脊柱推拿与生物心理社会自我管理对比医疗护理治疗下腰痛的疗效:一项随机试验研究方案。
Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol.
机构信息
Integrative Health and Wellbeing Research Program Earl E. Bakken Center for Spirituality & Healing, University of Minnesota, Mayo Memorial Building C504, 420 Delaware Street, Minneapolis, MN, 55414, USA.
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Department of Physical Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, 4029 Forbes Tower, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA.
出版信息
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 May 25;24(1):415. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06549-w.
BACKGROUND
Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is widespread, costly, and burdensome to patients and health systems. Little is known about non-pharmacological treatments for the secondary prevention of cLBP. There is some evidence that treatments addressing psychosocial factors in higher risk patients are more effective than usual care. However, most clinical trials on acute and subacute LBP have evaluated interventions irrespective of prognosis.
METHODS
We have designed a phase 3 randomized trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. The study is also a Hybrid type 1 trial with focus on intervention effectiveness while simultaneously considering plausible implementation strategies. Adults (n = 1000) with acute/subacute LBP at moderate to high risk of chronicity based on the STarT Back screening tool will be randomized in to 1 of 4 interventions lasting up to 8 weeks: supported self-management (SSM), spinal manipulation therapy (SMT), both SSM and SMT, or medical care. The primary objective is to assess intervention effectiveness; the secondary objective is to assess barriers and facilitators impacting future implementation. Primary effectiveness outcome measures are: (1) average pain intensity over 12 months post-randomization (pain, numerical rating scale); (2) average low back disability over 12 months post-randomization (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire); (3) prevention of cLBP that is impactful at 10-12 months follow-up (LBP impact from the PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0). Secondary outcomes include: recovery, PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 measures to assess pain interference, physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. Other patient-reported measures include LBP frequency, medication use, healthcare utilization, productivity loss, STarT Back screening tool status, patient satisfaction, prevention of chronicity, adverse events, and dissemination measures. Objective measures include the Quebec Task Force Classification, Timed Up & Go Test, the Sit to Stand Test, and the Sock Test assessed by clinicians blinded to the patients' intervention assignment.
DISCUSSION
By targeting those subjects at higher risk this trial aims to fill an important gap in the scientific literature regarding the effectiveness of promising non-pharmacological treatments compared to medical care for the management of patients with an acute episode of LBP and the prevention of progression to a severe chronic back problem.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581123.
背景
慢性下背痛(cLBP)广泛存在,给患者和医疗系统带来沉重负担。目前对于 cLBP 的二级预防,人们知之甚少。有证据表明,针对高风险患者的心理社会因素进行治疗,比常规护理更有效。然而,大多数急性和亚急性 LBP 的临床试验评估了干预措施,而不考虑预后。
方法
我们设计了一项 3 期随机试验,采用 2×2 析因设计。该研究也是一种混合 1 型试验,重点关注干预效果,同时考虑合理的实施策略。根据 STarT Back 筛查工具,将 1000 名有急性/亚急性 LBP 且有较高慢性风险的成年人(中至高度风险)随机分为 4 组,每组接受为期 8 周的干预:支持性自我管理(SSM)、脊柱推拿疗法(SMT)、SSM 和 SMT 联合治疗、或常规医疗护理。主要目标是评估干预效果;次要目标是评估影响未来实施的障碍和促进因素。主要有效性结果测量指标为:(1)随机分组后 12 个月的平均疼痛强度(疼痛,数字评分量表);(2)随机分组后 12 个月的平均下腰痛残疾程度(Roland-Morris 残疾问卷);(3)在 10-12 个月随访时预防 cLBP 的效果(PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 中的 LBP 影响)。次要结果包括:恢复情况、PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 评估疼痛干扰、身体功能、焦虑、抑郁、疲劳、睡眠障碍和参与社会角色及活动能力的指标。其他患者报告的测量指标包括 LBP 发作频率、药物使用、医疗保健利用、生产力损失、STarT Back 筛查工具状态、患者满意度、慢性预防、不良事件和传播措施。客观测量指标包括由临床医生进行的 Quebec 任务组分类、计时起立行走测试、坐立站起测试和袜子测试,这些指标对患者的干预分配保持盲态。
讨论
本试验针对高风险人群,旨在填补科学文献中的一个重要空白,即与常规护理相比,针对急性 LBP 发作患者的管理和预防进展为严重慢性背部问题,有前景的非药物治疗在有效性方面的差距。
试验注册
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03581123。