Clinical care standards for the management of low back pain: a scoping review

被引:4
|
作者
Alves, Gabriel S. [1 ]
Vera, Gustavo E. Z. [1 ]
Maher, Chris G. [2 ,3 ]
Ferreira, Giovanni E. [2 ,3 ]
Machado, Gustavo C. [2 ,3 ]
Buchbinder, Rachelle [4 ]
Pinto, Rafael Z. [5 ]
Oliveira, Crystian B. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Sao Paulo UNOESTE, Fac Med, Presidente Prudente, SP, Brazil
[2] Univ Sydney, Royal Prince Alfred Hosp, Inst Musculoskeletal Hlth, Sydney Local Hlth Dist, Level 10N,King George 5 Bldg,Missenden Rd,POB M179, Camperdown 2050, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, Fac Med & Hlth, Sydney Sch Publ Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[4] Monash Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, Musculoskeletal Hlth & Wiser Hlth Care Units, Melbourne, Australia
[5] Univ Fed Minas Gerais UFMG, Dept Phys Therapy, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
关键词
Low back pain; Clinical care standards; Quality of health care; INTERVENTION; GUIDELINES;
D O I
10.1007/s00296-024-05543-2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The objective of this study is to compare and contrast the quality statements and quality indicators across clinical care standards for low back pain. Searches were performed in Medline, guideline databases, and Google searches to identify clinical care standards for the management of low back pain targeting a multidisciplinary audience. Two independent reviewers reviewed the search results and extracted relevant information from the clinical care standards. We compared the quality statements and indicators of the clinical care standards to identify the consistent messages and the discrepancies between them. Three national clinical care standards from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom were included. They provided from 6 to 8 quality statements and from 12 to 18 quality indicators. The three standards provide consistent recommendations in the quality statements related to imaging, and patient education/advice and self-management. In addition, the Canadian and Australian standards also provide consistent recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. However, the three clinical care standards differ in the statements related to psychological assessment, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies. The three national clinical care standards provide consistent recommendations on imaging and patient education/advice, self-management of the condition, and two standards (Canadian and Australian) agree on recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. The standards differ in the quality statements related to psychological assessment, opioid prescription, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies.
引用
收藏
页码:1197 / 1207
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review
    Rathbone, Tori
    Truong, Catherine
    Haldenby, Haley
    Riazi, Sara
    Kendall, Mara
    Cimek, Tayler
    Macedo, Luciana G.
    BMJ OPEN SPORT & EXERCISE MEDICINE, 2020, 6 (01):
  • [22] Research designs and instruments to detect physiotherapy overuse of low-value care services in low back pain management: a scoping review
    Lukas Kühn
    Lara Lindert
    Paulina Kuper
    Robert Prill
    Kyung-Eun (Anna) Choi
    BMC Health Services Research, 23
  • [23] Clinical guidelines and care pathway for management of low back pain with or without radicular pain
    Bailly, Florian
    Trouvin, Anne-Priscille
    Bercier, Sandrine
    Dadoun, Sabrina
    Deneuville, Jean-Philippe
    Faguer, Rogatien
    Fassier, Jean-Baptiste
    Koleck, Michale
    Lassalle, Louis
    Le Vraux, Thomas
    Brigitte, Liesse
    Petitprez, Karine
    Ramond-Roquin, Aline
    Renard, Jean-Franaois
    Roren, Alexandra
    Rozenberg, Sylvie
    Sebire, Catherine
    Vuides, Gilles
    Rannou, Franaois
    Audrey, Petit
    JOINT BONE SPINE, 2021, 88 (06)
  • [24] Research designs and instruments to detect physiotherapy overuse of low-value care services in low back pain management: a scoping review
    Kuehn, Lukas
    Lindert, Lara
    Kuper, Paulina
    Prill, Robert
    Choi, Kyung-Eun
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [25] Exosomes for the Management of Low Back Pain: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence
    Gupta, Ashim
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (04)
  • [26] A scoping review on implementation processes and outcomes of models of care for low back pain in primary healthcare
    Duarte, Susana Tinoco
    Moniz, Alexandre
    Costa, Daniela
    Donato, Helena
    Heleno, Bruno
    Aguiar, Pedro
    Cruz, Eduardo B.
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [27] Recommending swimming to people with low back pain: A scoping review
    Oakes, Helen
    de Vivo, Marlize
    Mills, Hayley
    Stephensen, David
    JOURNAL OF BODYWORK AND MOVEMENT THERAPIES, 2023, 36 : 274 - 281
  • [28] Molecular Mechanism of Discogenic Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review
    Chiu, Abby P.
    Lesnak, Joseph
    Gabriel, Katherin
    Price, Ted
    Arendt-Nielsen, Lars
    Bobos, Pavlos
    Curatolo, Michele
    JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2024, 25 (04): : 28 - 28
  • [29] Outcome measures used in the smartphone applications for the management of low back pain: a systematic scoping review
    Coe-O'Brien, Rachel
    Joseph, Leonard
    Kuisma, Raija
    Paungmali, Aatit
    Sitilertpisan, Patraporn
    Pirunsan, Ubon
    HEALTH INFORMATION SCIENCE AND SYSTEMS, 2020, 8 (01)
  • [30] The effect of muscles energy technique in the management of chronic mechanical low back pain: A scoping review
    Ahmed, Usman Abba
    Nadasan, Thayananthee
    Van Oosterwijck, Jessica
    Maharaj, Sonill Sooknunan
    JOURNAL OF BACK AND MUSCULOSKELETAL REHABILITATION, 2021, 34 (02) : 179 - 193