Contextualizing the lived experiences of patients with low back pain from different countries according to the ICF framework.

OBJECTIVE: To explore perspectives, including social and psychological aspects, of patients seeking manual care for low back pain, in order to understand constructs of functioning that are important across different cultural contexts. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) emphasizes the importance of these aspects to describe health-related functioning. DESIGN: Focus group interviews. PATIENTS: Patients from Botswana, Canada and Norway seeking manual care for their low back pain. METHODS: Interviews were conducted in the 3 countries, transcribed verbatim, translated into English, and linked to the ICF according to established rules. RESULTS: Seven focus groups yielded 1,863 meaningful concepts that were linked to ICF categories. The largest proportion of responses linked to the Activities and Participation domain. The most frequently mentioned chapters related to pain and its mental aspects, suggesting that the psychological impact of living with low back pain is important to patients. CONCLUSION: Despite cultural differences, patients seeking manual care for low back pain in Botswana, Canada and Norway reported similar experiences of disability across ICF domains. The relatively high ranking of psychosocial factors highlights their importance for patients, in addition to factors of biological origin, and indicates that the contextual nature of the lived experience of low back pain may not be covered in standard examinations used in manual medicine.

The global summit on the efficacy and effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy for the prevention and treatment of non-musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: A small proportion of chiropractors, osteopaths, and other manual medicine providers use spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) to manage non-musculoskeletal disorders. However, the efficacy and effectiveness of these interventions to prevent or treat non-musculoskeletal disorders remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: We convened a Global Summit of international scientists to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT for the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of non-musculoskeletal disorders. GLOBAL SUMMIT: The Global Summit took place on September 14-15, 2019 in Toronto, Canada. It was attended by 50 researchers from 8 countries and 28 observers from 18 chiropractic organizations. At the summit, participants critically appraised the literature and synthesized the evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from inception to May 15, 2019 using subject headings specific to each database and free text words relevant to manipulation/manual therapy, effectiveness, prevention, treatment, and non-musculoskeletal disorders. Eligible for review were randomized controlled trials published in English. The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed independently by reviewers using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria for randomized controlled trials. We synthesized the evidence from articles with high or acceptable methodological quality according to the Synthesis without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) Guideline. The final risk of bias and evidence tables were reviewed by researchers who attended the Global Summit and 75% (38/50) had to approve the content to reach consensus. RESULTS: We retrieved 4997 citations, removed 1123 duplicates and screened 3874 citations. Of those, the eligibility of 32 articles was evaluated at the Global Summit and 16 articles were included in our systematic review. Our synthesis included six randomized controlled trials with acceptable or high methodological quality (reported in seven articles). These trials investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT for the management of infantile colic, childhood asthma, hypertension, primary dysmenorrhea, and migraine. None of the trials evaluated the effectiveness of SMT in preventing the occurrence of non-musculoskeletal disorders. Consensus was reached on the content of all risk of bias and evidence tables. All randomized controlled trials with high or acceptable quality found that SMT was not superior to sham interventions for the treatment of these non-musculoskeletal disorders. Six of 50 participants (12%) in the Global Summit did not approve the final report. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review included six randomized clinical trials (534 participants) of acceptable or high quality investigating the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT for the treatment of non-musculoskeletal disorders. We found no evidence of an effect of SMT for the management of non-musculoskeletal disorders including infantile colic, childhood asthma, hypertension, primary dysmenorrhea, and migraine. This finding challenges the validity of the theory that treating spinal dysfunctions with SMT has a physiological effect on organs and their function. Governments, payers, regulators, educators, and clinicians should consider this evidence when developing policies about the use and reimbursement of SMT for non-musculoskeletal disorders.

