No abstract

Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: This study retroactively investigated the search methods used in the 2019 Hayden et al. study, one of the first systematic reviews of prognostic factors that was published in the Cochrane Library. The review was designed to address recognized weaknesses in reviews of prognosis by using multiple supplementary search methods in addition to traditional electronic database searching.Methods: The authors used four approaches to comprehensively assess aspects of systematic review literature searching for prognostic factor studies: (1) comparison of search recall of broad versus focused electronic search strategies, (2) linking of search methods of origin for eligible studies, (3) analysis of impact of supplementary search methods on meta-analysis conclusions, and (4) analysis of prognosis filter performance.Results: The review’s focused electronic search strategy resulted in a 91% reduction in recall, compared to a broader version. Had the team relied on the focused search strategy without using supplementary search methods, they would have missed 23 of 58 eligible studies that were indexed in MEDLINE; additionally, the number of included studies in 2 of the review’s primary outcome meta-analyses would have changed. Using a broader strategy without supplementary searches would still have missed 5 studies. The prognosis filter used in the review demonstrated the highest sensitivity of any of the filters tested.Conclusions: Our study results support recommendations for supplementary search methods made by prominent systematic review methodologists. Leaving out any supplemental search methods would have resulted in missed studies, and these omissions would not have been prevented by using a broader search strategy or any of the other prognosis filters tested.

No abstract

Low back pain is a leading cause of disability globally. It is a common reason for presentation to the emergency department where opioids are commonly prescribed. This is a retrospective cohort study of opioid-naive adults with low back pain presenting to 1 of 4 emergency departments in Nova Scotia. We use routinely collected administrative clinical and drug-use data (July 2010-November 2017) to investigate the prevalence of prolonged opioid use and associated individual and prescription characteristics. In total, 23,559 eligible individuals presented with nonspecific low back pain, with 84.4% being opioid-naive. Our study population included 4023 opioid-naive individuals who filled a new opioid prescription within 7 days after their index emergency department visit (24.4%). The prevalence of prolonged opioid use after a new opioid prescription for low back pain (filling an opioid prescription 8-90 days after the emergency department visit and filling a subsequent prescription ±30 days of 6 months) was 4.6% (185 individuals). Older age and female sex were associated with clinically important increased odds of prolonged opioid use. First prescription average >90 morphine milligram equivalents/day (odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.0-2.6) and greater than 7-day supply (1.9, 1.1-3.1) were associated with prolonged opioid use in adjusted models. We found evidence of declining opioid prescriptions over the study period, but that 24.3% of first opioid prescriptions in 2016 would not have aligned with current guideline recommendations. Our study provides evidence to support a cautious approach to prescribing in opioid-naive populations.

No abstract