What does high value care for musculoskeletal conditions mean and how do you apply it in practice? A consensus statement from a research network of physiotherapists in New South Wales, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a physiotherapist-led consensus statement on the definition and provision of high-value care for people with musculoskeletal conditions. DESIGN: We performed a three-stage study using Research And Development/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method methodology. We reviewed evidence about current definitions through a rapid literature review and then performed a survey and interviews with network members to gather consensus. Consensus was finalised in a face-to-face meeting. SETTING: Australian primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Registered physiotherapists who are members of a practice-based research network (n=31). RESULTS: The rapid review revealed two definitions, four domains of high value care and seven themes of high-quality care. Online survey responses (n=26) and interviews (n=9) generated two additional high-quality care themes, a definition of low-value care, and 21 statements on the application of high value care. Consensus was reached for three working definitions (high value, high-quality and low value care), a final model of four high value care domains (high-quality care, patient values, cost-effectiveness, reducing waste), nine high-quality care themes and 15 statements on application. CONCLUSION: High value care for musculoskeletal conditions delivers most value for the patient, and the clinical benefits outweigh the costs to the individual or system providing the care. High-quality care is evidence based, effective and safe care that is patient-centred, consistent, accountable, timely, equitable and allows easy interaction with healthcare providers and healthcare systems.

Factors associated with neck pain in fighter aircrew: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Neck pain is a common complaint among fighter aircrew, impacting workforce health and operational capability. This systematic review aimed to identify, evaluate and synthesise the current evidence for factors associated with the occurrence of neck pain among fighter aircrew. Six electronic databases were searched in June 2019 and updated in June 2020 utilising the maximum date ranges. Included studies were appraised for methodological quality, ranked according to level of evidence and relevant data extracted. Where methods were homogeneous and data availability allowed, meta-analyses were performed. A total of 20 studies (16 cross sectional, one case-control, one retrospective cohort and two prospective cohort) were eligible for inclusion. Of the 44 factors investigated, consistent evidence was reported for greater occurrence of neck pain among aircrew operating more advanced aircraft and those exposed to more desk/computer work, while another 12 factors reported consistent evidence for no association. Of the 20 factors where meta-analyses could be performed, greater occurrence of neck pain was indicated for aircrew: flying more advanced aircraft, undertaking warm-up stretching and not placing their head against the seat under greater +Gz. Despite many studies investigating factors associated with neck pain among fighter aircrew, methodological limitations limited the ability to identify those factors that are most important to future preventive programmes. High-quality prospective studies with consistent use of definitions are required before we can implement efficient and effective programmes to reduce the prevalence and impact of neck pain in fighter aircrew. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019128952.Neck pain is a common complaint among fighter aircrew, impacting workforce health and operational capability. This systematic review aimed to identify, evaluate and synthesise the current evidence for factors associated with the occurrence of neck pain among fighter aircrew.