一项针对老年退伍军人的慢性腰痛个性化治疗方法的随机对照试验。

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Debra K Weiner, Angela Gentili, Meika A Fang, Edward Garay, Laura Lawson, Lenore Joseph, Cathy C Lee, Michelle I Rossi, Beverly Thorn, Subashan Perera
{"title":"一项针对老年退伍军人的慢性腰痛个性化治疗方法的随机对照试验。","authors":"Debra K Weiner, Angela Gentili, Meika A Fang, Edward Garay, Laura Lawson, Lenore Joseph, Cathy C Lee, Michelle I Rossi, Beverly Thorn, Subashan Perera","doi":"10.1002/acr.25671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to test the efficacy of personalized treatment of older Veterans with chronic low back pain (CLBP) delivered by Aging Back Clinics (ABC) as compared with usual care (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred ninety-nine Veterans age 65-89 with CLBP from 3 VA medical centers underwent baseline testing, randomization to ABC or UC and 12 months follow-up. ABC care was guided by trained physicians and published algorithms targeting key conditions contributing to CLBP (e.g., hip osteoarthritis, depression, fibromyalgia). UC was guided by the participant's primary care provider. The primary outcome was 6-month change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Among multiple secondary outcomes were pain intensity, quality of life (PROMIS-Global Health), self-reported physical function (PROMIS-29), falls, life space, and health care utilization collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Analyses were conducted according to intention-to-treat.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant group differences in ODI change. Greater improvement with ABC in the PROMIS-29 physical function scale was observed at 12 months (1.7 vs -0.4 points), PROMIS Global physical health at 6 (1.3 vs -1.2) and 12 months (0.7 vs -1.5), PROMIS Global mental health at 6 months (0.2 vs -2.3), present and prior week average/worst pain over 12 months (all p<0.05). There were marginally significantly fewer falls over 12 months (p=0.0527).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We did not find confirmatory evidence that personalized care (ABC) was superior with respect to ODI. We did find preliminary evidence that ABC was superior in other respects including improved self-reported physical health, less pain and fewer falls.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing A Personalized Approach to Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Older Veterans.\",\"authors\":\"Debra K Weiner, Angela Gentili, Meika A Fang, Edward Garay, Laura Lawson, Lenore Joseph, Cathy C Lee, Michelle I Rossi, Beverly Thorn, Subashan Perera\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acr.25671\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to test the efficacy of personalized treatment of older Veterans with chronic low back pain (CLBP) delivered by Aging Back Clinics (ABC) as compared with usual care (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred ninety-nine Veterans age 65-89 with CLBP from 3 VA medical centers underwent baseline testing, randomization to ABC or UC and 12 months follow-up. ABC care was guided by trained physicians and published algorithms targeting key conditions contributing to CLBP (e.g., hip osteoarthritis, depression, fibromyalgia). UC was guided by the participant's primary care provider. The primary outcome was 6-month change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Among multiple secondary outcomes were pain intensity, quality of life (PROMIS-Global Health), self-reported physical function (PROMIS-29), falls, life space, and health care utilization collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Analyses were conducted according to intention-to-treat.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant group differences in ODI change. Greater improvement with ABC in the PROMIS-29 physical function scale was observed at 12 months (1.7 vs -0.4 points), PROMIS Global physical health at 6 (1.3 vs -1.2) and 12 months (0.7 vs -1.5), PROMIS Global mental health at 6 months (0.2 vs -2.3), present and prior week average/worst pain over 12 months (all p<0.05). There were marginally significantly fewer falls over 12 months (p=0.0527).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We did not find confirmatory evidence that personalized care (ABC) was superior with respect to ODI. We did find preliminary evidence that ABC was superior in other respects including improved self-reported physical health, less pain and fewer falls.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25671\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25671","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在测试老年退伍军人慢性腰痛(CLBP)的个性化治疗与常规护理(UC)相比,由老年背部诊所(ABC)提供的效果。方法:来自3个VA医疗中心的299名年龄在65-89岁的CLBP退伍军人接受基线测试,随机分为ABC或UC,随访12个月。ABC护理由训练有素的医生指导,并针对导致CLBP的关键疾病(如髋关节骨关节炎、抑郁症、纤维肌痛)发表算法。UC由参与者的初级保健提供者指导。主要终点是6个月Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)的变化。多个次要结局包括疼痛强度、生活质量(promise - global Health)、自我报告的身体功能(promise -29)、跌倒、生活空间和在3、6、9和12个月收集的医疗保健利用情况。根据意向治疗进行分析。结果:两组间ODI变化无明显差异。在12个月时(1.7 vs -0.4), 6个月时(1.3 vs -1.2)和12个月时(0.7 vs -1.5), 6个月时(0.2 vs -2.3), 12个月时(当前和前一周)的平均/最严重疼痛,我们没有发现个性化护理(ABC)优于ODI的证实性证据。我们确实发现了初步证据,证明ABC在其他方面更优越,包括改善自我报告的身体健康、减少疼痛和减少跌倒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing A Personalized Approach to Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Older Veterans.

Objective: We aimed to test the efficacy of personalized treatment of older Veterans with chronic low back pain (CLBP) delivered by Aging Back Clinics (ABC) as compared with usual care (UC).

Methods: Two hundred ninety-nine Veterans age 65-89 with CLBP from 3 VA medical centers underwent baseline testing, randomization to ABC or UC and 12 months follow-up. ABC care was guided by trained physicians and published algorithms targeting key conditions contributing to CLBP (e.g., hip osteoarthritis, depression, fibromyalgia). UC was guided by the participant's primary care provider. The primary outcome was 6-month change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Among multiple secondary outcomes were pain intensity, quality of life (PROMIS-Global Health), self-reported physical function (PROMIS-29), falls, life space, and health care utilization collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Analyses were conducted according to intention-to-treat.

Results: There were no significant group differences in ODI change. Greater improvement with ABC in the PROMIS-29 physical function scale was observed at 12 months (1.7 vs -0.4 points), PROMIS Global physical health at 6 (1.3 vs -1.2) and 12 months (0.7 vs -1.5), PROMIS Global mental health at 6 months (0.2 vs -2.3), present and prior week average/worst pain over 12 months (all p<0.05). There were marginally significantly fewer falls over 12 months (p=0.0527).

Conclusions: We did not find confirmatory evidence that personalized care (ABC) was superior with respect to ODI. We did find preliminary evidence that ABC was superior in other respects including improved self-reported physical health, less pain and fewer falls.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信