Physiotherapists' experiences of implementation of the BetterBack model of care for low back pain in primary care - a focus group interview study.

INTRODUCTION: The BetterBack model of care (MoC), a best practice physiotherapy MoC for low back pain (LBP), was implemented in Swedish primary care to improve management of patients with LBP and provide patients with support tools to better self-manage episodes of LBP. PURPOSE: The objective was to describe how physiotherapists in primary care experienced the implementation of the BetterBack MoC for LBP. METHODS: Focus group interviews were conducted with physiotherapists in 2018-2019, 14-18 months after the introduction of the BetterBack MoC. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Five focus group interviews with 23 (15 female and 8 male) physiotherapists, age range 24-61 years were analyzed. A supportive organization and adaptation to the local culture, combined with health care professionals' attitudes and collaboration between physiotherapists emerged as important factors for a successful implementation and for long-term sustainability of the MoC. Physiotherapists had differing opinions if the implementation led to change in clinical practice. Improved confidence in how to manage patients with LBP was expressed by physiotherapists. CONCLUSIONS: Several barriers and facilitators influence the implementation of a best practice physiotherapy MoC for LBP in primary care, which need to be considered in future implementation and sustainability processes.

Are illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement mediators of treatment effect in best practice physiotherapy low back pain care? Secondary mediation analyses in the BetterBack trial.

INTRODUCTION: A best practice physiotherapy model of care (BetterBack MoC) for low back pain (LBP) aimed to improve patients' illness perceptions and self-care enablement, according to the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSM). OBJECTIVE: To confirm if illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement, in line with the CSM, are mediators of treatment effects on disability and pain of the BetterBack MoC for patients with LBP compared to routine primary care. A secondary aim was to explore if illness perceptions and patient self-care enablement are mediators of guideline adherent care. METHODS: Pre-planned single mediation analyses tested whether hypothesized mediators at 3 months mediated the treatment effect of the MoC (n = 264) compared to routine care (n = 203) on disability and pain at 6 months. Secondary mediation analyses compared guideline adherent care with non-adherent care. RESULTS: No indirect effects were identified. The BetterBack intervention did not have superior effects over routine care on the hypothesized mediators. Illness perceptions and self-care enablement were significantly associated with disability and pain at 6 months. Secondary analyses showed significant indirect effects of guideline adherent care through tested mediators. CONCLUSION: Despite no indirect effects, patients' illness perceptions and self-care enablement were associated with disability and back pain intensity outcomes and are potentially relevant treatment targets.

Improved adherence to clinical guidelines for low back pain after implementation of the BetterBack model of care: A stepped cluster randomized controlled trial within a hybrid type 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The BetterBack model of care (MoC) for low back pain (LBP) was recently developed in Swedish physiotherapy (PT) primary care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if PTs' adherence to LBP clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) improves after implementation of the BetterBack MoC (intervention). METHODS: This was a stepped, single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial. Patients nested in the three clusters were allocated to routine care (n = 222) or intervention (n = 278). The primary outcome was referral to specialist consultation. This was among five best practice recommendations divided into an assessment quality index (no referral to specialist consultation and no medical imaging) and a treatment quality index (use of educational interventions; use of exercise interventions; no use of non-evidence-based physiotherapy). For overall adherence, patients had to be treated with all five recommendations fulfilled. Logistic regression was used for between-group comparisons. RESULTS: The proportion of patients receiving referral to specialist consultation during the PT treatment period was low in both groups with no between-group differences. However, patients in the intervention group showed significantly higher assessment quality index, treatment quality index and overall adherence compared to routine care. Adherence to the separate recommendations showed improved stratified number of visits, use of exercise was maintained high, patient educational intervention increased and use of non-evidence-based physiotherapy decreased. A reduction of medical imaging during the physiotherapy treatment period was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of CPGs could be substantially improved by introducing a MoC through PT training and supportive materials.

The association between patients' illness perceptions and longitudinal clinical outcome in patients with low back pain.

Introduction: Illness perception is suggested to influence outcome in patients with low back pain (LBP). It is unknown if specific illness perceptions are of more importance for longitudinal outcomes, including development of self-management strategies. Objectives: This study explores whether patients' initial illness perceptions were associated with disability, pain, health-related quality of life, and self-care enablement outcomes in patients with LBP after 3 and 12 months. Methods: Four hundred sixty-seven consecutive patients seeking physiotherapeutic primary care for LBP were eligible to participate in this prospective cohort study, providing data at baseline and after 3 and 12 months (mean age 45 years, 56% women). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore whether patients' illness perceptions at baseline were associated with outcome in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale-LBP (NRS-LBP), EuroQol Five Dimensions, and Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI). Results: Stronger beliefs that the back problem will last a long time at baseline were associated with worse outcome in ODI, NRS-LBP, and PEI at 3 and 12 months and in EuroQol Five Dimensions at 12 months. Negative beliefs regarding treatment's ability to improve LBP were associated with worse outcome in NRS-LBP and PEI at 3 and 12 months and in ODI at 12 months. Conclusions: Illness perceptions regarding prognosis and treatment's ability to improve symptoms were the most prominent perceptions explaining several longitudinal clinical outcomes. These expectations should be addressed in an early stage in the delivery of interventions for LBP. These expectations were also important for patients' development of coping and self-management strategies.

