Elsevier

The Spine Journal

Volume 18, Issue 4, April 2018, Pages 614-619
The Spine Journal

Clinical Study
Activities performed and treatments conducted before consultation with a spine surgeon: are patients and clinicians following evidence-based clinical practice guidelines?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.08.259Get rights and content

Abstract

Background Context

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to ensure that evidence-based treatment is easily put into action. Whether patients and clinicians follow these guidelines is equivocal.

Purpose

The objectives of this study were to examine how many patients complaining of low back pain (LBP) underwent evidence-based medical interventional treatment in line with CPG recommendations before consultation with a spine surgeon, and to evaluate any associations between adherence to CPG recommendations and baseline factors.

Study Design/Setting

This is a cross-sectional cohort analysis at a tertiary care center.

Patient Sample

A total of 229 patients were referred for surgical consultation for an elective lumbar spinal condition.

Outcome Measures

The outcome measures include the number of CPG-recommended treatments undertaken by patients at or before the time of referral, the validated pain score, the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) health status, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score.

Methods

Questionnaires assessing demographic and functional characteristics as well as overall health care use were sent to patients immediately after their referral was received by the surgeon's office.

Results

Medications were the most common modality before consultation (74.2% of patients), of which 46.3% received opioids. The number of medications taken was significantly related to a higher ODI score (R=0.23, p=.0004), a higher pain score (R=0.15, p=.026), and a lower EQ-5D health status (R=−0.15, p=.024). In contrast, a lower pain score (7.2 vs. 7.7, p=.037) and a lower ODI score (26.6 vs. 29.9, p=.0023) were associated with performing adequate amounts of exercise. There was a significant association between lower numbers of treatments received and higher numerical pain rating scores (R=−0.14, p=.035). The majority (61.1%) of patients received two or less forms of treatment.

Conclusions

Evidence-based medical interventional treatments for patients with LBP are not being taken advantage of before spine surgery consultation. If more patients were to undertake CPG-endorsed conservative modalities, it may result in fewer unnecessary referrals from primary care physicians, and patients might not deteriorate as much while lingering on long wait lists. Further studies incorporating knowledge translation or health system pathway changes are necessary.

Introduction

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are important tools in the management of common medical conditions. The use of CPGs ensures that a consistent and evidence-based standard of care is available to all parties involved within the health care system. Several different CPGs are available in Canada to help guide treatment for individuals suffering from low back pain (LBP). One of the most predominant and highly recognized CPGs for LBP is the “Guideline for the Evidence-Informed Primary Care Management of LBP,” produced by the Toward Optimized Practice program of Alberta, Canada (TOP CPG) [1].

For CPGs to be truly useful, they must first be put into practice. Whether or not primary care physicians and allied health providers (eg, physiotherapists and chiropractors) actually heed the recommendations and provide treatment as directed is unclear [2], [3]. This is especially true when considering the volume of patients requiring treatment for LBP. Canadian spine surgeons receive a significant amount of LBP referrals, creating undesirable wait times in excess of what has been deemed to be clinically acceptable [4]. Many of these referrals are from primary care physicians for patients who are unlikely to be surgical candidates, and thereby will require only medical interventional treatment to manage their condition [5], [6].

The use of CPGs to dictate appropriate medical interventional treatment could reduce the number of unnecessary referrals to spine surgeons and decrease wait times for patients who would benefit from surgery [7]. CPG implementation may also reduce direct and indirect health care costs as patients may receive appropriate conservative care sooner and avoid clinical deterioration while waiting to see a spine specialist [8].

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether patients complaining of LBP received evidence-based medical interventional treatment, as per recommendations outlined in the TOP CPG, at the time of their referral by their primary care physician to a spine surgeon for consultation.

Section snippets

Methods

Consecutive adult patients (aged >18–80 years old) referred by primary care physicians over a 2-year period to one of two spine surgeons at a regional academic health center in Ontario, Canada, for consultation for an elective lumbar spinal condition were considered eligible for the study. Of note, this center is the only tertiary care hospital performing spinal surgery in the geographic region. Patients with cervical pathologies or adult spinal deformities (eg, scoliosis), or those with urgent

Results

A total of 229 eligible patients returned the informed consent form and completed questionnaires (equivalent to a 45% response rate) and were included in the study (Figure). Table 1 outlines the patient demographics and questionnaire results. In comparing the 229 included patients against 155 excluded patients who did not consent to the study nor complete the questionnaires (but were still eventually seen by one of two spine surgeons and hence for whom we could obtain basic data upon), we found

Discussion

In our study population, the most commonly followed medical interventional treatment recommendation was the use of medications, with opioid use representing the highest proportion of use. This is concerning, given that the Canadian Guideline for Safe and Effective Use of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain states that opioid initiation requires very careful consideration and implementation [11]. Patients who reach a certain dosage of opioid per day can actually become more sensitive to certain

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Nora McRae and Courtney Wilson for their assistance with data collection and data entry.

References (33)

  • C.E. Jensen et al.

    Economic evaluation of an implementation strategy for the management of low back pain in general practice

    Pain

    (2017)
  • M.C. Brouwers et al.

    AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care

    CMAJ

    (2010)
  • Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology

    Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines

  • M. Kahan et al.

    Canadian guideline for safe and effective use of opioids for chronic noncancer pain: clinical summary for family physicians. Part 1: general population

    Can Fam Physician

    (2011)
  • M. Lee et al.

    A comprehensive review of opioid-induced hyperalgesia

    Pain Physician

    (2011)
  • R. Chou et al.

    The effectiveness and risks of long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain: a systematic review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

    Ann Intern Med

    (2015)
  • Cited by (14)

    • Effects of telemedicine triage on efficiency and cost-effectiveness in spinal care

      2021, Spine Journal
      Citation Excerpt :

      Rather than incurring two new-patient encounter charges (one for surgeon and one subsequently for nonoperative provider), they were directed immediately to nonoperative provider to initiate and complete conservative management, to which the majority of ambulatory symptoms respond well. Layne et al. noted poor adherence to accepted guidelines of conservative treatment by primary care providers prior to referring patients to a spine surgeon [4]. They reported a low percentage (12.2%) of patients had exhausted conservative modalities prior to the referral, and in a significant segment of patients, the only treatment was narcotic pain medication.

    • Complementing or conflicting? A qualitative study of osteopaths’ perceptions of NICE low back pain and sciatica guidelines in the UK

      2019, International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Assumptions of patient uniformity can restrict the utility of CPGs for clinicians dealing with patients who have complex multi-morbidities and can also lead to less patient-centred care. As a result of these obstacles, implementation of NSLBP guidelines by musculoskeletal HCPs is inconsistent, which may result in inappropriate care, such as reduced use of conservative treatments and unnecessary referrals for imaging and surgical interventions [28,29]. Although interventions have been conducted to change clinicians' usage of CPGs, passive dissemination of guidelines has been ineffective in changing behaviour [30].

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    FDA device/drug status: Not applicable.

    Author disclosures: EIL: Nothing to disclose. DMR: Consulting: Palladian Health, LLC (C), Pacira Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (C), outside the submitted work. MJC: Nothing to disclose. PP: Nothing to disclose. SPK: Nothing to disclose. EKW: Grant: The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization (TOHAMO) (D, Paid directly to institution), pertaining to the submitted manuscript.

    The disclosure key can be found on the Table of Contents and at www.TheSpineJournalOnline.com.

    View full text