Richard Deyo

Background
Current literature describes the limits and pitfalls of using opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic pain and the importance of identifying alternatives. The objective of this study was to identify the practical issues patients and providers face when accessing alternatives to opioids, and how multiple parties view these issues.

Methods
Qualitative data were gathered to evaluate the outcomes of acupuncture and chiropractic (A/C) services for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) using structured interview guides among patients with CMP (n = 90) and primary care providers (PCPs) (n = 25) purposively sampled from a managed care health care system as well as from contracted community A/C providers (n = 14). Focus groups and interviews were conducted patients with CMP with varying histories of A/C use. Plan PCPs and contracted A/C providers took part in individual interviews. All participants were asked about their experiences managing chronic pain and experience with and/or attitudes about A/C treatment. Audio recordings were transcribed and thematically coded. A summarized version of the focus group/interview guides is included in the Additional file 1.

Results
We identified four themes around opioid use: (1) attitudes toward use of opioids to manage chronic pain; (2) the limited alternative options for chronic pain management; (3) the potential of A/C care as a tool to help manage pain; and (4) the complex system around chronic pain management. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with opioid medications for pain management, many practical barriers challenged access to other options. Most of the participants’ perceived A/C care as helpful for short term pain relief. We identified that problems with timing, expectations, and plan coverage limited A/C care potential for pain relief treatment.

Conclusions
These results suggest that education about realistic expectations for chronic pain management and therapy options, as well as making A/C care more easily accessible, might lead to more satisfaction for patients and providers, and provide important input to policy makers.

Issues related to measuring outcomes of care in geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) units were identified by the outcomes working group of the GEM evaluation conference. GEM units have as a major goal the improvement or maintenance of both physical and psychosocial function. Suggested outcome measures for physical health included survival, restricted activity days, general health perceptions, comprehensive physical function, and miscellaneous specific types of functioning. In the area of psycho-social function, the working group suggested measuring cognitive function, affect/life satisfaction, social function, and satisfaction with care. The patient's caregiver (eg, spouse or child) is often an important target of GEM care, and the group suggested measuring caregiver burden, life satisfaction, and assessment of patient behavior problems. While the primary goal of GEM units is to improve health status, their effects on the utilization and cost of health care are important t...

This study used a prospective cohort design. To examine factors associated with favorable self-reported patient outcomes 1 year after elective surgery for degenerative back problems. Many previous studies addressing the results of low back surgery have been conducted in academic institutions or by single surgeons. As part of a quality improvement effort, surgeons in private practice led a community-based outcomes management project in Washington State. Patients ages 18 and older with the following diagnoses were eligible for the study: degenerative changes, herniated disc, instability, and spinal stenosis. Nine orthopedists and neurosurgeons enrolled a total of 281 patients. Participants were asked to complete baseline and 1-year follow-up surveys. Data concerning diagnoses, clinical signs, and operative procedures were provided by the surgeons. The researchers examined sociodemographic characteristics, self-reported symptoms before surgery, preoperative clinical signs, diagnoses, and operative procedures associated with three primary outcomes: better functioning, improved quality of life, and overall treatment satisfaction. Follow-up surveys were completed by 236 (84%) of the enrolled patients. Approximately two thirds of the study participants reported much better functioning (65%), a great quality of life improvement (64%), and a very positive perspective about their treatment outcome (68%). The following variables were associated with worse patient outcomes: older age, previous low back surgery, workers' compensation coverage, and consultation with an attorney before surgery. Patients undergoing a fusion procedure were more likely to report good outcomes. The authors' experience indicates that community-based outcomes data collection efforts are feasible and can be incorporated into usual clinical practice. The study results indicate that compensation payments and litigation are two important predictors of poor outcomes after low back surgery in community practice. Because of small numbers, varied diagnoses, and possible selection bias, the findings with respect to fusion should be interpreted cautiously.

The Back Pain Outcome Assessment Team's information dissemination effort aims to provide a professional model for translating research findings into more consistent patterns of low back pain care and improved patient outcomes. The model's effectiveness will be evaluated in a randomized community-based trial. Intervention activities have been implemented in five Washington state communities. Strategies included a regional study group of surgeon opinion leaders, local hospital administrator small group meetings, traditional continuing medical education lectures, generalist academic detailing, an interactive videodisc (shared decision-making program) for patients who are surgical candidates, a prospective outcomes tracking system, and the distribution of national practice guidelines. This report describes the study design, methods for involving communities in the change process, the development and implementation of intervention activities, and an evaluation of the process.

