| 1. |
- Clement, R. Carter, et al.
(författare)
-
A proposed set of metrics for standardized outcome reporting in the management of low back pain
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Acta Orthopaedica. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1745-3682 .- 1745-3674. ; 86:5, s. 523-533
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose - Outcome measurement has been shown to improve performance in several fields of healthcare. This understanding has driven a growing interest in value-based healthcare, where value is defined as outcomes achieved per money spent. While low back pain (LBP) constitutes an enormous burden of disease, no universal set of metrics has yet been accepted to measure and compare outcomes. Here, we aim to define such a set. Patients and methods - An international group of 22 specialists in several disciplines of spine care was assembled to review literature and select LBP outcome metrics through a 6-round modified Delphi process. The scope of the outcome set was degenerative lumbar conditions. Results - Patient-reported metrics include numerical pain scales, lumbar-related function using the Oswestry disability index, health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire, and questions assessing work status and analgesic use. Specific common and serious complications are included. Recommended follow-up intervals include 6, 12, and 24 months after initiating treatment, with optional follow-up at 3 months and 5 years. Metrics for risk stratification are selected based on preexisting tools. Interpretation - The outcome measures recommended here are structured around specific etiologies of LBP, span a patient's entire cycle of care, and allow for risk adjustment. Thus, when implemented, this set can be expected to facilitate meaningful comparisons and ultimately provide a continuous feedback loop, enabling ongoing improvements in quality of care. Much work lies ahead in implementation, revision, and validation of this set, but it is an essential first step toward establishing a community of LBP providers focused on maximizing the value of the care we deliver.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lagerback, Tobias, et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of surgery for sciatica with disc herniation is not substantially affected by differences in surgical incidences among three countries : results from the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian spine registries
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European spine journal. - : SPRINGER. - 0940-6719 .- 1432-0932. ; 28:11, s. 2562-2571
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose Yearly incidence of surgery for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation varies and is 29/100,000 in Sweden, 46/100,000 in Denmark and 58/100,000 in Norway. This variation was used to study whether differences in surgical incidence were associated with differences in preoperative patient characteristics as well as patient-reported outcomes. Methods Data from the national spine registers in Sweden, Denmark and Norway during 2011-2013 were pooled, and 9965 individuals, aged 18-65 years, of which 6468 had one-year follow-up data, were included in the study. Both absolute and case-mix-adjusted comparisons of the primary outcome Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the secondary outcomes EQ-5D-3L, and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for leg and back pain were performed. Case-mix adjustment was done for baseline age, sex, BMI, smoking, co-morbidity, duration of leg pain and preoperative value of the dependent variable. Results Mean improvement in the outcome variables exceeded previously described minimal clinical important change in all countries. Mean (95% CI) final scores of ODI were 18 (17-18), 19 (18-20) and 15 (15-16) in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, respectively. Corresponding results of EQ-5D-3L were 0.74 (0.73-0.75), 0.73 (0.72-0.75) and 0.75 (0.74-0.76). Results of NRS leg and back pain behaved similarly. Case-mix adjustment did not alter the findings substantially. Conclusion We found no clear association between incidence of surgery for lumbar disc herniation and preoperative patient characteristics as well as outcome, and the differences between the countries were lower than the minimal clinical important difference in all outcomes. [GRAPHICS] .
|
|