Adapting the determinants of implementation behavior questionnaire to evaluate implementation of a structured low back pain programme using mixed-methods.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Best-practice low back pain (LBP) primary care programmes have been developed based on evidence-based clinical guidelines and implemented in Sweden and Denmark. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was utilized in the design of the implementation strategy. Based on the TDF domains, the Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) has been developed to evaluate implementation determinants, but its feasibility and validity need to be tested and adapted to study specific contexts. This study aimed to tailor the DIBQ for evaluation of implementation for LBP primary care programmes. The objectives were to (a) translate the DIBQ into Swedish and Danish, (b) adapt the DIBQ into DIBQ-tailored (DIBQ-t) to study content validity, (c) test the DIBQ-t for feasibility, and (d) perform validity testing of DIBQ-t. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods design. First, forward translation of the DIBQ, then adaptation into DIBQ-t using qualitative face validity and quantitative content validity was done. Finally, to determine feasibility and construct validity using confirmatory factor analyses, we used data from DIBQ-t collected after the programmes' 2-day course. RESULTS: The final DIBQ-t included 28 items describing 10 of the original 18 DIBQ domains and was considered feasible. A total of 598 clinicians out of 609 responded to the DIBQ-t, with only 2‰ of the items missing. The confirmatory factor analyses showed a good fit after removing two items with the lowest domain loading. The DIBQ-t maintained linkage to all domains within the Behavioral Change Wheel. The clinicians' expectations, according to the DIBQ-t, indicate facilitating determinants outweighing barriers at the initiation of implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: The study resulted in a feasible and valid version of a questionnaire for evaluating clinicians' expectations regarding implementation determinants of best-practice LBP primary care programmes.

Effectiveness and Quality of Implementing a Best Practice Model of Care for Low Back Pain (BetterBack) Compared with Routine Care in Physiotherapy: A Hybrid Type 2 Trial.

Low back pain (LBP) occurs in all ages and first-line treatment by physiotherapists is common. The main aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing a best practice model of care for LBP (intervention group-BetterBack☺ MoC) compared to routine physiotherapy care (control group) regarding longitudinal patient reported outcomes. The BetterBack☺ MoC contains clinical guideline recommendations and support tools to facilitate clinician adherence to guidelines. A secondary exploratory aim was to compare patient outcomes based on the fidelity of fulfilling a clinical practice quality index regarding physiotherapist care. A stepped cluster randomized design nested patients with LBP in the three clusters which were allocated to control (n = 203) or intervention (n = 264). Patient reported measures were collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months and analyzed with mixed model regression. The primary outcome was between-group changes from baseline to 3 months for pain intensity and disability. Implementation of the BetterBack☺ MoC did not show any between-group differences in the primary outcomes compared with routine care. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher satisfaction at 3 months and clinically meaningful greater improvement in LBP illness perception at 3 months and quality of life at 3 and 6 months but not in patient enablement and global impression of change compared with the control group. Physiotherapists' care that adhered to all clinical practice quality indices resulted in an improvement of most patient reported outcomes with a clinically meaningful greater improved LBP illness perception at 3 months and quality of life at 3 and 6 months, significantly greater improvement in LBP illness perception, pain and satisfaction at 3 and 6 months and significantly better enablement at all time points as well as better global improvement outcomes at 3 months compared with non-adherent care. This highlights the importance of clinical guideline based primary care for improving patient reported LBP outcomes.

Patients' experiences of the BetterBack model of care for low back pain in primary care - a qualitative interview study.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to describe patient experiences of received primary care for low back pain (LBP) according to the BetterBack Model of Care (MoC) with a focus on illness beliefs and self-management enablement. Methods: Individual interviews were conducted with 15 adults 4-14 months after receiving treatment according to the BetterBack MoC for LBP in primary care in Sweden. Data were analysed using content analysis. Results: When analysing the data, the following theme emerged; "Participant understanding of their treatment for low back pain and self-management strategies-a matter of support systems", comprising the following categories: "Knowledge translation", "Interaction and dialogue", "The health care professional support" and "Form organization". Participants experienced that they had better knowledge about their LBP and received tools to better manage their health condition. The participants expressed good communication with the treating physiotherapist and provided suggestions to further improve the treatment of LBP. Conclusions: Participants experienced that they had gained new knowledge about their health problems and after the treatment they had the tools to handle their back problems. This suggests that the BetterBack MoC may be used as a basis for a support system to provide valuable tools for self-management for patients with low back pain.

Confidence, attitudes, beliefs and determinants of implementation behaviours among physiotherapists towards clinical management of low back pain before and after implementation of the BetterBack model of care.

