between-group differences favored EPT for the OSW (relative difference, -4.8 points [CI, -8.9 to -0.7 points]) and back pain intensity (relative difference, -1.0 points [CI, -1.6 to -0.4 points]). The EPT group was more likely to self-report treatment success after 1 year (45.2%) than the UC group (27.6%) (relative risk, 1.6 [CI, 1.1 to 2.4]). There were no significant differences in health care use or missed workdays.LimitationThe patients and providers were unblinded, and specific physical therapy interventions responsible for effects could not be determined.ConclusionReferral from primary care to physical therapy for recent-onset sciatica improved disability and other outcomes compared with UC.Primary funding sourceAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Project description:ObjectivesAmid a political agenda for integrated, high-value care, the UK is implementing its Low Back and Radicular Pain Pathway. To align care with need, it is imperative to understand the patients' perspective. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to explore how people experience being managed for sciatica within an National Health Service (NHS) pathway.DesignQualitative interpretative study.SettingMusculoskeletal Service in an NHS, Primary Care Trust, UK.ParticipantsThe sample comprised 14 people aged ≥18 years with a clinical presentation of sciatica, who were currently under the care of a specialist physiotherapist (the specialist spinal triage practitioner), had undergone investigations (MRI) and received the results within the past 6 weeks. People were excluded if they had previously undergone spinal surgery or if the suspected cause of symptoms was cauda equina syndrome or sinister pathology. Participants were sampled purposively for variation in age and gender. Data were collected using individual semi-structured interviews (duration: 38-117 min; median: 82.6 min), which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsA series of problems with the local pathway (insufficient transparency and information; clinician-led decisions; standardised management; restricted access to specialist care; and a lack of collaboration between services) made it difficult for patients to access the management they perceived necessary. Patients were therefore required to be independent and proactive or have agency. This was, however, difficult to achieve (due to the impact of sciatica and because patients lacked the necessary skills, funds and support) and together with the pathway issues, this negated patients' capability to manage sciatica.ConclusionsThis novel paper explores how patients experience the process of being managed within a sciatica pathway. While highlighting the need to align with recommended best practice, it shows the need to be more person-centred and to support and empower patient agency.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov reference (UOS-2307-CR); Pre-results.

Dataset Information

Subgrouping patients with sciatica in primary care for matched care pathways: development of a subgrouping algorithm.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Subgrouping patients with sciatica in primary care for matched care pathways: development of a subgrouping algorithm.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets