Primary care doctors' management of low back pain patients--ten years after (original) (raw)
Related papers
BMC Family Practice, 2013
Background There are several guidelines dealing with the management of low back pain (LBP), but only few studies on the quality of care provided within General Practices as judged against those guidelines. The objective of this study is to analyse the management of LBP in Italian General Practice and compare it with guideline recommendations. Methods In this observational study, all patients visiting their General Practitioners (GPs) for treatment of LBP within a 8-week period were monitored for at least four weeks with regard to symptoms and diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Management of LBP was judged by pre-defined quality indicators based on guideline recommendations. Results Twenty-five of 114 eligible GPs participated in the study, representing a total of 43,012 registered patients. Of the 475 patients complaining of LBP and monitored for four weeks, 55.8% were diagnosed as having acute lumbar pain, 13.5% chronic lumbar pain, 17.1% acute sciatica, and 12.6% chronic sc...
On the course of low back pain in general practice: a one year follow up study
1998
Objectives-Knowledge on the clinical course of low back pain presented in general practice is poor. Preceding studies oVer a fragmentary view only, whereas further knowledge is important to enable the assessment of the prognosis. The object of this study is to investigate the course of low back pain presented in general practice to enable the assessment of the prognosis. Methods-A one year follow up study on the clinical course of low back pain in consecutive cases receiving usual care in general practice. During a period of two years 15 general practitioners from Amsterdam and surrounding areas included consecutive patients with both chronic and recent onset low back pain. After the initial visit, each patient was monitored for a period of 12 months. The follow up consisted of monthly postal questionnaires on the course of the low back pain and the related disability.
Outcome of general practitioner referrals to specialist outpatient clinics for back pain
The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1991
In 1983-84 general practitioners in the Oxford region kept records of their referrals to outpatient clinics over a period of six months. Five years later in 1988-89 the general practice notes of 182 patients referred for back pain were studied to determine the outcomes of their referral. The actions initiated in the outpatient clinics were compared with the general practitioners' main reason for referral recorded at the time of referral. Of the 182 patients 136 (74.7%) received specialist treatment following the outpatient referral despite the fact that general practitioners had given treatment as the main reason for referral in only 28.6% of cases. Patients' mean consultation rate for back pain declined from 4.2 consultations per annum to 0.9 (P less than 0.001) over the five year period, but there was a small but significant increase in consultations for other problems. Five years after the referral 33.3% of patients were still consulting their general practitioner for bac...
Low back pain and best practice care: A survey of general practice physicians
2010
Background: Acute low back pain (LBP) is primarily managed in general practice. We aimed to describe the usual care provided by general practitioners (GPs) and to compare this with recommendations of best practice in international evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute LBP. Methods: Care provided in 3533 patient visits to GPs for a new episode of LBP was mapped to key recommendations in treatment guidelines. The proportion of patient encounters in which care arranged by a GP aligned with these key recommendations was determined for the period 2005 through 2008 and separately for the period before the release of the local guideline in 2004 (2001-2004). Results: Although guidelines discourage the use of imaging, over one-quarter of patients were referred for imaging. Guidelines recommend that initial care should focus on advice and simple analgesics, yet only 20.5% and 17.7% of patients received these treatments, respectively. Instead, the analgesics provided were typically nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (37.4%) and opioids (19.6%). This pattern of care was the same in the periods before and after the release of the local guideline. Conclusions: The usual care provided by GPs for LBP does not match the care endorsed in international evidence-based guidelines and may not provide the best outcomes for patients. This situation has not improved over time. The unendorsed care may contribute to the high costs of managing LBP, and some aspects of the care provided carry a higher risk of adverse effects.
Study Design. Baseline description of a multicenter cohort study. Objective. To describe patients with low back pain (LBP) in both chiropractic and general practice in Denmark. Background. To optimize standards of care in the primary healthcare sector, detailed knowledge of the patient populations in different settings is needed. In Denmark, most LBP-patients access primary healthcare through chiropractic or general practice. Methods. Chiropractors and general practitioners recruited adult patients seeking care for LBP. Extensive baseline questionnaires were obtained and descriptive analyses presented separately for general and chiropractic practice patients, Mann-Whitney rank sum test and Pearson's chi-square test, were used to test for differences between the two populations. Results. Questionnaires were returned from 934 patients in chiropractic practice and 319 patients from general practice. Four out of five patients had had previous episodes, one-fourth were on sick leave,...
