IMPLEMENTING BACK PAIN TREATMENT PATHWAYS IN CLINICAL PRACTICE: QUALITATATIVE ANALYSIS OF STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS

Background
Evidence-based practice advocates utilising best current research evidence, while reflecting patient preference and clinical expertise in decision making. Successfully incorporating this evidence into practice is a complex process. Based on recommendations of existing guidelines and systematic evidence reviews conducted using the GRADE approach, treatment pathways for common spinal pain disorders were developed.

Aims
The aim of this study was to identify important potential facilitators to the integration of these pathways into routine clinical practice.

Methods
A 22 person stakeholder group consisting of patient representatives, clinicians, researchers and members of relevant clinical interest groups took part in a series of moderated focus groups, followed up with individual, semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using content analysis.

Results
Participants identified a number of issues which were categorized into broad themes. Common facilitators to implementation included continual education and synthesis of research evidence which is reflective of everyday practice; as well as the use of clear, unambiguous messages in recommendations. Meeting additional training needs in new or extended areas of practice was also recognized as an important factor. Different stakeholders identified specific areas which could be associated with successful uptake. Patients frequently defined early involvement in a shared decision making process as important. Clinicians identified case based examples and information on important prognostic indicators as useful tools to aiding decisions.

Conclusion
A number of potential implementation strategies were identified. Further work will examine the impact of these and other important factors on the integration of evidence-based treatment recommendations into clinical practice.

PROGNOSTIC FACTORS PREDICTING FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME AT FOUR MONTHS FOLLOWING ACUTE ANKLE SPRAIN

PROGNOSTIC FACTORS PREDICTING FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME AT FOUR MONTHS FOLLOWING ACUTE ANKLE SPRAINBleakley C.M.1, O'Connor S.R.1, Tully M.A.2, Rocke L.G.3, MacAuley D.C.1, Bradbury I.4, Keegan S.4, McDonough S.M.11University of Ulster, Health & Rehabilitation Sciences Research Institute, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom, 2Queen's University, UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health (NI), Belfast, United Kingdom, 3Royal Victoria Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Belfast, United Kingdom, 4Frontier Science (Scotland), Kincraig, Inverness-shire, United KingdomPurpose: To identify clinically relevant factors assessed following acute ankle sprain that predict functional recovery at four months post-injury.Relevance: Ankle sprains are one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries with an estimated 5000 new cases occurring each day in the United Kingdom. In the acute phase, ankle sprains may be associated with pain and loss of function. In the longer-term there is a risk of residual problems including chronic pain or reinjury. Few studies have sought to examine factors associated with a poor long-term prognosis.Participants: 101 patients (Age: Mean (SD) 25.9 (7.9) years; Body Mass Index (BMI): 25.3 (3.5) kg/m2) with an acute grade 1 or 2 ankle sprain attending an accident and emergency department or sports injury clinic. Exclusion criteria included complete (grade 3) rupture of the ankle ligament complex, bony ankle injury or multiple injuries.Methods: Participants were allocated as part of a randomised controlled trial to an accelerated intervention incorporating intermittent ice and early therapeutic exercise or a standard protection, rest, ice, compression, and elevation intervention for one week. Treatment was then standardised in both groups and consisted of ankle rehabilitation exercises focusing on muscle strengthening, neuromuscular training, and sports specific functional exercises for a period of approximately four to six weeks. On initial assessment age, gender, mechanism of injury, presence of an audible pop or snap and the presence of contact during the injury were recorded. The following factors were also recorded at baseline and at one and four weeks post-injury: weight-bearing dorsi-flexion test, lateral hop test, presence of medial pain on palpation and a positive impingement sign. Functional status was assessed using the Karlsson score at baseline, at week four and at four months. Reinjury rates were recorded throughout the intervention phase and at four months.Analysis: A mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the effect of each factor on functional status at week four and at four months. Significance was set at a Bonferroni adjusted level of 0.0125 (0.05/4).Results: Eighty-five participants (84%) were available at final follow-up assessment. Pain on weight-bearing dorsi-flexion and lateral hop tests at week four were both associated with a lower functional score at four months post-injury (P = 0.011 and P = 0.001). No other significant interactions were observed at any other timepoint (baseline or week one). There were only two reinjuries within the four month follow-up period with a further two reported at approximately six months post-injury. We were therefore unable to determine whether any factors were associated with an increased risk of reinjury.Conclusions: Potential prognostic factors on initial or early examination after acute ankle sprain did not help predict functional recovery at four months post-injury. However, pain on weight-bearing dorsi-flexion and lateral hop tests observed at four weeks were associated with a slower rate of recovery.Implications: Some clinical tests may help identify patients at risk of poor functional recovery after acute ankle sprain. However, further work is required to examine factors which may be predictive on initial assessment.Key-words: 1. Prognostic factors 2. Recovery 3. Ankle sprainFunding acknowledgements: Physiotherapy Research Foundation, Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, Strategic Priority Fund; Department of Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland.Ethics approval: Office for Research Ethics Committee (UK).

