Cargando…
Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain from the five most common presentations to primary care (back, neck, shoulder, knee or multi-site pain), where the majority of patients are managed, is a costly global health challenge. At present, first-line decision-making is based on clinical reasoning and s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7014664/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32046647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-1074-9 |
_version_ | 1783496681062400000 |
---|---|
author | Hill, J. C. Garvin, S. Chen, Y. Cooper, V. Wathall, S. Saunders, B. Lewis, M. Protheroe, J. Chudyk, A. Dunn, K. M. Hay, E. van der Windt, D. Mallen, C. Foster, N. E. |
author_facet | Hill, J. C. Garvin, S. Chen, Y. Cooper, V. Wathall, S. Saunders, B. Lewis, M. Protheroe, J. Chudyk, A. Dunn, K. M. Hay, E. van der Windt, D. Mallen, C. Foster, N. E. |
author_sort | Hill, J. C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain from the five most common presentations to primary care (back, neck, shoulder, knee or multi-site pain), where the majority of patients are managed, is a costly global health challenge. At present, first-line decision-making is based on clinical reasoning and stratified models of care have only been tested in patients with low back pain. We therefore, examined the feasibility of; a) a future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT), and b) General Practitioners (GPs) providing stratified care at the point-of-consultation for these five most common MSK pain presentations. METHODS: The design was a pragmatic pilot, two parallel-arm (stratified versus non-stratified care), cluster RCT and the setting was 8 UK GP practices (4 intervention, 4 control) with randomisation (stratified by practice size) and blinding of trial statistician and outcome data-collectors. Participants were adult consulters with MSK pain without indicators of serious pathologies, urgent medical needs, or vulnerabilities. Potential participant records were tagged and individuals sent postal invitations using a GP point-of-consultation electronic medical record (EMR) template. The intervention was supported by the EMR template housing the Keele STarT MSK Tool (to stratify into low, medium and high-risk prognostic subgroups of persistent pain and disability) and recommended matched treatment options. Feasibility outcomes included exploration of recruitment and follow-up rates, selection bias, and GP intervention fidelity. To capture recommended outcomes including pain and function, participants completed an initial questionnaire, brief monthly questionnaire (postal or SMS), and 6-month follow-up questionnaire. An anonymised EMR audit described GP decision-making. RESULTS: GPs screened 3063 patients (intervention = 1591, control = 1472), completed the EMR template with 1237 eligible patients (intervention = 513, control = 724) and 524 participants (42%) consented to data collection (intervention = 231, control = 293). Recruitment took 28 weeks (target 12 weeks) with > 90% follow-up retention (target > 75%). We detected no selection bias of concern and no harms identified. GP stratification tool fidelity failed to achieve a-priori success criteria, whilst fidelity to the matched treatments achieved “complete success”. CONCLUSIONS: A future definitive cluster RCT of stratified care for MSK pain is feasible and is underway, following key amendments including a clinician-completed version of the stratification tool and refinements to recommended matched treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Name of the registry: ISRCTN. Trial registration number: 15366334. Date of registration: 06/04/2016. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7014664 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70146642020-02-18 Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial Hill, J. C. Garvin, S. Chen, Y. Cooper, V. Wathall, S. Saunders, B. Lewis, M. Protheroe, J. Chudyk, A. Dunn, K. M. Hay, E. van der Windt, D. Mallen, C. Foster, N. E. BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain from the five most common presentations to primary care (back, neck, shoulder, knee or multi-site pain), where the majority of patients are managed, is a costly global health challenge. At present, first-line decision-making is based on clinical reasoning and stratified models of care have only been tested in patients with low back pain. We therefore, examined the feasibility of; a) a future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT), and b) General Practitioners (GPs) providing stratified care at the point-of-consultation for these five most common MSK pain presentations. METHODS: The design was a pragmatic pilot, two parallel-arm (stratified versus non-stratified care), cluster RCT and the setting was 8 UK GP practices (4 intervention, 4 control) with randomisation (stratified by practice size) and blinding of trial statistician and outcome data-collectors. Participants were adult consulters with MSK pain without indicators of serious pathologies, urgent medical needs, or vulnerabilities. Potential participant records were tagged and individuals sent postal invitations using a GP point-of-consultation electronic medical record (EMR) template. The intervention was supported by the EMR template housing the Keele STarT MSK Tool (to stratify into low, medium and high-risk prognostic subgroups of persistent pain and disability) and recommended matched treatment options. Feasibility outcomes included exploration of recruitment and follow-up rates, selection bias, and GP intervention fidelity. To capture recommended outcomes including pain and function, participants completed an initial questionnaire, brief monthly questionnaire (postal or SMS), and 6-month follow-up questionnaire. An anonymised EMR audit described GP decision-making. RESULTS: GPs screened 3063 patients (intervention = 1591, control = 1472), completed the EMR template with 1237 eligible patients (intervention = 513, control = 724) and 524 participants (42%) consented to data collection (intervention = 231, control = 293). Recruitment took 28 weeks (target 12 weeks) with > 90% follow-up retention (target > 75%). We detected no selection bias of concern and no harms identified. GP stratification tool fidelity failed to achieve a-priori success criteria, whilst fidelity to the matched treatments achieved “complete success”. CONCLUSIONS: A future definitive cluster RCT of stratified care for MSK pain is feasible and is underway, following key amendments including a clinician-completed version of the stratification tool and refinements to recommended matched treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Name of the registry: ISRCTN. Trial registration number: 15366334. Date of registration: 06/04/2016. BioMed Central 2020-02-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7014664/ /pubmed/32046647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-1074-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Hill, J. C. Garvin, S. Chen, Y. Cooper, V. Wathall, S. Saunders, B. Lewis, M. Protheroe, J. Chudyk, A. Dunn, K. M. Hay, E. van der Windt, D. Mallen, C. Foster, N. E. Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title | Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the start msk feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7014664/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32046647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-019-1074-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hilljc stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT garvins stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT cheny stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT cooperv stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT wathalls stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT saundersb stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT lewism stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT protheroej stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT chudyka stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT dunnkm stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT haye stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT vanderwindtd stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT mallenc stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT fosterne stratifiedprimarycareversusnonstratifiedcareformusculoskeletalpainfindingsfromthestartmskfeasibilityandpilotclusterrandomizedcontrolledtrial |