Chronic low back pain in general practice: the challenge of the consultation
Family Practice, 1999
Chew-Graham C and May C. Chronic low back pain in general practice: the challenge of the consultation. Family Practice 1999; 16: 46-49. Background. Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a symptom commonly presented to GPs, accounting for a significant proportion of their workload. It is also a common reason for sickness absence, and thus of national economic importance.
The approach of physiatrists to low back pain across Europe
Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation, 2018
Low back pain (LBP) is the most common type of musculoskeletal pain, thus it is one of the most commonly encountered conditions in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. The physicians who are primarily responsible for the nonsurgical management of LBP are physiatrists. The present study aimed to investigate the approaches of physiatrists to low back pain across Europe. Preferences, tendencies, and priorities in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of LBP, as well as the epidemiological data pertaining to LBP in PRM practice were evaluated in this Europe-wide study. The study was conducted under the control of the European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM) Musculoskeletal Disorders Research Committee. A total of 576 physiatrists from most European countries participated in the survey. The results show that physiatrists frequently deal with patients with LBP in their daily practice. Most patients are not referred to other departments and are treated with vari...
2014
The 2009 Spinal Model of Care published by the Western Australian Health Department via the Musculoskeletal Health Network would benefit from an update. Best-evidence synthesis and cost-risks-benefits estimations suggest that such guidelines should provide: (1) the early assessment of patients with non-malignant spinal pain (particularly low back) by a musculoskeletal clinician, be it a chiropractor, musculoskeletal physician, osteopath or musculoskeletal physiotherapist with referral within the early stages of the disorder; and (2) the provision of manipulative therapy, where indicated, as a first-line treatment while also providing rehabilitation, health promotion, and contemporary wellness/wellbeing management with the intention of avoiding chronicity. Emerging workforce capacity suggests that early assessment and evidence-based management of non-malignant spinal pain is feasible, leading to better patient outcomes. The authors and the association are hopeful that providing this ...
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2017
Background: Various health care professionals apply Spinal Manipulative Treatment (SMT) in daily practice. While the characteristics of chiropractors and manual therapists and the characteristics of their patient populations are well described, there is little research about physicians who use SMT techniques. A distinct group of physicians in The Netherlands has been trained in musculoskeletal (MSK) medicine, which includes the use of SMT. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of these physicians and their patient population. Methods: All registered MSK physicians were approached with questionnaires and telephone interviews to collect data about their characteristics. Data about patient characteristics were extracted from a web-based register. In this register physicians recorded basic patient data (age, gender, the type and duration of the main complaint, concomitant complaints and the type of referral) at the first consultation. Patients were invited to fill in web-based questionnaires to provide baseline data about previous treatments and the severity of their main complaint. Functional impairment was measured with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Results: Questionnaires were sent to 138 physicians of whom 90 responded (65%). Most physicians were trained in MSK medicine after a career in other medical specialities. They reported to combine their SMT treatment with a variety of diagnostic and treatment options part of which were only permissible for physicians, such as prescription medication and injections. The majority of patients presented with complaints of long duration (62.1% > 1 year), most frequently low back pain (48.1%) or neck pain (16.9%), with mean scores of 6.0 and 6.2, respectively, on a 0 to10 numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain intensity. Mean scores on all PROMs showed moderate impairment. Patients most frequently reported previous treatment by physical therapists (68.1%), manual therapists (37.7%) or chiropractors (17.0%). Conclusion: Our study showed that MSK physicians in The Netherlands used an array of SMT techniques. They embedded their SMT techniques in a broad array of other diagnostic and treatment options, part of which were limited to medical doctors. Most patients consulted MSK physicians with spinal pain of long duration with moderate functional impairment.