Cargando…

Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Konstantinou, Kika, Lewis, Martyn, Dunn, Kate M, Ogollah, Reuben, Artus, Majid, Hill, Jonathan C, Hughes, Gemma, Robinson, Michelle, Saunders, Benjamin, Bartlam, Bernadette, Kigozi, Jesse, Jowett, Sue, Mallen, Christian D, Hay, Elaine M, van der Windt, Danielle A, Foster, Nadine E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323615/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32617529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30099-0
_version_ 1783551800869126144
author Konstantinou, Kika
Lewis, Martyn
Dunn, Kate M
Ogollah, Reuben
Artus, Majid
Hill, Jonathan C
Hughes, Gemma
Robinson, Michelle
Saunders, Benjamin
Bartlam, Bernadette
Kigozi, Jesse
Jowett, Sue
Mallen, Christian D
Hay, Elaine M
van der Windt, Danielle A
Foster, Nadine E
author_facet Konstantinou, Kika
Lewis, Martyn
Dunn, Kate M
Ogollah, Reuben
Artus, Majid
Hill, Jonathan C
Hughes, Gemma
Robinson, Michelle
Saunders, Benjamin
Bartlam, Bernadette
Kigozi, Jesse
Jowett, Sue
Mallen, Christian D
Hay, Elaine M
van der Windt, Danielle A
Foster, Nadine E
author_sort Konstantinou, Kika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care. METHODS: We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as “completely recovered” or “much better” on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581. FINDINGS: Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4–13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4–14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89–1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care. INTERPRETATION: The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7323615
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73236152020-06-30 Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial Konstantinou, Kika Lewis, Martyn Dunn, Kate M Ogollah, Reuben Artus, Majid Hill, Jonathan C Hughes, Gemma Robinson, Michelle Saunders, Benjamin Bartlam, Bernadette Kigozi, Jesse Jowett, Sue Mallen, Christian D Hay, Elaine M van der Windt, Danielle A Foster, Nadine E Lancet Rheumatol Article BACKGROUND: Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care. METHODS: We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as “completely recovered” or “much better” on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581. FINDINGS: Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4–13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4–14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89–1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care. INTERPRETATION: The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research. Elsevier 2020-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7323615/ /pubmed/32617529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30099-0 Text en © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Konstantinou, Kika
Lewis, Martyn
Dunn, Kate M
Ogollah, Reuben
Artus, Majid
Hill, Jonathan C
Hughes, Gemma
Robinson, Michelle
Saunders, Benjamin
Bartlam, Bernadette
Kigozi, Jesse
Jowett, Sue
Mallen, Christian D
Hay, Elaine M
van der Windt, Danielle A
Foster, Nadine E
Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title_full Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title_short Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial
title_sort stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (scopic): a randomised controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323615/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32617529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30099-0
work_keys_str_mv AT konstantinoukika stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT lewismartyn stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT dunnkatem stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ogollahreuben stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT artusmajid stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hilljonathanc stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hughesgemma stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT robinsonmichelle stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT saundersbenjamin stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT bartlambernadette stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kigozijesse stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT jowettsue stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT mallenchristiand stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hayelainem stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT vanderwindtdaniellea stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT fosternadinee stratifiedcareversususualcareformanagementofpatientspresentingwithsciaticainprimarycarescopicarandomisedcontrolledtrial