A scoping review on implementation processes and outcomes of models of care for low back pain in primary healthcare

被引:0
作者
Duarte, Susana Tinoco [1 ,2 ]
Moniz, Alexandre [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Costa, Daniela [3 ,4 ]
Donato, Helena [5 ,6 ]
Heleno, Bruno [3 ]
Aguiar, Pedro [1 ,7 ]
Cruz, Eduardo B. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] NOVA Univ Lisbon, Comprehens Hlth Res Ctr CHRC, Natl Sch Publ Hlth, Lisbon, Portugal
[2] Polytech Inst Setubal, Sch Hlth Care, Physiotherapy Dept, Setubal, Portugal
[3] Univ NOVA Lisboa, NOVA Med Sch, Comprehens Hlth Res Ctr CHRC, NMS,FCM, Lisbon, Portugal
[4] Univ Nova Lisboa, NOVA Med Sch, EpiDoc Unit, NMS,FCM, Lisbon, Portugal
[5] Ctr Hosp & Univ Coimbra EPE, Documentat & Sci Informat Serv, Coimbra, Portugal
[6] Univ Coimbra, Fac Med, Coimbra, Portugal
[7] NOVA Univ Lisbon, Natl Sch Publ Hlth, Lisbon, Portugal
关键词
Low back pain; Primary health care; Quality of health care; Health services research; Outcome and process assessment; Health care; MUSCULOSKELETAL HEALTH; STRATIFIED CARE; START BACK; MANAGEMENT; SCIATICA; GUIDELINES; LONGER;
D O I
10.1186/s12913-024-11764-9
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundTo address the societal burden of low back pain (LBP), several health systems have adopted Models of Care (MoCs). These evidence-informed models aim for consistent care and outcomes. However, real-world applications vary, with each setting presenting unique challenges and nuances in the primary healthcare landscape. This scoping review aims to synthesize the available evidence regarding the use of implementation theories, models or frameworks, context-specific factors, implementation strategies and outcomes reported in MoCs targeting LBP in primary healthcare.MethodsMEDLINE(Pubmed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature databases were searched. Eligible records included MoCs for adults with LBP in primary healthcare. Two reviewers independently extracted data concerning patient-related, system-related and implementation-related outcomes. The implementation processes, including guiding theories, models or frameworks, barriers and facilitators to implementation and implementation strategies were also extracted. The data were analysed through a descriptive qualitative content analysis and synthesized via both quantitative and qualitative approaches.ResultsEleven MoCs (n = 29 studies) were included. Implementation outcomes were assessed in 6 MoCs through quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches. Acceptability and appropriateness were the most reported outcomes. Only 5 MoCs reported underlying theories, models, or frameworks. Context-specific factors influencing implementation were identified in 3 MoCs. Common strategies included training providers, developing educational materials, and changing record systems. Notably, only one MoC included a structured multifaceted implementation strategy aligned with the evaluation of patient, organizational and implementation outcomes.ConclusionsThe implementation processes and outcomes of the MoCs were not adequately reported and lacked sufficient theoretical support. As a result, conclusions about the success of implementation cannot be drawn, as the strategies employed were not aligned with the outcomes. This study highlights the need for theoretical guidance in the development and implementation of MoCs for the management of LBP in primary healthcare.RegistrationOpen Science Framework Registries (https://osf.io/rsd8x).
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Leg pain location and neurological signs relate to outcomes in primary care patients with low back pain
    Lisbeth Hartvigsen
    Lise Hestbaek
    Charlotte Lebouef-Yde
    Werner Vach
    Alice Kongsted
    [J]. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 18
  • [22] Exploring the origin of pain subclassification, with emphasis on low back pain: a scoping review
    Jess, Mary-Anne
    Hamilton, Sharon
    Ryan, Cormac
    Wellburn, Shaun
    Alexanders, Jenny
    Spence, Daniel
    Martin, Denis
    [J]. JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS, 2021, 19 (02) : 308 - 340
  • [23] A Stratified Approach for Managing Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care (SPLIT Program): A Before-and-After Study
    Gomes, Luis Antunes
    Fernandes, Rita
    Caeiro, Carmen
    Henriques, Ana Rita
    de Sousa, Rute Dinis
    Branco, Jaime C.
    Pimentel-Santos, Fernando
    Moniz, Rubina
    Vicente, Lilia
    Canhao, Helena
    Rodrigues, Ana Maria
    Cruz, Eduardo Brazete
    [J]. ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2024, 22 (03) : 195 - 202
  • [24] GP attitudes and self-reported behaviour in primary care consultations for low back pain
    Corbett, Mandy
    Foster, Nadine
    Ong, Bie Nio
    [J]. FAMILY PRACTICE, 2009, 26 (05) : 359 - 364
  • [25] EFFECTIVENESS OF A CLASSIFICATION-BASED APPROACH TO LOW BACK PAIN IN PRIMARY CARE: A BENCHMARKING CONTROLLED TRIAL
    Simula, Anna Sofia
    Malmivaara, Antti
    Booth, Neill
    Karppinen, Jaro
    [J]. JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE, 2024, 56
  • [26] A classification-based approach to low back pain in primary care - protocol for a benchmarking controlled trial
    Simula, A. S.
    Malmivaara, A.
    Booth, N.
    Karppinen, J.
    [J]. BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2020, 21 (01)
  • [27] Clinical Outcomes Among Low Back Pain Consulters With Referred Leg Pain in Primary Care
    Hill, Jonathan C.
    Konstantinou, Kika
    Egbewale, Bolaji E.
    Dunn, Kate M.
    Lewis, Martyn
    van der Windt, Danielle
    [J]. SPINE, 2011, 36 (25) : 2168 - 2175
  • [28] Managing low back pain in primary care
    Maher, Chris G.
    Williams, Chris
    Lin, Chris
    Latimer, Jane
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN PRESCRIBER, 2011, 34 (05) : 128 - 132
  • [29] Low back pain - A primary care challenge
    Deyo, RA
    Phillips, WR
    [J]. SPINE, 1996, 21 (24) : 2826 - 2832
  • [30] Primary Care Research Priorities in Low Back Pain An Update
    Menezes Costa, Luciola da Cunha
    Koes, Bart W.
    Pransky, Glenn
    Borkan, Jeffrey
    Maher, Christopher G.
    Smeets, Rob J. E. M.
    [J]. SPINE, 2013, 38 (02) : 148 - 156