Consensus for a primary care clinical decision-making tool for assessing, diagnosing, and managing low back pain in Alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition causing disability and high healthcare costs. Alberta faces challenges with unnecessary referrals to specialists and long wait times. A province-wide standardized clinical care pathway based on evidence-based best practices can improve efficiency, reduce wait times, and enhance patient outcomes. Implementing such pathways has shown success in other areas of healthcare in Alberta. This study developed a clinical decision-making pathway to standardize care and minimize uncertainty in assessment, diagnosis, and management. METHODS: A systematic rapid review identified existing tools and evidence that could support a comprehensive LBP clinical decision-making tool. Forty-seven healthcare professionals participated in four rounds of a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on the assessment, diagnosis, and management of patients presenting to primary care with LBP in Alberta, Canada. This project was a collaborative effort between Alberta Health Services' Bone and Joint Health Strategic Clinical Network (BJHSCN) and the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). RESULTS: A province-wide expert panel consisting of professionals from different health disciplines and regions collaborated to develop an LBP clinical decision-making tool. This tool presents clinical care pathways for acute, subacute, and chronic LBP. It also provides guidance for history-taking, physical examination, patient education, and management. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical decision-making tool will help to standardize care, provide guidance on the diagnosis and management of LBP, and assist in clinical decision-making for primary care providers in both public and private sectors.

A scoping review and best evidence synthesis for treatment of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff disorders include a broad spectrum of pathological conditions including partial-thickness and full-thickness tears. Studies have shown partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (PTRCT) prevalence to be twice that of full-thickness tears. In the working population, PTRCTs are one of the most common causes of shoulder pain and often result in occupational disability due to pain, stiffness, and loss of shoulder function. Treatment of PTRCTs remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to consolidate the existing high-quality evidence on best management approaches in treating PTRCTs using both nonoperative and operative approaches. METHODS: A scoping review with best evidence synthesis was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Library (Wiley), SCOPUS, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), PubMed Central, and Science Direct were searched from 2000 to March 3, 2023. Level 1 studies, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses that included level 1 and 2 studies, were included. RESULTS: The search yielded 8276 articles. A total of 3930 articles were screened after removing 4346 duplicates. Application of inclusion criteria resulted in 662 articles that were selected for full-text review. Twenty-eight level 1 studies, 1 systematic review, 4 meta-analyses, and 1 network meta-analyses were included in the best evidence synthesis. Nonoperative strategies included injections (ie, platelet-rich plasma, corticosteroid, prolotherapy, sodium hyaluronate, anesthetic, and atelocollagen), exercise therapy, and physical agents. Operative interventions consisted of débridement, shaving of the tendon and footprint, transtendon repair, and traditional suture anchor repair techniques with and without tear completion. Both nonoperative and operative strategies demonstrated effectiveness at managing pain and functional outcome for PTRCTs. The evidence supports the effectiveness of surgical intervention in treating PTRCTs regardless of arthroscopic technique. CONCLUSION: The results of this scoping review do not support superiority of operative over nonoperative management and suggest that both strategies can be effective at managing pain and functional outcome for PTRCTs. Surgery, however, is the most invasive and costly approach, with the highest risk of complications such as infection. Other variables such as patient expectation, treating practitioner bias, or preference may change which modalities are offered and in what sequence.

Evidence-based consensus guidelines for ALS genetic testing and counseling.

OBJECTIVE: Advances in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) gene discovery, ongoing gene therapy trials, and patient demand have driven increased use of ALS genetic testing. Despite this progress, the offer of genetic testing to persons with ALS is not yet "standard of care." Our primary goal is to develop clinical ALS genetic counseling and testing guidelines to improve and standardize genetic counseling and testing practice among neurologists, genetic counselors or any provider caring for persons with ALS. METHODS: Core clinical questions were identified and a rapid review performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-P) 2015 method. Guideline recommendations were drafted and the strength of evidence for each recommendation was assessed by combining two systems: the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) System and the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP). A modified Delphi approach was used to reach consensus among a group of content experts for each guideline statement. RESULTS: A total of 35 guideline statements were developed. In summary, all persons with ALS should be offered single-step genetic testing, consisting of a C9orf72 assay, along with sequencing of SOD1, FUS, and TARDBP, at a minimum. The key education and genetic risk assessments that should be provided before and after testing are delineated. Specific guidance regarding testing methods and reporting for C9orf72 and other genes is provided for commercial laboratories. INTERPRETATION: These evidence-based, consensus guidelines will support all stakeholders in the ALS community in navigating benefits and challenges of genetic testing.

The responsiveness and validity of the Rotator Cuff Quality of Life (RC-QOL) index in a 2-year follow-up study.

