Healthcare provider perspectives on integrating a comprehensive spine care model in an academic health system: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems (HCS) are challenged in adopting and sustaining comprehensive approaches to spine care that require coordination and collaboration among multiple service units. The integration of clinicians who provide first line, evidence-based, non-pharmacological therapies further complicates adoption of these care pathways. This cross-sectional study explored clinician perceptions about the integration of guideline-concordant care and optimal spine care workforce requirements within an academic HCS. METHODS: Spine care clinicians from Duke University Health System (DUHS) completed a 26-item online survey via Qualtrics on barriers and facilitators to delivering guideline concordant care for low back pain patients. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 27 clinicians (57% response) responded to one or more items on the questionnaire, with 23 completing the majority of questions. Respondents reported that guidelines were implementable within DUHS, but no spine care guideline was used consistently across provider types. Guideline access and integration with electronic records were barriers to use. Respondents (81%) agreed most patients would benefit from non-pharmacological therapies such as physical therapy or chiropractic before receiving specialty referrals. Providers perceived spine patients expected diagnostic imaging (81%) and medication (70%) over non-pharmacological therapies. Providers agreed that receiving imaging (63%) and opioids (59%) benchmarks could be helpful but might not change their ordering practice, even if nudged by best practice advisories. Participants felt that an optimal spine care workforce would require more chiropractors and primary care providers and fewer neurosurgeons and orthopedists. In qualitative responses, respondents emphasized the following barriers to guideline-concordant care implementation: patient expectations, provider confidence with referral pathways, timely access, and the appropriate role of spine surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Spine care clinicians had positive support for current tenets of guideline-concordant spine care for low back pain patients. However, significant barriers to implementation were identified, including mixed opinions about integration of non-pharmacological therapies, referral pathways, and best practices for imaging and opioid use.

The impact of neck pain on gait health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence exists demonstrating the negative impacts of chronic musculoskeletal pain on key measures of gait. Despite neck pain being the second most common musculoskeletal pain condition, there is a paucity of evidence exploring the impacts of neck pain specifically on these outcomes. The aims of this work were to systematically review the current evidence of the associations between chronic neck pain and measures of gait health and to conduct meta-analysis for quantitative assessment of the effect sizes under different walking conditions. METHODS: Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PEDro. Eligible study designs included observational studies consisting of an exposure group with chronic neck pain and control group without chronic neck pain and primary outcomes relating to gait health. For outcomes amenable to meta-analysis, a random-effects model was used to derive summary estimates of Hedge's g depicted graphically with forest plots. Other gait outcomes were narratively summarized. Risk of bias was also assessed. RESULTS: The original search yielded 1918 articles; 12 met final eligibility criteria including 10 cross-sectional studies. Outcomes were grouped first by the five domains of gait: pace, rhythm, asymmetry, variability, and postural control; and second by the tested walking conditions. Meta-analyses for gait speed revealed large effect-sizes indicating that individuals with chronic neck pain had slower measures of gait and lower measures of cadence. Gait outcomes that were narratively summarized supported these findings. CONCLUSION: The quantitative and qualitative findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest a negative impact of CNNP on measures of gait health, particularly gait speed, under various walking conditions. However, broad interpretation of these results should be cautious. Testing gait under dual task conditions may be particularly sensitive to the impact of CNNP, and future work is needed to better understand how pain disrupts this important functionality of the locomotor system. Additionally, consideration should be made to assess measures of variability and investigate these relationships in the older adult population.

A systematic review of chiropractic care for fall prevention: rationale, state of the evidence, and recommendations for future research.

BACKGROUND: Falls in older adults are a significant and growing public health concern. There are multiple risk factors associated with falls that may be addressed within the scope of chiropractic training and licensure. Few attempts have been made to summarize existing evidence on multimodal chiropractic care and fall risk mitigation. Therefore, the broad purpose of this review was to summarize this research to date. BODY: Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PEDro, and Index of Chiropractic Literature. Eligible study designs included randomized controlled trials (RCT), prospective non-randomized controlled, observational, and cross-over studies in which multimodal chiropractic care was the primary intervention and changes in gait, balance and/or falls were outcomes. Risk of bias was also assessed using the 8-item Cochrane Collaboration Tool. The original search yielded 889 articles; 21 met final eligibility including 10 RCTs. One study directly measured the frequency of falls (underpowered secondary outcome) while most studies assessed short-term measurements of gait and balance. The overall methodological quality of identified studies and findings were mixed, limiting interpretation regarding the potential impact of chiropractic care on fall risk to qualitative synthesis. CONCLUSION: Little high-quality research has been published to inform how multimodal chiropractic care can best address and positively influence fall prevention. We propose strategies for building an evidence base to inform the role of multimodal chiropractic care in fall prevention and outline recommendations for future research to fill current evidence gaps.