多学科综合医学团队治疗慢性腰痛:一项观察性比较疗效研究。

Peter M Wayne, David M Eisenberg, Kamila Osypiuk, Brian J Gow, Claudia M Witt, Roger B Davis, Julie E Buring
{"title":"多学科综合医学团队治疗慢性腰痛:一项观察性比较疗效研究。","authors":"Peter M Wayne,&nbsp;David M Eisenberg,&nbsp;Kamila Osypiuk,&nbsp;Brian J Gow,&nbsp;Claudia M Witt,&nbsp;Roger B Davis,&nbsp;Julie E Buring","doi":"10.1089/acm.2018.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) is burdensome and costly, and a common condition for which adults use integrative therapies. The effectiveness of multidisciplinary integrative approaches has not been well studied. The purpose of this observational study was to compare characteristics and outcomes of CLBP patients treated at the Osher Clinical Center (OCC) versus other clinics at Brigham and Women's Hospital.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Observational comparative effectiveness study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary care hospital.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Patients ≥21 years with 3+ months of CLBP or 6+ months of intermittent low-back pain.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>All patients were observed for 12 months. OCC patients received care at the integrative clinic (7.3 visits on average over 13 weeks); non-OCC patients received usual care at other clinics of the same hospital.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcomes: change from baseline to 6 months in functional status (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]) and bothersomeness of pain (BOP).</p><p><strong>Secondary outcomes: </strong>change in RDQ and BOP at 3 and 12 months, percentages of patients with clinically meaningful (≥30%) improvements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred fifty-six OCC and 153 non-OCC participants were enrolled; follow-up was 90.4 and 98.0%, respectively, at 12 months. There were substantial differences in baseline characteristics between groups. For RDQ, the adjusted mean group difference was nonsignificant at 6 months; for BOP, the differences were significant, but clinically small. At 12 months, the observed benefit on RDQ was significant and clinically meaningful; for BOP, there were significant, but clinically small differences. Percentages of patients with ≥30% improvements in RDQ were significantly greater in the OCC group only at 12 months, and both 6 and 12 months for BOP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Baseline characteristics can differ between those who select different sources of healthcare for CLBP. While benefits seen in the OCC versus non-OCC clinics were not large, further evaluation through randomized trials might be warranted to provide a more definitive evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520659,"journal":{"name":"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)","volume":" ","pages":"781-791"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/acm.2018.0002","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Multidisciplinary Integrative Medicine Team in the Treatment of Chronic Low-Back Pain: An Observational Comparative Effectiveness Study.\",\"authors\":\"Peter M Wayne,&nbsp;David M Eisenberg,&nbsp;Kamila Osypiuk,&nbsp;Brian J Gow,&nbsp;Claudia M Witt,&nbsp;Roger B Davis,&nbsp;Julie E Buring\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/acm.2018.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) is burdensome and costly, and a common condition for which adults use integrative therapies. The effectiveness of multidisciplinary integrative approaches has not been well studied. The purpose of this observational study was to compare characteristics and outcomes of CLBP patients treated at the Osher Clinical Center (OCC) versus other clinics at Brigham and Women's Hospital.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Observational comparative effectiveness study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary care hospital.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Patients ≥21 years with 3+ months of CLBP or 6+ months of intermittent low-back pain.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>All patients were observed for 12 months. OCC patients received care at the integrative clinic (7.3 visits on average over 13 weeks); non-OCC patients received usual care at other clinics of the same hospital.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcomes: change from baseline to 6 months in functional status (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]) and bothersomeness of pain (BOP).</p><p><strong>Secondary outcomes: </strong>change in RDQ and BOP at 3 and 12 months, percentages of patients with clinically meaningful (≥30%) improvements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred fifty-six OCC and 153 non-OCC participants were enrolled; follow-up was 90.4 and 98.0%, respectively, at 12 months. There were substantial differences in baseline characteristics between groups. For RDQ, the adjusted mean group difference was nonsignificant at 6 months; for BOP, the differences were significant, but clinically small. At 12 months, the observed benefit on RDQ was significant and clinically meaningful; for BOP, there were significant, but clinically small differences. Percentages of patients with ≥30% improvements in RDQ were significantly greater in the OCC group only at 12 months, and both 6 and 12 months for BOP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Baseline characteristics can differ between those who select different sources of healthcare for CLBP. While benefits seen in the OCC versus non-OCC clinics were not large, further evaluation through randomized trials might be warranted to provide a more definitive evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"781-791\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/acm.2018.0002\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2018.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/5/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2018.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