Background: The Rotator Cuff Quality of Life (RC-QOL) index was developed to evaluate quality of life in patients with rotator cuff disease. This study provides additional psychometric testing in accordance with the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines. Methods: This was a 2-year follow-up study on 66 patients (mean age, 59 ± 10 years) originally presenting with chronic full-thickness rotator cuff tears to a tertiary care center. The methodology involved testing internal consistency, content validity, and criterion validity. Responsiveness was evaluated using 3 strategies: 1) standardized response mean of the raw change scores; 2) Guyatt's Responsiveness Index; and 3) Global Rating Scales of improvement correlated to a quality of life measure. Results: Content validity was confirmed with a Cronbach α of 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.95) and absence of floor and ceiling effects. Criterion validity was confirmed using the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index as a reference standard (r = 0.87, P < .001). The effect size of distribution-based methods of determining responsiveness was large (0.99-1.09) compared to that of mixed- and anchor-based methods (0.47-0.89). All responsiveness calculations met minimum requirements for acceptable thresholds. Conclusion: The RC-QOL is a valid and responsive measure of health-related quality of life in patients with chronic rotator cuff pathology. The results of this study added to the methodologic quality assessment of the RC-QOL, completing 7 of 10 Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments criteria.

Consensus for a primary care clinical decision-making tool for assessing, diagnosing, and managing shoulder pain in Alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is a highly prevalent condition and a significant cause of morbidity and functional disability. Current data suggests that many patients presenting with shoulder pain at the primary care level are not receiving high quality care. Primary care decision-making is complex and has the potential to influence the quality of care provided and patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a clinical decision-making tool that standardizes care and minimizes uncertainty in assessment, diagnosis, and management. METHODS: First a rapid review was conducted to identify existing tools and evidence that could support a comprehensive clinical decision-making tool for shoulder pain. Secondly, provincial consensus was established for the assessment, diagnosis, and management of patients presenting to primary care with shoulder pain in Alberta, Canada using a three-step modified Delphi approach. This project was a highly collaborative effort between Alberta Health Services' Bone and Joint Health Strategic Clinical Network (BJH SCN) and the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). RESULTS: A clinical decision-making tool for shoulder pain was developed and reached consensus by a province-wide expert panel representing various health disciplines and geographical regions. This tool consists of a clinical examination algorithm for assessing, diagnosis, and managing shoulder pain; recommendations for history-taking and identification of red flags or additional concerns; recommendations for physical examination and neurological screening; recommendations for the differential diagnosis; and care pathways for managing patients presenting with rotator cuff disease, biceps pathology, superior labral tear, adhesive capsulitis, osteoarthritis, and instability. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical decision-making tool will help to standardize care, provide guidance on the diagnosis and management of shoulder pain, and assist in clinical decision-making for primary care providers in both public and private sectors.

Evaluating quality of care for patients with rotator cuff disorders.

BACKGROUND: Measuring quality in healthcare is vital in evaluating patient outcomes and system performance. The availability of reliable and valid information about the quality of care for patients presenting with rotator cuff disorders (RCD) in Alberta, Canada is scarce. The objective of this study is to measure quality of care for patients with RCD in order to identify areas of improvement. METHODS: This study employs descriptive survey research design. Between March 2015 and November 2016, a convenience sample of patients presenting with chronic, full-thickness rotator cuff tears to two sport medicine centres in Calgary and Edmonton, Alberta completed two questionnaires: the Healthcare Access and Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (HAPSQ) and the Rotator Cuff Quality-of-Life Index (RC-QOL). Data collected using both questionnaires were used to make judgments about quality of care. Quality of care was evaluated using six dimensions of quality defined by the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health: accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, effectiveness, appropriateness, and safety. Data was also used to compare current patient clinical pathways to ideal clinical pathway algorithms and used to make judgments about the appropriateness and safety of healthcare practices. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-one patients participated in the study. The longest mean waiting times for medical services in Alberta were for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) received in the public sector (103 days) and consultation by orthopaedic surgeon (172 days). Patient satisfaction with respect to quality of care was lowest for emergency room physician and highest for orthopaedic surgeon visits. Patients were treated by a mean of 2.5 physicians (SD: 0.77, range: 2-7). The total aggregate average cost per patient was $4541.19. The mean RC-QOL score for all patients was 42 (SD: 22). Only 54 patients (64%) requiring surgery were able to consult with a surgeon within benchmark timeframes. A comparison of current to ideal clinical pathway algorithms found that 38 patients (22%) experienced indirect clinical pathways, whereby care was fragmented and patients received care from multiple and often, redundant healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: There is a discrepancy between current and ideal clinical pathways whereby some patients are experiencing quality of care that is inefficient, disjointed, and less than ideal.