Regional anesthesia training model for resource-limited settings: a prospective single-center observational study with pre-post evaluations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Educational initiatives are a sustainable means to address provider shortages in resource-limited settings (RLS), yet few regional anesthesia curricula for RLS have been described. We sought to design a reproducible training model for RLS called Global Regional Anesthesia Curricular Engagement (GRACE), implement GRACE at an RLS hospital in Ghana, and measure training and practice-based outcomes associated with GRACE implementation. METHODS: Fourteen of 15 physician anesthesiologists from the study location and three from an outside orthopedic specialty hospital consented to be trainees and trainers, respectively, for this prospective single-center observational study with pre-post evaluations. We conducted an initial needs assessment to determine current clinical practices, participants' learning preferences, and available resources. Needs assessment findings, expert panel recommendations, and investigator consensus were then used to generate a site-specific curriculum that was implemented during two 3-week periods. We evaluated trainee satisfaction and changes in knowledge, clinical skill, and peripheral nerve block (PNB) utilization using the Kirkpatrick method. RESULTS: The curriculum consisted of didactic lectures, simulations, and clinical instruction to teach ultrasound-guided PNB for limb injuries. Pre-post evaluations showed trainees were satisfied with GRACE, median knowledge examination score improved from 62.5% (15/24) to 91.7% (22/24) (p<0.001), clinical examination pass rate increased from 28.6% (4/14) to 85.7% (12/14) (p<0.01), and total PNB performed in 3 months grew from 48 to 118. CONCLUSIONS: GRACE applied in an RLS hospital led to the design, implementation, and measurement of a regional anesthesia curriculum tailored to institutional specifications that was associated with positive Kirkpatrick outcomes.

If I was more informed about what exactly they do: perceptions of Botswana district hospital healthcare providers about World Spine Care.

Background: In 2011, World Spine Care (WSC) opened their pilot clinic at the Botswana Mahalapye District Hospital (MDH) aiming to develop a low-cost model of evidence-based spine care for underserved communities. Providing sustainable, integrated, evidence-based care will require buy-in from local healthcare providers (HCPs) and the communities served. The purpose of this project was to understand how MDH HCPs perceive WSC. Methods: We used a qualitative descriptive methodology to conduct individual, semi-structured interviews with MDH HCPs who had some familiarity about WSC services. Interviews were conducted in English, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. We used an iterative coding process for thematic content analysis and interpretations were regularly reviewed by all co-authors. Results: In March 2017, interviews with 20 HCPs, from diverse disciplines with a range in years' experience at MDH, revealed three overlapping themes: knowledge about WSC and spinal related disorders, perceived role of WSC, and challenges for WSC integration. Participants who attended WSC conferences or self-referred for care were more informed and, generally, held positive perceptions. Participants lacked knowledge about managing spinal-related disorders, asserted hospital protocols did not meet patient needs, and perceived WSC is 'filling a gap' to manage these conditions. There were mixed perceptions about care received as WSC patients; some ultimately obtained relief, while others reported the treatment painful and unfamiliar, discharging themselves from care. Challenges to integrate WSC into the healthcare system were: lack of knowledge about scope of practice and unclear referral pathways; reversing the isolated care WSC provides by increasing collaboration between WSC and hospital staff; and, high turnover of WSC clinicians that undermines program sustainability. Conclusions: MDH healthcare providers had adequate general knowledge about World Spine Care and spinal-related disorders, but did not understand the WSC scope of practice nor referral pathways to and from providers. Participants advocated for greater collaboration between WSC and hospital staff to increase acceptance and integration to deliver spine care services and foster wider adoption of the WSC model, particularly if WSC expands services across Botswana. Future efforts that incorporate interviews with patients and government officials also can provide valuable perspectives to achieve sustainable, integrated, evidence-based spine care.

