Article

A Long Way to Go Practice Patterns and Evidence in Chronic Low Back Pain Care

Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, 725 Airport Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7590, USA.
Spine (Impact Factor: 2.45). 05/2009; 34(7):718-24. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819792b0
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A cross-sectional, telephone survey of a representative sample of North Carolina households in 2006.
The primary objectives of these analyses were to describe health care use (providers, medications, treatments, diagnostic tests) for chronic low back pain (LBP) and relate current patterns of use to current best evidence for care of the condition.
Chronic LBP is common and expensive. Prior research on care utilization often was derived from medical claims databases, reflecting reimbursed health care use, often by one payer.
Five thousand three hundred fifty-seven households were contacted in 2006 to identify 732 noninstitutionalized adults 21 years and older with chronic LBP. Five hundred ninety individuals sought care. Patient reported health care utilization, comparison with efficacy was demonstrated by current systematic reviews.
Individuals with chronic back pain were middle-aged (mean age 53 years), and the majority were women (62%). Provider and treatment use was common and varied. Sixty percent used narcotics in the previous month. The mean number of provider visits was 21, and over one-third had an advanced imaging procedure in the past year. Physical treatments were common, and often not supported by evidence. Only 3% had engaged in a formal spine rehabilitation program. Half of patients not taking antidepressants were positive on a 2-item depression screen. Although this study was population-based, it was conducted in only one state.
Provider and treatment use for chronic LBP are both very common and varied. Current treatment patterns are consistent with overutilization of some medications and treatments, and underutilization of exercise and depression treatment.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Liana Castel, Sep 05, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
116 Views
  • Source
    • "One of these methods is transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), a noninvasive treatment that can be self-administered by patients and is generally associated with few safety concerns, adverse effects being principally limited to transient skin irritation. TENS is currently widely used as an add-on therapy for chronic LBP patients (Buchmuller-Cordier et al., 2008; Carey et al., 2009). Despite wide use of this treatment, its efficacy in relieving chronic LBP has not been established: in the last review of the Cochrane Database (Khadilkar et al., 2008), only four studies meeting the criteria for high methodological quality were included in the qualitative analysis (Deyo et al., 1990; Cheing and Hui-Chan, 1999; Topuz et al., 2004; Jarzem et al., 2005). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical neurostimulation (TENS) in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). Design: Prospective, randomized, multicentre, single-blind study. Setting: Twenty-one French pain centres. Participants: Two hundred thirty-six consecutive adult patients consulting for chronic LBP, with or without radicular pain (mean age ± standard deviation: 53 ± 13 years; range: 28-86 years). Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either active (n = 117) or sham (n = 119) TENS in four 1-h daily treatment sessions for 3 months. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measured was improvement of functional status at 6 weeks (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). Secondary outcome measures were improvement of functional status at 3 months, pain relief (weekly visual analogue scale assessments), positive functional repercussions of pain levels on quality of life, a diminution of the use of analgesic and anti-inflammatory medication, satisfaction with the overall treatment strategy and compliance. Functional status did not differ between the groups, whether at 6 weeks or 3 months (p = 0.351 at 6 weeks). A significant improvement between the first and last visual analogue scale assessments was observed in patients with either lumbar pain alone or lumbar and radicular pain treated with active TENS. Other outcome measures did not differ significantly between the two groups. There was no functional benefit of TENS in the treatment of patients with chronic LBP.
    European journal of pain (London, England) 05/2012; 16(5):656-65. DOI:10.1002/j.1532-2149.2011.00061.x · 3.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Documentation assists health care professionals in providing appropriate services to patients by documenting indications and medical necessity, and reflects the competency and character of the physician. Documentation is considered a cornerstone of the quality of patient care. This is nowhere more true than in interventional pain management. Thus, documentation in physicians' offices, hospital settings, ambulatory surgery centers, rehabilitation centers, and other settings must be accurate, complete, and reflect all of the services provided during each encounter. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) defines medical necessity in these terms: "no payment may be made under Part A or Part B for any expense incurred for items or services which are not reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury or to improve the functioning of a participant." The American Medical Association (AMA) defines medical necessity as, "health care services or procedures that a prudent physician would provide to a patient for the purpose of preventing, diagnosing, or treating an illness, injury, disease, or its symptoms in a manner that is in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical practice, clinically appropriate in terms of type, frequency, extent, site, and duration, and not primarily for the convenience of the patient, physician, or other health care provider." Documentation requirements include an appropriate medical record utilizing recognized and acceptable standards of documentation and an established process. However, the evolution of electronic medical records (EMRs) or electronic health records (EHRs) nullifies many of the issues faced in handwritten documentation. Multiple types of documentation include evaluation and management services and documentations in ambulatory surgery centers, hospital outpatient departments, and in office settings, specifically while performing interventional procedures. Evaluation and management services incorporate 5 levels of service for consultations and visits, with multiple key elements of service including history, physical examination, and medical decision making. Documentation of interventional procedures in general requires a history and physical, indication and medical necessity, intra-operative procedural description, post-operative monitoring and ambulation, discharge, and disposition. With minor variations, these requirements are similar for an in-office setting, hospital out patient department, and ambulatory surgery centers.
    Pain physician 12(4):E199-224. · 4.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
Show more