目的:慢性腰痛(CLBP)是一种负担沉重且费用昂贵的疾病,是成年人使用综合治疗的常见疾病。多学科综合方法的有效性尚未得到很好的研究。本观察性研究的目的是比较在Osher临床中心(OCC)和布里格姆妇女医院其他诊所治疗的CLBP患者的特征和结果。设计:观察性比较有效性研究。环境:三级保健医院。受试者:年龄≥21岁,CLBP≥3个月或间歇性腰痛≥6个月的患者。干预:所有患者观察12个月。OCC患者在综合诊所接受治疗(13周内平均访问7.3次);非occ患者在同一医院的其他诊所接受常规治疗。主要结果:从基线到6个月的功能状态变化(Roland残疾问卷[RDQ])和疼痛感(BOP)。次要结局:3个月和12个月时RDQ和BOP的变化,临床有意义(≥30%)改善的患者百分比。结果:OCC参与者156名,非OCC参与者153名;12个月随访率分别为90.4%和98.0%。两组之间的基线特征存在显著差异。对于RDQ, 6个月时调整后的平均组差异无统计学意义;对于BOP,差异显著,但临床较小。在12个月时,观察到的RDQ获益显著且具有临床意义;对于BOP,有显著性差异,但临床差异很小。OCC组RDQ改善≥30%的患者百分比仅在12个月时显著高于BOP组,在6个月和12个月时均显著高于OCC组。结论:选择不同医疗来源的CLBP患者的基线特征可能不同。虽然在OCC和非OCC诊所中看到的益处并不大,但通过随机试验进行进一步评估可能有必要提供更明确的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Multidisciplinary Integrative Medicine Team in the Treatment of Chronic Low-Back Pain: An Observational Comparative Effectiveness Study.

Objectives: Chronic low-back pain (CLBP) is burdensome and costly, and a common condition for which adults use integrative therapies. The effectiveness of multidisciplinary integrative approaches has not been well studied. The purpose of this observational study was to compare characteristics and outcomes of CLBP patients treated at the Osher Clinical Center (OCC) versus other clinics at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Design: Observational comparative effectiveness study.

Setting: Tertiary care hospital.

Subjects: Patients ≥21 years with 3+ months of CLBP or 6+ months of intermittent low-back pain.

Intervention: All patients were observed for 12 months. OCC patients received care at the integrative clinic (7.3 visits on average over 13 weeks); non-OCC patients received usual care at other clinics of the same hospital.

Outcome measures: Primary outcomes: change from baseline to 6 months in functional status (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]) and bothersomeness of pain (BOP).

Secondary outcomes: change in RDQ and BOP at 3 and 12 months, percentages of patients with clinically meaningful (≥30%) improvements.

Results: One hundred fifty-six OCC and 153 non-OCC participants were enrolled; follow-up was 90.4 and 98.0%, respectively, at 12 months. There were substantial differences in baseline characteristics between groups. For RDQ, the adjusted mean group difference was nonsignificant at 6 months; for BOP, the differences were significant, but clinically small. At 12 months, the observed benefit on RDQ was significant and clinically meaningful; for BOP, there were significant, but clinically small differences. Percentages of patients with ≥30% improvements in RDQ were significantly greater in the OCC group only at 12 months, and both 6 and 12 months for BOP.

Conclusions: Baseline characteristics can differ between those who select different sources of healthcare for CLBP. While benefits seen in the OCC versus non-OCC clinics were not large, further evaluation through randomized trials might be warranted to provide a more definitive evaluation.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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