Interprofessional Attitudes and Interdisciplinary Practices for Older Adults With Back Pain Among Doctors of Chiropractic: A Descriptive Survey.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to report on attitudes of doctors of chiropractic (DCs) toward integrative medicine and their self-reported interdisciplinary practices for older adults with back pain. METHODS: This descriptive survey was conducted with licensed DCs in a Midwestern community in the United States. Respondents completed a 53-item postal survey of demographics, practice characteristics, referral and co-management patterns, attitudes toward interdisciplinary practice, and the Integrative Medicine-30 Questionnaire (IM-30). Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-seven DCs completed the survey (29% response). Geriatric-focused chiropractic practices were uncommon (<15%), although 56% reported that 25% to 49% of the patients treated each week were older adults. Respondents had a moderate orientation toward collaboration with other health care providers (IM-30 mean [standard deviation] 61.3 [11.5]). The IM-30 subscales placed DCs high on measures of integrative medicine safety; moderate on patient-centeredness, openness to working with other providers, and referral readiness; and low on learning from alternative paradigms. Doctors of chiropractic most referred older patients to neurologists, family physicians, massage therapists, orthopedists, and other chiropractors. Doctors of chiropractic reported the highest levels of co-management with family physicians, physical therapists, and massage therapists. Most DCs (92%) were confident in their own ability to manage back pain in older adults, with modest confidence expressed for treatments from professionals using manual therapies. Most (77%) responded that older patients would experience the most improvement if DCs collaborated with another chiropractor, rather than with medical professionals. CONCLUSION: Doctors of chiropractic in one geographic community are moderately oriented toward interprofessional practice with other health care providers for older adults with back pain. Follow-up studies in representative national and international samples are recommended.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: resources to implement a spine care program.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a list of resources necessary to implement a model of care for the management of spine-related concerns anywhere in the world, but especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Contents from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) Classification System and GSCI care pathway papers provided a foundation for the resources list. A seed document was developed that included resources for spine care that could be delivered in primary, secondary and tertiary settings, as well as resources needed for self-care and community-based settings for a wide variety of spine concerns (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, pathology and spinal diseases). An iterative expert consensus process was used using electronic surveys. RESULTS: Thirty-five experts completed the process. An iterative consensus process was used through an electronic survey. A consensus was reached after two rounds. The checklist of resources included the following categories: healthcare provider knowledge and skills, materials and equipment, human resources, facilities and infrastructure. The list identifies resources needed to implement a spine care program in any community, which are based upon spine care needs. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first international and interprofessional attempt to develop a list of resources needed to deliver care in an evidence-based care pathway for the management of people presenting with spine-related concerns. This resource list needs to be field tested in a variety of communities with different resource capacities to verify its utility. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: model of care and implementation.

PURPOSE: Spine-related disorders are a leading cause of global disability and are a burden on society and to public health. Currently, there is no comprehensive, evidence-based model of care for spine-related disorders, which includes back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, spinal diseases, and pathology, that could be applied in global health care settings. The purposes of this paper are to propose: (1) principles to transform the delivery of spine care; (2) an evidence-based model that could be applied globally; and (3) implementation suggestions. METHODS: The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) meetings and literature reviews were synthesized into a seed document and distributed to spine care experts. After three rounds of a modified Delphi process, all participants reached consensus on the final model of care and implementation steps. RESULTS: Sixty-six experts representing 24 countries participated. The GSCI model of care has eight core principles: person-centered, people-centered, biopsychosocial, proactive, evidence-based, integrative, collaborative, and self-sustaining. The model of care includes a classification system and care pathway, levels of care, and a focus on the patient's journey. The six steps for implementation are initiation and preparation; assessment of the current situation; planning and designing solutions; implementation; assessment and evaluation of program; and sustain program and scale up. CONCLUSION: The GSCI proposes an evidence-based, practical, sustainable, and scalable model of care representing eight core principles with a six-step implementation plan. The aim of this model is to help transform spine care globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries and underserved communities. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The Global Spine Care Initiative: classification system for spine-related concerns.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a classification system that would apply to anyone with a spine-related concern and that can be used in an evidence-based spine care pathway. METHODS: Existing classification systems for spinal disorders were assembled. A seed document was developed through round-table discussions followed by a modified Delphi process. International and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate. RESULTS: Thirty-six experts from 15 countries participated. After the second round, there was 95% agreement of the proposed classification system. The six major classifications included: no or minimal symptoms (class 0); mild symptoms (i.e., neck or back pain) but no interference with activities (class I); moderate or severe symptoms with interference of activities (class II); spine-related neurological signs or symptoms (class III); severe bony spine deformity, trauma or pathology (class IV); and spine-related symptoms or destructive lesions associated with systemic pathology (class V). Subclasses for each major class included chronicity and severity when different interventions were anticipated or recommended. CONCLUSIONS: An international and interprofessional group developed a comprehensive classification system for all potential presentations of people who may seek care or advice at a spine care program. This classification can be used in the development of a spine care pathway, in clinical practice, and for research purposes. This classification needs to be tested for validity, reliability, and consistency among clinicians from different specialties and in different communities and cultures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.