Department of Emergency Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Denver Health Hospital & Authority, Denver, CO, United States of America.
Am J Emerg Med. 2019 Jul;37(7):1322-1326. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2018.10.009. Epub 2018 Oct 23.
Physical therapy (PT) is commonly cited as a non-opioid pain strategy, and previous studies indicate PT reduces opioid utilization in outpatients with back pain. No study has yet examined whether PT is associated with lower analgesic prescribing in the ED setting.
This was a retrospective cohort study of discharged ED visits with a primary ICD-10 diagnosis relating to back or neck pain from 10/1/15 to 2/21/17 at an urban academic ED. Visits receiving a PT evaluation were matched with same-date visits receiving usual care. We compared the primary outcomes of opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing between the two cohorts using chi-squared test and multivariable logistic regression.
74 ED visits received PT during the study period; these visits were matched with 390 same-date visits receiving usual care. Opioid prescribing among ED-PT visits was not significantly higher compared to usual care visits on both unadjusted analysis (50% vs 42%, p = 0.19) and adjusted analysis (adjOR 1.05, 95% CI 0.48-2.28). However, benzodiazepine prescribing among ED-PT visits was significantly higher than usual care visits on both unadjusted (45% vs 23%, p < 0.001) and adjusted analysis (adjOR 3.65, 95% CI 1.50-8.83).
In this single center study, ED back and neck pain visits receiving PT were no less likely to receive an opioid prescription and were more likely to receive a benzodiazepine than visits receiving usual care. Although prior studies demonstrate that PT may reduce opioid utilization in the subsequent year, these results indicate that analgesic prescribing is not reduced at the initial ED encounter.
物理治疗(PT)通常被认为是一种非阿片类疼痛策略,先前的研究表明,PT 可减少门诊腰痛患者的阿片类药物使用。尚无研究探讨 PT 是否与 ED 环境中阿片类药物处方量降低有关。
这是一项回顾性队列研究,纳入了 2015 年 10 月 1 日至 2017 年 2 月 21 日期间在城市学术 ED 就诊、主要 ICD-10 诊断为背痛或颈痛的出院 ED 就诊。接受 PT 评估的就诊与同日接受常规护理的就诊相匹配。我们通过卡方检验和多变量逻辑回归比较了两组的主要结局,即阿片类药物和苯二氮䓬类药物的处方。
在研究期间,74 次 ED 就诊接受了 PT;这些就诊与 390 次同日接受常规护理的就诊相匹配。在未调整分析(50% vs 42%,p=0.19)和调整分析(调整后的优势比 1.05,95%置信区间 0.48-2.28)中,ED-PT 就诊的阿片类药物处方率均不显著高于常规护理就诊。然而,在未调整分析(45% vs 23%,p<0.001)和调整分析(调整后的优势比 3.65,95%置信区间 1.50-8.83)中,ED-PT 就诊的苯二氮䓬类药物处方率均显著高于常规护理就诊。
在这项单中心研究中,接受 PT 的 ED 背痛和颈痛就诊开具阿片类药物处方的可能性并不低于接受常规护理的就诊,且开具苯二氮䓬类药物的可能性更高。尽管先前的研究表明,PT 可能会减少后续一年内的阿片类药物使用,但这些结果表明,在初始 ED 就诊时,阿片类药物的处方并未减少。