Cargando…
Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol
BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is widespread, costly, and burdensome to patients and health systems. Little is known about non-pharmacological treatments for the secondary prevention of cLBP. There is some evidence that treatments addressing psychosocial factors in higher risk patients are...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10209583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37231386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06549-w |
_version_ | 1785046907778760704 |
---|---|
author | Bronfort, Gert Delitto, Anthony Schneider, Michael Heagerty, Patrick J. Chou, Roger Connett, John Evans, Roni George, Steven Glick, Ronald M. Greco, Carol Hanson, Linda Keefe, Francis Leininger, Brent Licciardone, John McFarland, Christine Meier, Eric Schulz, Craig Turk, Dennis |
author_facet | Bronfort, Gert Delitto, Anthony Schneider, Michael Heagerty, Patrick J. Chou, Roger Connett, John Evans, Roni George, Steven Glick, Ronald M. Greco, Carol Hanson, Linda Keefe, Francis Leininger, Brent Licciardone, John McFarland, Christine Meier, Eric Schulz, Craig Turk, Dennis |
author_sort | Bronfort, Gert |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is widespread, costly, and burdensome to patients and health systems. Little is known about non-pharmacological treatments for the secondary prevention of cLBP. There is some evidence that treatments addressing psychosocial factors in higher risk patients are more effective than usual care. However, most clinical trials on acute and subacute LBP have evaluated interventions irrespective of prognosis. METHODS: We have designed a phase 3 randomized trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. The study is also a Hybrid type 1 trial with focus on intervention effectiveness while simultaneously considering plausible implementation strategies. Adults (n = 1000) with acute/subacute LBP at moderate to high risk of chronicity based on the STarT Back screening tool will be randomized in to 1 of 4 interventions lasting up to 8 weeks: supported self-management (SSM), spinal manipulation therapy (SMT), both SSM and SMT, or medical care. The primary objective is to assess intervention effectiveness; the secondary objective is to assess barriers and facilitators impacting future implementation. Primary effectiveness outcome measures are: (1) average pain intensity over 12 months post-randomization (pain, numerical rating scale); (2) average low back disability over 12 months post-randomization (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire); (3) prevention of cLBP that is impactful at 10–12 months follow-up (LBP impact from the PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0). Secondary outcomes include: recovery, PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 measures to assess pain interference, physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. Other patient-reported measures include LBP frequency, medication use, healthcare utilization, productivity loss, STarT Back screening tool status, patient satisfaction, prevention of chronicity, adverse events, and dissemination measures. Objective measures include the Quebec Task Force Classification, Timed Up & Go Test, the Sit to Stand Test, and the Sock Test assessed by clinicians blinded to the patients’ intervention assignment. DISCUSSION: By targeting those subjects at higher risk this trial aims to fill an important gap in the scientific literature regarding the effectiveness of promising non-pharmacological treatments compared to medical care for the management of patients with an acute episode of LBP and the prevention of progression to a severe chronic back problem. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581123. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10209583 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102095832023-05-26 Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol Bronfort, Gert Delitto, Anthony Schneider, Michael Heagerty, Patrick J. Chou, Roger Connett, John Evans, Roni George, Steven Glick, Ronald M. Greco, Carol Hanson, Linda Keefe, Francis Leininger, Brent Licciardone, John McFarland, Christine Meier, Eric Schulz, Craig Turk, Dennis BMC Musculoskelet Disord Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is widespread, costly, and burdensome to patients and health systems. Little is known about non-pharmacological treatments for the secondary prevention of cLBP. There is some evidence that treatments addressing psychosocial factors in higher risk patients are more effective than usual care. However, most clinical trials on acute and subacute LBP have evaluated interventions irrespective of prognosis. METHODS: We have designed a phase 3 randomized trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. The study is also a Hybrid type 1 trial with focus on intervention effectiveness while simultaneously considering plausible implementation strategies. Adults (n = 1000) with acute/subacute LBP at moderate to high risk of chronicity based on the STarT Back screening tool will be randomized in to 1 of 4 interventions lasting up to 8 weeks: supported self-management (SSM), spinal manipulation therapy (SMT), both SSM and SMT, or medical care. The primary objective is to assess intervention effectiveness; the secondary objective is to assess barriers and facilitators impacting future implementation. Primary effectiveness outcome measures are: (1) average pain intensity over 12 months post-randomization (pain, numerical rating scale); (2) average low back disability over 12 months post-randomization (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire); (3) prevention of cLBP that is impactful at 10–12 months follow-up (LBP impact from the PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0). Secondary outcomes include: recovery, PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 measures to assess pain interference, physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. Other patient-reported measures include LBP frequency, medication use, healthcare utilization, productivity loss, STarT Back screening tool status, patient satisfaction, prevention of chronicity, adverse events, and dissemination measures. Objective measures include the Quebec Task Force Classification, Timed Up & Go Test, the Sit to Stand Test, and the Sock Test assessed by clinicians blinded to the patients’ intervention assignment. DISCUSSION: By targeting those subjects at higher risk this trial aims to fill an important gap in the scientific literature regarding the effectiveness of promising non-pharmacological treatments compared to medical care for the management of patients with an acute episode of LBP and the prevention of progression to a severe chronic back problem. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581123. BioMed Central 2023-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC10209583/ /pubmed/37231386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06549-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Bronfort, Gert Delitto, Anthony Schneider, Michael Heagerty, Patrick J. Chou, Roger Connett, John Evans, Roni George, Steven Glick, Ronald M. Greco, Carol Hanson, Linda Keefe, Francis Leininger, Brent Licciardone, John McFarland, Christine Meier, Eric Schulz, Craig Turk, Dennis Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title | Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title_full | Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title_fullStr | Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title_short | Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
title_sort | effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10209583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37231386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06549-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bronfortgert effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT delittoanthony effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT schneidermichael effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT heagertypatrickj effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT chouroger effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT connettjohn effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT evansroni effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT georgesteven effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT glickronaldm effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT grecocarol effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT hansonlinda effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT keefefrancis effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT leiningerbrent effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT licciardonejohn effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT mcfarlandchristine effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT meiereric effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT schulzcraig effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol AT turkdennis effectivenessofspinalmanipulationandbiopsychosocialselfmanagementcomparedtomedicalcareforlowbackpainarandomizedtrialstudyprotocol |