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS: EFFECTS OF WALKING EXERCISE IN CHRONIC MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS: EFFECTS OF WALKING EXERCISE IN CHRONIC MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN O'Connor S.R.1, Tully M.A.2, Ryan B.3, Baxter D.G.3, Bradley J.M.1, McDonough S.M.11University of Ulster, Health & Rehabilitation Sciences Research Institute, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom, 2Queen's University, UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health (NI), Belfast, United Kingdom, 3University of Otago, Centre for Physiotherapy Research, Dunedin, New ZealandPurpose: To examine the effects of walking exercise on pain and self-reported function in adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain.Relevance: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is a major cause of morbidity, exerting a substantial influence on long-term health status and overall quality of life. Current treatment recommendations advocate various aerobic exercise interventions for such conditions. Walking may represent an ideal form of exercise due to its relatively low impact. However, there is currently limited evidence for its effectiveness.Participants: Not applicable.Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was undertaken by two independent reviewers according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the recommendations of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group. Six electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PEDro, Sport DISCUS and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for relevant papers published up to January 2010 using MeSH terms. All randomised or non-randomised studies published in full were considered for inclusion. Studies were required to include adults aged 18 years or over with a diagnosis of chronic low back pain, osteoarthritis or fibromyalgia. Studies were excluded if they involved peri-operative or post-operative interventions or did not include a comparative, non exercise or non-walking exercise control group. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force system was used to assess methodological quality. Data for pain and self-reported function were extracted and converted to a score out of 100.Analysis: Data were pooled and analyzed using RevMan (v.5.0.24). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the X2 and I2 test statistics. A random effects model was used to calculate the mean differences and 95% CIs. Data were analyzed by length of final follow-up which was categorized as short (≤8 weeks post randomisation), mid (2-12 months) or long-term (>12 months).Results: A total of 4324 articles were identified and twenty studies (1852 participants) meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the review. Overall, studies were judged to be of at least fair methodological quality. The most common sources of likely bias were identified as lack of concealed allocation and failure to adequately address incomplete data. Data from 12 studies were suitable for meta-analysis. Walking led to reductions in pain at short (<8 weeks post randomisation) (-8.44 [-14.54, -2.33]) and mid-term (>8 weeks - 12 month) follow-up (-9.28 [-16.34, -2.22]). No effect was observed for long-term (>12 month) data (-2.49 [-7.62, 2.65]). For function, between group differences were observed for short (-11.57 [-16.06, -7.08]) and mid-term data (-13.26 [-16.91, -9.62]). A smaller effect was also observed at long-term follow-up (-5.60 [-7.70, -3.50]).Conclusions: Walking interventions were associated with statistically significant improvements in pain and function at short and mid-term follow-up. Long-term data were limited but indicated that these effects do not appear to be maintained beyond twelve months.Implications: Walking may be an effective form of exercise for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. However, further research is required which examines longer term follow-up and dose-response issues in this population.Key-words: 1. Walking exercise 2. Musculoskeletal pain 3. Systematic reviewFunding acknowledgements: Department of Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland.Ethics approval: Not applicable.

Effect of accelerated rehabilitation on function after ankle sprain:randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare an accelerated intervention incorporating early therapeutic exercise after acute ankle sprains with a standard protection, rest, ice, compression, and elevation intervention.

DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessor.

SETTING: Accident and emergency department and university based sports injury clinic.

PARTICIPANTS: 101 patients with an acute grade 1 or 2 ankle sprain.

INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to an accelerated intervention with early therapeutic exercise (exercise group) or a standard protection, rest, ice, compression, and elevation intervention (standard group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was subjective ankle function (lower extremity functional scale). Secondary outcomes were pain at rest and on activity, swelling, and physical activity at baseline and at one, two, three, and four weeks after injury. Ankle function and rate of reinjury were assessed at 16 weeks.

RESULTS: An overall treatment effect was in favour of the exercise group (P=0.0077); this was significant at both week 1 (baseline adjusted difference in treatment 5.28, 98.75% confidence interval 0.31 to 10.26; P=0.008) and week 2 (4.92, 0.27 to 9.57; P=0.0083). Activity level was significantly higher in the exercise group as measured by time spent walking (1.2 hours, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.4 v 1.6, 1.3 to 1.9), step count (5621 steps, 95% confidence interval 4399 to 6843 v 7886, 6357 to 9416), and time spent in light intensity activity (53 minutes, 95% confidence interval 44 to 60 v 76, 58 to 95). The groups did not differ at any other time point for pain at rest, pain on activity, or swelling. The reinjury rate was 4% (two in each group).

CONCLUSION: An accelerated exercise protocol during the first week after ankle sprain improved ankle function; the group receiving this intervention was more active during that week than the group receiving standard care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13903946.

“There’s a Catch-22”. The complexities of pain management for people with advanced dementia nearing the end of life: a qualitative exploration of physicians’ perspectives

Background: Pain management is a cornerstone of palliative care. The clinical issues encountered by physicians when managing pain in patients dying with advanced dementia, and how these may impact on prescribing and treatment, are unknown. Aim: To explore physicians’ experiences of pain management for patients nearing the end of life, the impact of these on prescribing and treatment approaches, and the methods employed to overcome these challenges. Design: Qualitative, semi-structured interview study exploring: barriers to and facilitators of pain management, prescribing and treatment decisions, and training needs. Thematic analysis was used to elicit key themes. Settings/Participants: Twenty-three physicians, responsible for treating patients with advanced dementia approaching the end of life, were recruited from primary care (n=9), psychiatry (n=7) and hospice care (n=7). Results: Six themes emerged: diagnosing pain, complex prescribing and treatment approaches, side-effects and adverse events, route of administration, importance of sharing knowledge and training needs. Knowledge exchange was often practised through liaison with physicians from other specialties. Cross-specialty mentoring, and the creation of knowledge networks were believed to improve pain management in this patient population. Conclusions: Pain management in end-stage dementia is complex, requiring cross-population of knowledge between palliative care specialists and non-specialists, in addition to collateral information provided by other health professionals and patients’ families. Regular, cost- and time-effective mentoring and ongoing professional development are perceived to be essential in empowering physicians to meet clinical challenges in this area.