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
  • [31] Outcome measures used in the smartphone applications for the management of low back pain: a systematic scoping review
    Rachel Coe-O’Brien
    Leonard Joseph
    Raija Kuisma
    Aatit Paungmali
    Patraporn Sitilertpisan
    Ubon Pirunsan
    Health Information Science and Systems, 8
  • [32] A systematic scoping review of patient health outcomes and perceptions following management of low back pain via care pathways in primary health care
    Boyle, Eileen M.
    Fary, Robyn E.
    Kang, Kwangil
    Evans, Kerrie
    Rebbeck, Trudy
    Beales, Darren J.
    MUSCULOSKELETAL CARE, 2021, 19 (01) : 84 - 109
  • [33] Examining Resilient Pain Behaviors for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review
    Austin, Robin R.
    Ang, Oliver
    Haley, Alex
    Hanson, Linda
    Kennedy, Doug
    Mendenhall, Heidi
    Schulz, Craig
    Thorpe, Don
    Evans, Roni
    PAIN MANAGEMENT NURSING, 2024, 25 (04) : 417 - 424
  • [34] Exploring the origin of pain subclassification, with emphasis on low back pain: a scoping review
    Jess, Mary-Anne
    Hamilton, Sharon
    Ryan, Cormac
    Wellburn, Shaun
    Alexanders, Jenny
    Spence, Daniel
    Martin, Denis
    JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS, 2021, 19 (02) : 308 - 340
  • [35] Research designs and instruments to detect physiotherapy overuse of low-value care services in low back pain management: a scoping review protocol
    Lukas Kühn
    Lara Lindert
    Kyung-Eun Choi
    Systematic Reviews, 11
  • [36] Research designs and instruments to detect physiotherapy overuse of low-value care services in low back pain management: a scoping review protocol
    Kuehn, Lukas
    Lindert, Lara
    Choi, Kyung-Eun
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2022, 11 (01)
  • [37] Clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care - An international comparison
    Koes, BW
    van Tulder, MW
    Ostelo, R
    Burton, AK
    Waddell, G
    SPINE, 2001, 26 (22) : 2504 - 2513
  • [38] Clinical guidelines in the management of low back pain
    Burton, AK
    Waddell, G
    BAILLIERES CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 1998, 12 (01): : 17 - 35
  • [39] Clinical prediction rules in the physiotherapy management of low back pain: A systematic review
    Haskins, Robin
    Rivett, Darren A.
    Osmotherly, Peter G.
    MANUAL THERAPY, 2012, 17 (01) : 9 - 21
  • [40] Physiotherapeutic Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Nonspecific Low Back Pain Literature Review
    Franz, K.
    van Wijnen, H.
    PHYSIOSCIENCE, 2015, 11 (02) : 53 - 61