BackgroundOld adults admitted to the hospital are at severe risk of functional loss during hospitalization. Early in-hospital physical rehabilitation programs appear to prevent functional loss in geriatric patients. The first aim of this review was to investigate the effect of early physical rehabilitation programs on physical functioning among geriatric patients acutely admitted to the hospital. The second aim was to evaluate the feasibility of early physical rehabilitation programs.MethodsTwo searches, one for physical functioning and one for feasibility, were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE. Additional studies were identified through reference and citation tracking. To be included articles had to report on in-hospital early physical rehabilitation of patients aged 65 years and older with an outcome measure of physical functioning. Studies were excluded when the treatment was performed on specialized units other than geriatric units. Randomized controlled trials were included to examine the effect of early physical rehabilitation on physical functioning, length of stay and discharge destination. To investigate feasibility also non randomized controlled trials were added.ResultsFifteen articles, reporting on 13 studies, described the effect on physical functioning. The early physical rehabilitation programs were classified in multidisciplinary programs with an exercise component and usual care with an exercise component. Multidisciplinary programs focussed more on facilitating discharge home and independent ADL, whereas exercise programs aimed at improving functional outcomes. At time of discharge patients who had participated in a multidisciplinary program or exercise program improved more on physical functional tests and were less likely to be discharged to a nursing home compared to patients receiving only usual care. In addition, multidisciplinary programs reduced the length of hospital stay significantly. Follow-up interventions improved physical functioning after discharge. The feasibility search yielded four articles. The feasibility results showed that early physical rehabilitation for acutely hospitalized old adults was safe. Adherence rates differed between studies and the recruitment of patients was sometimes challenging.ConclusionsEarly physical rehabilitation care for acutely hospitalized old adults leads to functional benefits and can be safely executed. Further research is needed to specifically quantify the physical component in early physical rehabilitation programs.

Study Design. Cross-sectional study. Objective. The aim of this study was to study the personal and societal impact of low back pain (LBP) in patients admitted to a multidisciplinary spine center. Summary of Background Data. The socioeconomic burden of LBP is very high. A minority of patients visit secondary or tertiary care because of severe and long-lasting complaints. This subgroup may account for a major part of disability and costs, yet could potentially gain most from treatment. Currently, little is known about the personal and societal burden in patients with chronic complex LBP visiting secondary/tertiary care. Methods. Baseline data were acquired through patient-reported questionnaires and health insurance claims. Primary outcomes were LBP impact (Impact Stratification, range 8–50), functioning (Pain Disability Index, PDI; 0–70), quality of life (EuroQol-5D, EQ5D; −0.33 to 1.00), work ability (Work Ability Score, WAS; 0–10), work participation, productivity costs (Productivity Cost Questionnaire), and healthcare costs 1 year before baseline. Healthcare costs were compared with matched primary and secondary care LBP samples. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied. Results. In total, 1502 patients (age 46.3 ± 12.8 years, 57% female) were included. Impact Stratification was 35.2 ± 7.5 with severe impact (≥35) for 58% of patients. PDI was 38.2 ± 14.1, EQ5D 0.39 (interquartile range, IQR: 0.17–0.72); WAS 4.0 (IQR: 1.0–6.0) and 17% were permanently work-disabled. Mean total health care costs (€4875, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4309–5498) were higher compared to the matched primary care sample (n = 4995) (€2365, 95% CI: 2219–2526, P < 0.001), and similar to the matched secondary care sample (n = 4993) (€4379, 95% CI: 4180–4590). Productivity loss was estimated at €4315 per patient (95% CI: 3898–4688) during 6 months. Conclusion. In patients seeking multidisciplinary spine care, the personal and societal impact of LBP is very high. Specifically, quality of life and work ability are poor and health care costs are twice as high compared to patients seeking primary LBP care. Level of Evidence: 3

N/A.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the textLongitudinal validity of the NIH minimal dataset was tested. Responsiveness was established with areas under the ROC curve of 0.84 for the total outcome score and 0.91 for Impact Stratification. Compared to mean baseline scores, an improvement of 14 points on the total outcome score and 7.5 points on Impact Stratification can be interpreted as clinically important.

Treatment response trajectories were identified in 996 patients with low back pain (LBP) visiting multidisciplinary spine care. Six disability and six LBP impact trajectories were identified, with most patients experiencing stable levels of functioning. Baseline patient characteristics were not associated with (un)favorable outcome during 2-year follow-up.

Purpose A cross-sectional and longitudinal study was conducted to analyse construct validity, responsiveness, and Minimal Clinically Important Change (MCIC) in the Work Ability Score (WAS) and Pain Disability Index Work item (PDI-W) in patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP). Method Construct validity was assessed by testing predefined hypotheses. Responsiveness and MCIC were measured with an anchor-based method. The area under the receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) and the optimal cut-off point were calculated. Smallest Detectable Change (SDC) was calculated to determine measurement error. Results In total, 1502 patients (age 18–65 years) with CLBP were included. For validity of the WAS and PDI-W, respectively, seven and six out of 10 hypotheses were not rejected. The WAS (n = 355) was responsive to change with an AUC of 0.70. MCIC was 1.5 point, SDCindividual 4.9, and SDCgroup 0.3. MCICs were 4.5, 1.5, and − 0.5 points for, respectively, low, middle, and high scoring baseline groups. The PDI-W (n = 297) was responsive to change with an AUC of 0.80. MCIC was − 2.5 points, SDCindividual 5.2, and SDCgroup 0.3. MCICs were − 0.5, − 2.5, and − 4.5 points for, respectively, low, middle, and high scoring baseline groups. Conclusion Construct validity of the WAS and PDI-W was insufficient in this patient sample. The WAS and PDI-W are responsive to change. On average, improvements of 1.5 point (WAS) and  − 2.5 points (PDI-W) were interpreted as clinically important. However, MCICs are also baseline dependent. Due to a risk of measurement error, at the individual level change scores should be interpreted with caution.

Purpose A scoping review was conducted with the objective to identify and map the available evidence from long-term studies on chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP), to examine how these studies are conducted, and to address potential knowledge gaps. Method We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to march 2021, not restricted by date or language. Experimental and observational study types were included. Inclusion criteria were: participants between 18 and 65 years old with non-specific sub-acute or chronic LBP, minimum average follow-up of > 2 years, and studies had to report at least one of the following outcome measures: disability, quality of life, work participation, or health care utilization. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment. Data were extracted, tabulated, and reported thematically. Results Ninety studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies examined invasive treatments (72%), conservative (21%), or a comparison of both (7%). No natural cohorts were included. Methodological quality was weak (16% of studies), moderate (63%), or strong (21%) and generally improved after 2010. Disability (92%) and pain (86%) outcomes were most commonly reported, followed by work (25%), quality of life (15%), and health care utilization (4%). Most studies reported significant improvement at long-term follow-up (median 51 months, range 26 months–18 years). Only 10 (11%) studies took more than one measurement > 2 year after baseline. Conclusion Patients with persistent non-specific LBP seem to experience improvement in pain, disability and quality of life years after seeking treatment. However, it remains unclear what factors might have influenced these improvements, and whether they are treatment-related. Studies varied greatly in design, patient population, and methods of data collection. There is still little insight into the long-term natural course of LBP. Additionally, few studies perform repeated measurements during long-term follow-up or report on patient-centered outcomes other than pain or disability.

28. Hansson EK, Hansson TH. The costs for persons sick-listed more than one month because of low back or neck problems. A twoyear prospective study of Swedish patients.