scholarly journals Simultaneous multidisciplinary care pathway for back pain: a new approach for a first-level comprehensive evaluation and treatment to guarantee adequate pain relief and recovery

ABOUTOPEN ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-54
Author(s):  
Massimo Allegri ◽  
Massimiliano Sacchelli ◽  
Dino Sgavicchia ◽  
Vincenzo Manna ◽  
Fabio Cappabianca ◽  
...  

Low back pain continues to be a major clinical challenge with high direct and indirect societal costs. It is a complex disease with complex pathophysiology both for acute and chronic low back pain. Although there is consistent evidence about multidisciplinary treatment of low back pain, several different approaches and techniques are proposed, with different results often conflicting among them. In fact, even though the multidisciplinary approach is widely accepted, it is generally applied in different steps involving only one health care providing for each approach. This approach not only does not guarantee a real multidisciplinary vision of this disease but also lacks evaluation of the dynamic changes of the disease according to real patients’ needs. In our hospital setting we have developed a “simultaneous multidisciplinary care” of low back pain patients in order to overcome these problems and to satisfy all patients’ needs by evaluating and treating all problems causing and related to low back pain. Starting from the existing literature we propose our approach as a new pathway to treat low back patients with a simultaneous multidisciplinary approach.

Spine ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 850-855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke E. Patrick ◽  
Elizabeth M. Altmaier ◽  
Ernest M. Found

Pharmacia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-120
Author(s):  
Daniela Taneva ◽  
Angelina Kirkova ◽  
Petar Atanasov

Chronic low back pain is a heterogeneous group of disorders with recurrent low back pain over 3 months. The high incidence of lumbago is an important phenomenon in our industrial society. Patients with chronic low back pain often receive multidisciplinary treatment. The bio approach, the psycho-approach, and the social approach optimally reduce the risk of chronicity by providing rehabilitation for patients with persistent pain after the initial acute phase. Damage to the structures of the spinal cord and the occurrence of low back pain as a result of evolutionary, social and medical causes disrupt the rhythm of life and cause less or greater disability. Recovery of patients with low back pain is not limited only to influencing the pain syndrome but requires the implementation of programs to eliminate the complaints that this pathology generates in personal, family and socio-professional terms. This paper aims to familiarize the audience with the medication used, and the programs for active recovery in patients suffering from chronic low back pain.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-17
Author(s):  
Andaru Cahya S ◽  
Widodo Mardi Santoso ◽  
Machlusil Husna ◽  
Badrul Munir ◽  
Shahdevi Nandar Kurniawan

Low back pain is the most common symptom found in the primary health care and is the number one cause of disability throughout worldwide. It is estimated that around 60 – 80% the world population will experience back pain during their lifespan. There are three different source of pain in the spine: axial-lumbosacral, radicular and reffered pain. All of these source brings different clinical presentations. Low back pain could be classified as acute, subacute and chronic low back pain. The pain could be nociceptive or neuropathic, the most common symptoms reported are “pressure pain” and “pain attack”. The physician should be aware of “red flags” symptoms that lead into more serious condition beside back pain and, therefore the patient has to be investigated to further examination whenever these symptoms present. The management of low back pain consist of severe modalities, both therapeutic and rehabilitative procedure. Oftentimes, the management needed multidisciplinary approach. It is important to general practitioners to identify and treat low back pain appropriately to reduce the burden of the disease and to prevent the disabilties caused by this condition.


2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra K. Staiger ◽  
Anna Serlachius ◽  
Susie Macfarlane ◽  
Sharron Anderson ◽  
Thomas Chan ◽  
...  

This paper reports on the development of a care-pathway to improve service linkages between the acute setting and community health services in the treatment of low back pain. The pathway was informed by two processes: (1) a literature review based on best-practice guidelines in the assessment, treatment and continuity of care for low back pain patients; and (2) consultation with staff and key stakeholders. Stakeholders from both the acute and community sectors comprised the Working Group, who identified central areas of concern to be addressed in the care-pathway, with the goal of preventing chronicity of low back pain and reducing emergency department presentations. The main outcomes achieved include: the development of a new care-coordinator role, which would support a greater focus on integration between acute and community sectors for low back pain patients; identifying the need to screen at-risk patients; implementation of the SCTT (Service Coordination Tool Templates) tool as a system of referral across the acute and community settings; and agreement on the need to develop an evidence-based self-management program to be offered to low back pain patients. The benefits and challenges of implementing this care pathway are discussed.