BACKGROUND: Implementing clinical guidelines is challenging. To facilitate uptake, we developed a model of care (BetterBack Model of Care) and an implementation strategy to support management of low back pain in primary care. The aim of this study was to evaluate physiotherapists´ confidence, attitudes and beliefs in managing patients with low back pain before and after a multifaceted implementation of the BetterBack Model of Care. A further aim was to evaluate determinants of implementation behaviours among physiotherapists. METHODS: This clinical trial was an experimental before and after study within a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial. The primary outcome was Practitioner Self-Confidence Scale (PCS), secondary outcomes were the Pain Attitude and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT) and Determinants of Implementation Behaviour Questionnaire (DIBQ). Data was analysed using repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen physiotherapists answered a questionnaire before, directly after, as well as 3 and 12 months after implementation of the Model of Care. PCS improved over time with a large effect size post implementation (ηp2 = 0.197, p < 0.001). Changes in PABS-PT were only significant after 12 months with higher biopsychosocial orientation, (ηp2 = 0.071, p < 0.01) and lower biomedical orientation, (ηp2 = 0.136, p < 0.001). Directly after the workshop, after 3 and 12 months, physiotherapists had high ratings on all DIBQ domains, (scores > 50) implying that all were potential facilitators of the implementation. However, after 3 months, all domains had significantly decreased except for organisation, social influence and patient expectation domains. However, after 12 months, organisation and social influence domains had significantly decreased while domains such as knowledge, skills and beliefs about capabilities returned to initial levels. CONCLUSIONS: Physiotherapists´ confidence and biopsychosocial orientation increased after implementation and may have the potential to improve management of low back pain in primary care. The implementation behaviour showed mostly facilitating patterns but changed over time, pinpointing a need to repeatedly monitor these changes. This can inform the need for changes of implementation efforts in different phases and support sustainability strategies. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03147300 3 May 2017, prospectivly registered.

Effectiveness of implementing a best practice primary healthcare model for low back pain (BetterBack) compared with current routine care in the Swedish context: an internal pilot study informed protocol for an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 2 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem commonly requiring healthcare. In Sweden, there is a call from healthcare practitioners (HCPs) for the development, implementation and evaluation of a best practice primary healthcare model for LBP. AIMS: (1) To improve and understand the mechanisms underlying changes in HCP confidence, attitudes and beliefs for providing best practice coherent primary healthcare for patients with LBP; (2) to improve and understand the mechanisms underlying illness beliefs, self-care enablement, pain, disability and quality of life in patients with LBP; and (3) to evaluate a multifaceted and sustained implementation strategy and the cost-effectiveness of the BetterBack☺ model of care (MOC) for LBP from the perspective of the Swedish primary healthcare context. METHODS: This study is an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 2 trial testing the hypothesised superiority of the BetterBack☺ MOC compared with current routine care. The trial involves simultaneous testing of MOC effects at the HCP, patient and implementation process levels. This involves a prospective cohort study investigating implementation at the HCP level and a patient-blinded, pragmatic, cluster, randomised controlled trial with longitudinal follow-up at 3, 6 and 12 months post baseline for effectiveness at the patient level. A parallel process and economic analysis from a healthcare sector perspective will also be performed. Patients will be allocated to routine care (control group) or the BetterBack☺ MOC (intervention group) according to a stepped cluster dogleg structure with two assessments in routine care. Experimental conditions will be compared and causal mediation analysis investigated. Qualitative HCP and patient experiences of the BetterBack☺ MOC will also be investigated. DISSEMINATION: The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. Further national dissemination and implementation in Sweden and associated national quality register data collection are potential future developments of the project. DATE AND VERSION IDENTIFIER: 13 December 2017, protocol version 3. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03147300; Pre-results.

Subacromial corticosteroid injection or acupuncture with home exercises when treating patients with subacromial impingement in primary care--a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS) commonly seek primary care. Subacromial corticosteroid injection is the standard treatment given by GPs, which is supported by earlier studies reporting a positive effect but inconclusive evidence over the long- term. In Sweden, physiotherapists often choose acupuncture combined with exercises to treat SIS, which was reported as probably efficacious. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of subacromial corticosteroids injected by a GP with physiotherapy combining acupuncture and home exercises as treatments for SIS. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was performed in primary health care. Patients diagnosed with SIS were randomized to either subacromial corticosteroid injection(s) or 10 acupuncture treatments combined with home- exercises. The main outcomes were pain and shoulder function (Adolfsson-Lysholm shoulder assessment score). Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL) (EuroQol-five dimension self-report questionnaire) and the patients' global assessment of change. All patients were assessed at baseline and after 6 weeks and 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen patients with SIS were included, of which 91 complied with the study protocol. There were no significant differences between treatments with regard to pain, shoulder function and HRQL in change over time. However, both treatment groups improved significantly from baseline over time. CONCLUSIONS: Both subacromial corticosteroid injection and a series of acupuncture treatments combined with home exercises significantly decreased pain and improved shoulder function in patients with SIS, but neither treatment was significantly superior to the other.