Sequential cross-sectional study. To quantify patterns of outpatient lumbar spine surgery. Outpatient lumbar spine surgery patterns are undocumented. We used CPT-4 and ICD-9-CM diagnosis/procedure codes to identify lumbar spine operations in 20+ year olds. We combined sample volume estimates from the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), the National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery (NSAS), and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) with complete case counts from HCUP's State Inpatient Databases (SIDs) and State Ambulatory Surgery Databases (SASDs) for four geographically diverse states. We excluded pregnant patients and those with vertebral fractures, cancer, trauma, or infection. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted rates. Ambulatory cases comprised 4% to 13% of procedures performed from 1994 to 1996 (NHDS/NSAS data), versus 9% to 17% for 1997 to 2000 (SID/SASD data). Discectomies comprised 70% to 90% of outpatient cases. Conversely, proportions of discectomies performed on outpatients rose from 4% in 1994 to 26% in 2000. Outpatient fusions and laminectomies were uncommon. NIS data indicate that nationwide inpatient surgery rates were stable (159 cases/100,000 in 1994 vs. 162/100,000 in 2000). However, combined data from all sources suggest that inpatient and outpatient rates rose from 164 cases/100,000 in 1994 to 201/100,000 in 2000. While inpatient lumbar surgery rates remained relatively stable for 1994 to 2000, outpatient surgery increased over time.

A prospective cohort study. To assess 10-year outcomes of patients with sciatica resulting from a lumbar disc herniation treated surgically or nonsurgically. There is little information comparing long-term outcomes of surgical and conservative therapy of lumbar disc herniation in contemporary clinical practice. Prior studies suggest that these outcomes are similar. Patients recruited from the practices of orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and occupational medicine physicians throughout Maine had baseline interviews with follow-up questionnaires mailed at regular intervals over 10 years. Clinical data were obtained at baseline from a physician questionnaire. Primary analyses were based on initial treatment received, either surgical or nonsurgical. Secondary analyses examined actual treatments received by 10 years. Outcomes included patient-reported symptoms of leg and back pain, functional status, satisfaction, and work and disability compensation status. Of 507 eligible consenting patients initially enrolled, 10-year outcomes were available for 400 of 477 (84%) surviving patients; 217 of 255 (85%) treated surgically, and 183 of 222 (82%) treated nonsurgically. Patients undergoing surgery had worse baseline symptoms and functional status than those initially treated nonsurgically. By 10 years, 25% of surgical patients had undergone at least one additional lumbar spine operation, and 25% of nonsurgical patients had at least one lumbar spine operation. At 10-year follow-up, 69% of patients initially treated surgically reported improvement in their predominant symptom (back or leg pain) versus 61% of those initially treated nonsurgically (P = 0.2). A larger proportion of surgical patients reported that their low back and leg pain were much better or completely gone (56% vs. 40%, P = 0.006) and were more satisfied with their current status (71% vs. 56%, P = 0.002). Treatment group differences persisted after adjustment for other determinants of outcome in multivariate models. Change in the modified Roland back-specific functional status scale favored surgical treatment, and the relative benefit persisted over the follow-up period. Despite these differences, work and disability status at 10 years were comparable among those treated surgically or nonsurgically. Surgically treated patients with a herniated lumbar disc had more complete relief of leg pain and improved function and satisfaction compared with nonsurgically treated patients over 10 years. Nevertheless, improvement in the patient's predominant symptom and work and disability outcomes were similar regardless of treatment received. For patients in whom elective discectomy is a treatment option, an individualized treatment plan requires patients and their physicians to integrate clinical findings with patient preferences based on their symptoms and goals.

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed nonspecific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The purpose of this article is to disseminate the report of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) task force on research standards for cLBP. The NIH Pain Consortium charged a research task force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel developed a 3-stage process, each with a 2-day meeting. The panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research subjects (drawing heavily on the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved these recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of cLBP. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.