Pain ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supp C) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard I. Newman ◽  
Joel L. Seres ◽  
Leonard P. Yospe ◽  
Bonnie Garlington

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 2-3
Author(s):  
Lesley Beique ◽  
Jason Martyn

Background:   In collaboration with emergency physicians, the physiotherapy and pharmacy teams at RGH implemented a novel multidisciplinary, evidence-based pathway, addressing a significant care gap in the management of low back pain (LBP) in urban emergency departments (EDs).   To accomplish this, the physiotherapist conducts a neuromusculoskeletal exam, prior to the physician. They provide treatment including manual therapy, mobilization, education, home-exercises and referral to community resources. The pharmacist then reviews medications, discusses pain management, prescribes analgesia and creates a plan for outpatient analgesia. This occurs while the patient awaits the physician, avoiding increases to length of stay (LOS) and reducing burden on physicians.   Implementation: At minimum, a site wishing to implement the pathway requires a team consisting of a physiotherapist (PT) and pharmacist dedicated to the ED, called the Rapid Assessment Back Team (RABT). To operationalize the RABT successfully, the selected PT and pharmacist must be confident practitioners and have a solid understanding of LBP, red-flags, and appropriate treatment. To avoid increasing LOS, patients are seen during the 2-hour average waiting time required to see a physician. The project team consisted of physiotherapists, pharmacists, nurses, physicians, managers, and QI leaders, formed to facilitate a collaborative approach to implementation. The Prosci® ADKAR model and Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were used to implement the pathway and troubleshoot operational challenges.   Evaluation Methods: Front-line staff manually collected data on response time, treatments, adverse events, and resources provided. The investigators reviewed patient charts to record opioid prescriptions, DI referrals, and arrival/discharge times of the patients. We compared outcomes of patients seen by the RABT to historical site data of patients with a discharge diagnosis of LBP from the ED.   We actively sought feedback from physicians, nurses, and the leadership group to ensure that we identified unintended consequences or near-misses early on. We reviewed interim data such as LOS and average time-to-assessment, to identify areas for improvement. This data and feedback were addressed via bimonthly PDSA cycles. We also administered patient and staff satisfaction surveys before and after site implementation of the pathway to develop an understanding of patient and staff thoughts and experiences with the service model.   Results: We studied these outcomes in 44 patients exposed to our RABT implementation. Patients who saw a physiotherapist prior to the physician had shorter median ED LOS (3.2 vs. 4.0 hours), lower diagnostic imaging rates (36.4% vs. 49.4%) and less opioid prescribing (31.8% vs. 49.2%). No patients returned to the ED within 72 hours post evaluation, compared to the 7.6% historical recidivism. Not all patients were seen by a pharmacist. When performing a subgroup analysis of patients seen by both a pharmacist and physiotherapist prior to physician, opioid prescriptions were found to drop significantly from a baseline of 49.2% to 16.7%.   Advice and Lessons Learned: Valuable learnings from the pilot include: As described above, the physiotherapist and pharmacist must be experienced and confident to be successful in the ED setting. Selection of the appropriate clinicians is crucial to achieving results, and given this is a new area of practice for many physiotherapists, a proper orientation to the setting is required. The combination of a physiotherapist and pharmacist had the largest impact on study outcomes, further confirming the need for a multidisciplinary approach to ED patient care. An “ED toolkit” can greatly facilitate service implementation for future sites, and this was developed to facilitate implementation of the RABT at another ED within the city. The toolkit consisted of items such as resources, workflows, patient handouts, sample documentation and promotional materials to increase awareness. Service hours may need some realignment with patient demand and should be geared towards minimizing service disruptions. Ideally, the physiotherapist and pharmacist would work similar hours to maximize the amount of patients able to be seen. Regular PDSA cycles to review interim data and address operational issues increases the likelihood of success by ensuring the pathway evolves to fit the contextual needs of the site. Reviewing early results motivates the team to continue to utilize the pathway. Reviewing practice issues allows clinicians to improve the care provided. One significant unintended consequence was the increase in ED LOS for patients who were referred to PT/pharmacy following physician assessment. In addition, this subgroup did not show significant reductions in opioid prescriptions or DI referrals. RABT referrals were subsequently restricted to before the physician only.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e052938
Author(s):  
Kathrin Louise Braeuninger-Weimer ◽  
Naffis Anjarwalla ◽  
Alison H McGregor ◽  
Lisa Roberts ◽  
Philip Sell ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the perceptions of orthopaedic clinicians about consultations for people with persistent musculoskeletal low back pain (PMLBP) in which surgery is not recommended. Surgery is not recommended for the majority of PMLBP consulting in secondary care settings.SettingSecondary care sector in the UK.ParticipantsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 orthopaedic team clinicians from 17 different hospitals in the UK and Ireland. Interviews explored clinicians’ perceptions of the challenges in consultations where surgery is not indicated. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsTwo meta-themes, Difficulties and Enablers, each consisting of several subthemes were identified. Difficulties included challenges around the choice of appropriate terminology and labels for PMLBP, managing patients’ expectations, working with mentally vulnerable patients and explaining imaging findings. Enablers included early management of expectations, use of routine imaging, triaging, access to direct referral elsewhere, including other non-surgical practitioners in the team, training to improve communication skills and understanding of psychological issues.ConclusionThe findings highlight clinicians’ perceived need for concordance in messages delivered across the care pathway and training of orthopaedic clinicians to deliver effective reassurance and address patients’ needs in circumstances where surgery is not indicated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document