Cargando…

Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Back pain remains a challenge for primary care internationally. One model that has not been tested is stratification of the management according to the patient's prognosis (low, medium, or high risk). We compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stratified primar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hill, Jonathan C, Whitehurst, David GT, Lewis, Martyn, Bryan, Stirling, Dunn, Kate M, Foster, Nadine E, Konstantinou, Kika, Main, Chris J, Mason, Elizabeth, Somerville, Simon, Sowden, Gail, Vohora, Kanchan, Hay, Elaine M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lancet Publishing Group 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3208163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21963002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60937-9
_version_ 1782215599919726592
author Hill, Jonathan C
Whitehurst, David GT
Lewis, Martyn
Bryan, Stirling
Dunn, Kate M
Foster, Nadine E
Konstantinou, Kika
Main, Chris J
Mason, Elizabeth
Somerville, Simon
Sowden, Gail
Vohora, Kanchan
Hay, Elaine M
author_facet Hill, Jonathan C
Whitehurst, David GT
Lewis, Martyn
Bryan, Stirling
Dunn, Kate M
Foster, Nadine E
Konstantinou, Kika
Main, Chris J
Mason, Elizabeth
Somerville, Simon
Sowden, Gail
Vohora, Kanchan
Hay, Elaine M
author_sort Hill, Jonathan C
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Back pain remains a challenge for primary care internationally. One model that has not been tested is stratification of the management according to the patient's prognosis (low, medium, or high risk). We compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stratified primary care (intervention) with non-stratified current best practice (control). METHODS: 1573 adults (aged ≥18 years) with back pain (with or without radiculopathy) consultations at ten general practices in England responded to invitations to attend an assessment clinic. Eligible participants were randomly assigned by use of computer-generated stratified blocks with a 2:1 ratio to intervention or control group. Primary outcome was the effect of treatment on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score at 12 months. In the economic evaluation, we focused on estimating incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health-care costs related to back pain. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN37113406. FINDINGS: 851 patients were assigned to the intervention (n=568) and control groups (n=283). Overall, adjusted mean changes in RMDQ scores were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group at 4 months (4·7 [SD 5·9] vs 3·0 [5·9], between-group difference 1·81 [95% CI 1·06–2·57]) and at 12 months (4·3 [6·4] vs 3·3 [6·2], 1·06 [0·25–1·86]), equating to effect sizes of 0·32 (0·19–0·45) and 0·19 (0·04–0·33), respectively. At 12 months, stratified care was associated with a mean increase in generic health benefit (0·039 additional QALYs) and cost savings (£240·01 vs £274·40) compared with the control group. INTERPRETATION: The results show that a stratified approach, by use of prognostic screening with matched pathways, will have important implications for the future management of back pain in primary care. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3208163
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Lancet Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32081632012-01-19 Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial Hill, Jonathan C Whitehurst, David GT Lewis, Martyn Bryan, Stirling Dunn, Kate M Foster, Nadine E Konstantinou, Kika Main, Chris J Mason, Elizabeth Somerville, Simon Sowden, Gail Vohora, Kanchan Hay, Elaine M Lancet Articles BACKGROUND: Back pain remains a challenge for primary care internationally. One model that has not been tested is stratification of the management according to the patient's prognosis (low, medium, or high risk). We compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stratified primary care (intervention) with non-stratified current best practice (control). METHODS: 1573 adults (aged ≥18 years) with back pain (with or without radiculopathy) consultations at ten general practices in England responded to invitations to attend an assessment clinic. Eligible participants were randomly assigned by use of computer-generated stratified blocks with a 2:1 ratio to intervention or control group. Primary outcome was the effect of treatment on the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score at 12 months. In the economic evaluation, we focused on estimating incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health-care costs related to back pain. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN37113406. FINDINGS: 851 patients were assigned to the intervention (n=568) and control groups (n=283). Overall, adjusted mean changes in RMDQ scores were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group at 4 months (4·7 [SD 5·9] vs 3·0 [5·9], between-group difference 1·81 [95% CI 1·06–2·57]) and at 12 months (4·3 [6·4] vs 3·3 [6·2], 1·06 [0·25–1·86]), equating to effect sizes of 0·32 (0·19–0·45) and 0·19 (0·04–0·33), respectively. At 12 months, stratified care was associated with a mean increase in generic health benefit (0·039 additional QALYs) and cost savings (£240·01 vs £274·40) compared with the control group. INTERPRETATION: The results show that a stratified approach, by use of prognostic screening with matched pathways, will have important implications for the future management of back pain in primary care. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK. Lancet Publishing Group 2011-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC3208163/ /pubmed/21963002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60937-9 Text en © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This document may be redistributed and reused, subject to certain conditions (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authorsview.authors/supplementalterms1.0) .
spellingShingle Articles
Hill, Jonathan C
Whitehurst, David GT
Lewis, Martyn
Bryan, Stirling
Dunn, Kate M
Foster, Nadine E
Konstantinou, Kika
Main, Chris J
Mason, Elizabeth
Somerville, Simon
Sowden, Gail
Vohora, Kanchan
Hay, Elaine M
Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title_full Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title_short Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial
title_sort comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (start back): a randomised controlled trial
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3208163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21963002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60937-9
work_keys_str_mv AT hilljonathanc comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT whitehurstdavidgt comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lewismartyn comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bryanstirling comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT dunnkatem comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT fosternadinee comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT konstantinoukika comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT mainchrisj comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT masonelizabeth comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT somervillesimon comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT sowdengail comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT vohorakanchan comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hayelainem comparisonofstratifiedprimarycaremanagementforlowbackpainwithcurrentbestpracticestartbackarandomisedcontrolledtrial